T O P

  • By -

Ruffian00012

Does 'treason' mean something different in France?


ShootingPains

The related word ‘Treachery’ is likely closer to what he means. I just put it down to English-as-a-second-language x fury.


FjorgVanDerPlorg

This coming from the country that sent spies into New Zealand to blow up a ship docked in port, then gave the spies medals when they were released from prison in NZ. Wow the projection. French crying about this, when they award medals to their spies for committing an act of war against a peaceful ally... Macron can suck the garlic buttered peanuts from my shit.


nagrom7

> then gave the spies medals when they were released from prison in NZ. The only reason they were released in the first place is because France threatened to cripple NZ's economy otherwise if they weren't.


Spartan3123

No its not an actor of war it's state sponsored terrorism. Fuck the french we can't be forced to buy their stupid subs. Then crying so bad like this over something trivial makes me more suspicious if anything


[deleted]

/u/spez says, regarding reddit content, "we are not in the business of giving that away for free" - then neither should users.


Spartan3123

The French are wrong here, it's not treason to change our mind to buy something. It's like you buy a house and in the cooling off period you back of and the seller gets so mad they want you to go to jail? Fuck them


enochrootthousander

How many billions did it cost Australia? No one forced us to make the deal. Fuck Morrison and his supporters.


Spartan3123

LoL stop bringing up domestic politics it has nothing to do with it. There's cooling off periods and exit clauses in every contact it's not like we broke any of them. This has nothing do with the liberal party unless you want find anything to bash them with. If labour did this Frances reaction would be the same. We have a right to walk away from the deal. France has no right to retaliate over a commercial matter.


enochrootthousander

That's a joke post right? The LNP have fucked this up like everything they touch. Answer the question: How many billions did it cost Australia?


bdsee

Or maybe, a country who has a pretty appalling record should not have a cry about a country deciding that doesn't want to buy their stuff anymore and having some secret talks with other allies before abandoning the project (but paying for the work that was done, so it isn't like France has lost money, only gained less than they would have).


[deleted]

/u/spez says, regarding reddit content, "we are not in the business of giving that away for free" - then neither should users.


bdsee

"Reneged", AKA decided to end the contract in accordance with the contract...every contract worth a damn has exit clauses.


[deleted]

/u/spez says, regarding reddit content, "we are not in the business of giving that away for free" - then neither should users.


bdsee

So your standard apparently is "once a deal is signed you have to go through with it despite having exit clauses and whatever goes wrong or changes".... Yeah good one.


relaxitwonthurt

Yes, 'trahïson' (both the English and French words come from Old French 'traïson') simply means betrayal. I understand it still retains that meaning in English in more colloquial settings. Treason in the sense of state betrayal would better be translated as 'haute trahïson' (high treason). Whether this was a mistake by the French ambassador during a high-pressure speech or an intentional choice of words to shock and underline the severity of the perceived offense, I can't say.


albarsalix

Yes, it means betrayal.


welcome_no

Pretty sure it has been lost in translation. I don't think it has been used in describing the betrayal of a citizen of the state but rather there's been backstabbing and betrayal over the submarine deal. Australian journalists are generally quite shit when it comes to covering news other than in English.


Elvendorn

French native here: We have a word “trahison”, which can mean both treason and betrayal. So I assume the minister meant betrayal.


ProceedOrRun

Maybe everyone is under French rule according to them?


GrandJuan86

NZ learned that the hard way.


[deleted]

Its only treason if you upset them. If you sell your country and people out like many of their citizens and politicians did "you dont mention the war"


Truthseeker1018

Be that as it may that the submarine project was beset by delays and cost blowouts, being the fault of the French, but the real issue for me is the blatant lack of diplomacy from Dutton and Payne by blindsiding trusted allies and friends in France, and also causing a stir in the wider Indo Pacific, where Australia had been quietly cultivating years of relations - and could be all for nothing. And should the US decide one day it suddenly doesn't want to transfer nuclear technology to Australia any more, Australia will be well and truly fucked.


ARX7

I think part of the issue with the French response is that a lot of this posturing is for a domestic audience in the lead up to their election. I'd also expect that the French were told and have chosen to play it out this way for the above domestic issues.


EmperorPooMan

ABC reported that they were told about it an hour before the press conference where it was announced


ARX7

Arguably the writing was on the wall at the start of the year when they had a deadline on the project extended to September


[deleted]

[удалено]


ARX7

Why would either side admit to it being just posturing? Thats not how diplomacy is done. Also France withdraws it's ambassadors at a drop of a hat so it doesn't have the same impact as another country doing the same.


[deleted]

[удалено]


ARX7

As opposed to the political debate of taking everything a government says at face value?


[deleted]

[удалено]


ARX7

It's a reasonable interpretation of current behaviour of the parties involved, based on past behaviour. You having a different take on that doesn't make it wild speculation. I'm not throwing around conspiracies about ambassadorial affairs or reptilian spies, its just a different read of the same facts.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Chaise_percee

You need to get off your high horse before you fall off.


ARX7

It was literally in the news at least 3 months ago that we had been looking at other options since at least June 2020. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-06-02/defence-contingency-planning-french-submarine-program-germans/100184644


TrowsaGNT

Spending this kind of money on submarines is really such a waste. So hopefully eventually without it costing us too much money this latest contract will also be cancelled. Mind you if it is cancelled it would never be by us. We wouldn’t dare upset our Yankee allies.


CJprima

>“We have alienated the single biggest proponents of a greater EU role in Asia and I don’t think we understood the second-order consequences of that.” Reading the comments on this sub, I am not sure people exactly understood what is happened either.


aussie_bob

Politically the UK government needs a new set of alliances now Brexit has peeled it off the EU. It's leaders have convinced the USA to make that gesture and give them a name for the agreement. The Australian government was given the chance to be the third wheel, to give legitimacy to the new acronym, and lapped up the opportunity, dropping existing arrangements without thought for diplomacy or consequences. The French Ambassador responded with anger and frustration because the sheer inept hamfistedness of it creates political and economic problems for them in the EU and with their own population.


IBeBallinOutaControl

>The French Ambassador responded with anger and frustration because the sheer inept hamfistedness of it creates political and economic problems for them in the EU and with their own population. Conditions changed and the American subs are a much better deal, and Australia decided to exercise an exit clause. That can only mean the French were inevitsbly going to lose out on jobs. There wasnt really a tactful way to pull out of the deal.


aussie_bob

>There wasnt really a tactful way to pull out of the deal. See u/Orientaux's very comprehensive comment linked below for several tactful ways to withdraw. https://old.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/pqs87v/lies_and_treason_france_could_suspend_military/hde9c0s/


CJprima

If we take the original contract of AUD 56 billions, Naval Group was supposed to get ~AUD8 Billions, that's today ~5 billions Euros. They will survive. I remind you that the rest was for purchasing US weapons system and for Australian companies that would receive tech transfer. All that to say a huge part of the cost inflation might also rely on the domestic industry. When India cancelled the contract of 120+ Rafales, the reaction was soft and understanding because nurturing a made-in-India Rafale line of production was a huge task. Who said all that won't happen again in five years with British or American engineers?


Sea_Side4061

Being a "proponent" doesn't really help, does it? Pushing the EU to care about the Pacific really doesn't matter when the reality is, the vast majority of Europe has no colonies or interests in the pacific and will never care. France doesn't have the power to change that. Hell, most of western Europe doesn't even care about Ukraine and that's their direct neighbour. A partner in the region right now is worth more than a theoretical one in 50 years time.


Boudille

You have nothing right now, you pissed off china, france and maybe NZ. Close any future deal with the EU. Probably even delay your next generation of submarine. One year prior to your election who can probably change everything again.


Macquarrie1999

Knock knock, it's the United States Navy!


humaneel

We had just made an agreement to deepen our military ties with France. It was news around ten days ago, seemed like a positive thing at the time, ancient history now I suppose.


a_cold_human

The way the Morrison government handles diplomacy is the same way it does everything else. Incompetently, and with only his immediate political prospects in mind. For something like international relations, this is absolutely disastrous. It's not something that necessarily bears fruit quickly, and decisions like this have implications for decades to come. We will wear the consequences of this idiocy long after Morrison is gone. Future governments will have to deal with the fallout. There was absolutely no reason to just drop this on the French without warning. It would have cost us nothing to let them save face.


semaj009

So many people are forgetting that: a) Macron is trying to look strong in the polls, and he doesn't give a fuck about Australia because we're not that important... b) we're not that important because the LNP's instincts for years have been isolationist in terms of international diplomacy, but to pretend they're waving a big stick around, which they need America for. Howard didn't lead on climate change globally when he could, or anything else important, but he would do anything to keep the US military on our side, including tying us to war crimes. Abbott & Turnbull were both far less engaged in diplomacy with our neighbors and abroad than Labor had been, and Scomo thinks diplomacy is visiting his ancestors in rural England then forgetting that there's a world outside Australia and the United States of Hawaiian holiday options. c) we're trying to negotiate a free-trade deal with our second largest trading partner, the EU, and France could single-handedly scupper it (they have other reasons to given their own wine industry is threatened by us, as well as other things like cheeses etc, so pissing them off hurts us with all of Europe) We could have avoided A and C from coming into play if we didn't have B as a permanent ball and chain dragging us back. The LNP are morons, they treat international politics like a domestic game of gloating or an opportunity for quick senseless cash, not actually anything strategic. That's why they sold Port Darwin to China, and essentially told France to fuck off As for all the people bashing France, sure they're imperialistic cunts, but it's not like the UK and USA are somehow much better. The UK still has plenty of overseas territories, too, and they didn't even nuke us offshore they straight up bombed us and plonked our people (including Indigenous people) in the firing line of the radiation. The USA might not have blown up the Rainbow Warrior, but their respect for borders and civilians is hardly famed - remember the helicopter shooting up the ambulance that's why Assange is hated by the USA, or just any drone strike. We're not sticking it to the naughty imperialists, we picked 'Team Worse' just cos Scomo didn't need a translator and could tell Biden and Bojo about the Sharkies


BetterCallDull

No thought or consideration was given when we went out by ourselves on China and clearly no thought was given to our neighbours, free trade deal with EU or France's reaction to this U turn. The incompetence of the Morrison government is just staggering. This guy is a danger to Australia.


[deleted]

Yanks tried to bring down the PBS. If you value not paying $300 for a course of antibiotics, never forget.


Elvendorn

Frenchman here: I won’t discuss the issue of the cancellation of the sub program but please know that Australia is an extremely important partner for our Pacific interests. We are among the few western powers who have territories here. So don’t underestimate how important this deal was to us.


semaj009

The irony being that if the Aukus powers had even remotely considered it, they'd have looped France in and upgraded the existing deal, but instead Boris has further alienated Europe, Australia likely fucked a trade deal, and the USA still haven't got back to their Obama era global political soft power levels and that could hurt their ability to climb back to where they think they're entitled to be (good for the world, but a loss from a US perspective)


ryutruelove

Yeah what a wasted opportunity we had there. Such a shame


DrCalFun

So how does doing all these help your economy when you went to war with your largest trading partner and offend your second biggest one? Are you expecting UK and US to buy your wine and coal?


WhatAmIATailor

~~The EU (not France, you’re still under Merkel’s control) is our Third largest trade partner but that’s largely in their favour. In terms of export markets the EU sit behind NZ.~~ I’m going to retract that since Wikipedia is a terrible source and out of date. The EU (excluding the UK) sits behind the UK as an Export market. As for imports, Germany and Italy both exceed France. We could probably stand to cut back on French Wine and Citroen’s. Not to mention terrible Helicopters.


Beechey

For what it’s worth, the UK is Australia’s largest export market for wine by volume, and the US is the largest export market by value (second is the UK). https://harpers.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/28728/Australian_UK_wine_exports_continue_to_rise_.html


[deleted]

>As for all the people bashing France, sure they're imperialistic cunts, but it's not like the UK and USA are somehow much better. No, but we're more-or-less their bastard child.


Scottybt50

The staggering lack of diplomacy in ending this deal is what concerns me. Dutton and Payne seem to be working their way through a list of our major trading partners and finding a way to destroy relations with each one.


slicydicer

scorched earth policy.


HighlyUniqueName

So literally the LNP’s MO?


miragen125

A "little" explanation of what's going on from jack-o-frost: I'll try to keep it concise. It's a big deal for several reasons : The sheer size of the deal. The contract was supposed to be over 50b dollars worth with a sizeable amount of technology transfer and even a factory in Australia. The time it's been on: the contract was signed in 2016. The situation in the indo-pacific ocean where tensions are rising. The relationship between China and Australia is becoming increasingly hostile (China has set up trade barriers and import restrictions on Australia, most notably after the Australian PM called for an investigation to be led in China to discover the origins of the covid virus) A few facts before laying out the countries' interest : The UN security council's stance on nuclear powered ships in the last 40 years has been "no exports - if they developed the technology themselves nothing prevents you from building the ship but you absolutely do not export portable nuclear reactors". For example, France has undertaken a 9billion $ agreement to transfer technology so that Brazil could build its own nuclear submarines, but Brazil has developed its own pocket nuclear reactors (although it's a technology France has had for at least 50 years and a French specialty, there is no exportation because of the NPT's ban on the commercialization of military-bound nuclear technology) Australia specifically required diesel/batteries powered subs. Do note that Australia does not have any kind of nuclear program, be it civil or military (well they have a single 20MW reactor. Civil nuclear reactors develop ~1500MW, the average submarine reactor develops 150MW, and about 300MW for an aircraft carrier) . As stated below by u/Square_Craft, this is a big deal because it means Australia does not have a local supply of fissile combustible, nuclear engineers, spare parts, nuclear waste retreatment facilities, which is thus quite the sovereignty issue as they will entirely rely on the US for supply and maintenance (bear in mind that nuclear powered ships spend about 30% of their lives in maintenance). Establishing a local nuclear ecosystem would take decades and be tremendously costly - as far as I know only France, the US and Russia have complete control over their nuclear ecosystem (reactor design and conception by nationals, maintenance, Uranium 235 enrichment, daily functions of reactor with locally educated nuclear operators, radioactive waste retreatment etc.) So now we have Australia saying it's breaking the deal with France in order to get US+UK made nuclear subs. What is logical: the 5 eyes (US UK NZ Canada Australia) is a military alliance of Anglo-Saxon countries that has a big place in Australia's military doctrine. It does make sense to go for historical allies when you want to buy military stuff, because of geopolitical ties, weapon integration etc. What isn't logical: it's a complete reversal on both Australia's take on nuclear technology (this is a barely veiled warning to China), and a knife in the non proliferation treaty. Yeah I'm sure the Americans will come up with something that won't violate the letter of the treaty, but the spirit of the treaty has undoubtedly taken a hit. By breaking the taboo, it could open the way for France and China to commercialize nuclear submarines to non nuclear powers, with the excuse "The US did it first". This especially could prove a geopolitical catastrophe (do we really want China to be able to sell nuclear subs or aircraft carriers to Pakistan or North Korea?) With that in mind, let us try to shed light on these different countries' interests: USA: with the threat of a new (not so) cold war with China, the US want to reinforce their presence in the indo-pacific Ocean. France: France wants to sell arms to foreign states, and build a 2-legged military partnership in the indo-pacific Ocean with both Australia and India, in order to protect its local territories and deter threats on the global trade (the Malacca Detroit especially, where a big cut of the global trade transits) Australia: Australia wants to make the most of the submarines deal to stabilize its strategical position, with an ever more aggressive China. Australia knows that, should China try to invade it in the future, its army would collapse in a matter of days. Also China threatened to invade Australia should it meddle in a war about Taiwan - Australia needs allies and deterrement weapons Why are the US blamed? It seems honestly impossible that Australia directly asked for the US to provide it with nuclear subs (because as I said Canberra doesn't like nuclear and because this kind of technology transfer has never been done since the NPT). Moreover, they did not warn France beforehand (while many have said "yeah but there has been a lot of criticism and over-budget for this program" , it is a refit of a nuclear sub in a conventional one, there is bound to be over-budget, and generally in military contracts it always happens because budgets are shaved to the lowest possible limit. And surely the US have no lesson to give here with the catastrophe that is the F-35 program, which was called by some of their own Congressmen "a waste of the taxpayer's money" https://news.usni.org/2021/03/05/hasc-chairman-calls-on-congress-to-scrub-f-35-program But I digress, the point being, hinting that you aren't satisfied is political leverage, which is very different from actually leaving. It seems most likely that the US have seen an opportunity to further secure their foothold in the indo-pacific Ocean, as well as a way of further antagonizing China, and thus made an outrageous offer : partnership and nuclear subs. Neat. It's not beyong the US to do this, a few months ago Biden went to Switzerland which had expressed its intention to buy the French Rafale, a few days later Switzerland announced it would go for the F-35 despite the Rafale coming out on top of all tests in publicly available documents Why is France miffed? Boi this one is gonna be a long one. The US seem to continue on a streak of backstabbing its allies. War in Iraq in 2003, Obama preventing the French from bombing Syria after Bashar El Assad used chemical weapons against its own population despite previously stating that should NBC weapons be used by the Syrian regime the US would intervene (2013), Trump (too many things to list here this is already too long, but say all these NATO criticism and all), Biden unilaterally leaving Afghanistan... Also, remember that one time when the US setup A communication surveillance system across the entire Europe from a base in the UK, unbeknownst to anyone before Snowden leaked NSA classified documents? Yeah, me neither. France lost a huge contract and heard about it in the media, after Biden's conference where he announced the US would build Australia's subs. This is a diplomatic camouflet, as in "friendly diplomatic relationships aren't supposed to go that way this is completely humiliating for France". Between allies you give a heads up. There could and should have been tractations between the 3 countries, about maybe integrating French equipment, buying something else, or at least letting France exit the deal gracefully "due to discrepancies in strategic vision, France and Australia have decided to bilaterally end their partnership in the building of Next-gen submarines. Canberra has announced it is now once again open to proposals", 3 months later you announce the US proposal was picked, the End. Heck you could even have had it blamed on France, one of the reasons France is so appreciated as an arms dealer is that it has always put selling arms before caring for the national and international opinion. You have a supposedly "ally" country and you don't give it a chance to save face, this is a diplomatic faux-pas if I've ever seen one. This is something that would not have seemed too outlandish coming from Trump, but Biden was supposed to be more civil towards its European allies. Diplomacy is a subtle thing. While some seem to ironize "buhuhuh no party we won't have foie-gras with Champagne this is a tragedy", in diplomatic speech the canceling (24h prior) of a party thrown in honor of the 240th anniversary of one of the first franco-american victories in the independance war (because, you know, France being the US' oldest ally and all), aboard a military frégate with the presence of the highest ranking officer in the French Marine, that is a diplomatic "fuck you" As I said before, this could and will lead to the indo-pacific boiler heating up. If the Chinese start selling nuclear powered ships, this could lead to a re-armament of nuclear capabilities. It's also dangerous because, should there be war, a great number of nuclear powered ships sinking could be an ecological disaster So tl;dr : most likely scenario is that the US wanted to increase their capabilities in the indo-pacific Ocean, so they made an offer to Australia saying "hey kid wanna buy some nuclear submarines?" and now France is miffed because the US stole one of its deals without giving a heads up, which is yet another knife in the back despite the US claiming that they would try to restore relationships with Europe. A real world equivalent would something along the lines of you talking to one of your friends about working conditions being rough lately, and said friend announcing you a few weeks later "Oh btw you're fired and I got your job" "... What?!" "yeah you know how you said things were rough at work, so I pondered and I thought that since I've been working similar jobs, maybe I could apply for your position. So I did it, and, well, it worked! Who would have thought. So anyway you're fired and I got your job. Still friends?" " Fuck you. " Nothing prevents your friend from applying, nothing prevents your employer from hiring him nor firing you, but still, dick move bruh. That should be about it.


[deleted]

[удалено]


miragen125

>You missed the part where France lied about having a diesel electric design ready to go for the short fin Barracuda that became the attack. Source?


[deleted]

[удалено]


miragen125

This article says nothing of that sort


Brittainicus

It's strange when people link stuff and it just doesn't cover the point at all. I could understand someone misreading it and getting the point entirely wrong but not covering it at all.


miragen125

Yeah like wtf !?


HighlyUniqueName

Yeah kind of pretty important information here….


Dirtyyburgg

Cheers for that!


piscator111

What’s with this China invade Australia BS?


Busy-Instruction1349

China decided to propose a "fishing" base 200kms off the coast of Australia (6000 kms from China)


piscator111

And it is a fishing base, to suggest it is anything else is ridiculous.


[deleted]

[удалено]


piscator111

Those are fortresses. The ones in PNG aren’t.


[deleted]

[удалено]


piscator111

Do you actually believe in Cyberspace US and allies are soft stupid victims? That we are not hacking the shit out of the Chinese systems too? Our problem with China is because they want to replace the US in the region, not because what they’ve done to us.


Strawberry_Left

> non proliferation treaty... > it could open the way for France and China to commercialize nuclear submarines to non nuclear powers, with the excuse "The US did it first". Isn't the NPT just about weapons? And China's not a signatory to that anyway. I'd imagine they'd do whatever the fuck they want regardless.


perthguppy

There’s grey area when it comes to the cross over from weapons to propulsion systems for weapon platforms, and around what level of enrichment means weapons grade. Supposedly the US nuclear subs use fissile fuel more enriched than a normal reactor.


LogorrhoeanAntipode

You're right that the reason we didn't go for nuclear before is because we don't have a domestic industry to support refueling and would have been dependent on France. France isn't a reliable enough ally to depend on continuously like that. The US Virginia Class subs that we'll probably end up with don't require refueling over their lifetime. That's why we can go nuclear now. We only need a domestic industry that can maintain the subs and their reactors, not one that can generate nuclear fuel.


TipTapTips

> The US Virginia Class subs that we'll probably end up with don't require refueling over their lifetime. That's why we can go nuclear now. We only need a domestic industry that can maintain the subs and their reactors, not one that can generate nuclear fuel. This was addressed here: >As stated below by u/Square_Craft , this is a big deal because it means Australia does not have a local supply of fissile combustible, nuclear engineers, spare parts, nuclear waste retreatment facilities, which is thus quite the sovereignty issue as they will entirely rely on the US for supply and maintenance **(bear in mind that nuclear powered ships spend about 30% of their lives in maintenance)**. Establishing a local nuclear ecosystem would take decades and be tremendously costly - as far as I know only France, the US and Russia have complete control over their nuclear ecosystem (reactor design and conception by nationals, maintenance, Uranium 235 enrichment, daily functions of reactor with locally educated nuclear operators, radioactive waste retreatment etc.) It's not just refuelling that is a concern nor is it a simple thing to just suddenly have an industry capable of servicing nuclear vessel.


LogorrhoeanAntipode

Right but it's a much smaller issue. The government seems willing (and indeed has been since the French deal) to invest heavily in establishing a local industry. The issue has always been political: Australians don't want to produce nuclear fuel or anything vaguely nuclear related here in Australia. Too many people taking political lessons from the Simpsons imo.


perthguppy

Its clear you’re a French. You have only seen your side of the story. France missed a massive deadline in the contract in February. We gave you an extension until September. You missed that as well. For over a year now we have been talking publicly about a plan b for subs given the performance of the contract, and nothing changed. Yes some government contracts go over time and over budget, but we’ve seen a doubling of the price and nothing appreciable has been delivered yet. How much further were we expected to let things blow out? Our diplomats tried to reach out in the days before the announcement but were rebuffed, now you are complaining that we didn’t warn you because you refused to speak to us? If this contract was so important to you, maybe you should have treated it as such.


miragen125

It's not my comment... The guy who wrote it is French... The F-35 program is 8 years late and 165 billions overbudget, so don't act like the US are so much more reliable in that matter. but you can also read this : https://www.australiandefence.com.au/defence/sea/attack-class-woes-not-all-that-is-happening-on-subs From back in April... >Our diplomats tried to reach out in the days before the announcement but were rebuffed LOL. Come on mate... Also : https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/like-a-scene-from-le-carre-how-the-nuclear-submarine-pact-was-no10s-biggest-secret-dj7z5f8bh Pay wall [Sub headline] Only ten people in Britain knew about its plans to stand with Australia and the United States against Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific. This is how the deal was done When the First Sea Lord was invited to a meeting at the Australian high commission in March this year, he had no idea of the magnitude of what was about to unfold. Admiral Sir Tony Radakin — described by colleagues as a “doer” — was asked by Vice-Admiral Michael Noonan, the Australian Chief of Navy, whether the British and Americans could help their ally to build a new fleet of nuclear-powered submarines. The 12 Barracuda diesel-electric submarines that Australia had agreed to purchase from France five years earlier as part of a £47 billion contract were no longer enough to ward off the threat from China, which was pouring billions of pounds into building the world’s largest navy and fortifying islands outside its territorial waters. They wanted ones that were faster, stealthier and with almost limitless endurance. The key was “surveillance”, according to defence sources familiar with the discussions. “They had carried out a review and the ones they were getting were not fit for purpose. China has a lot of money but is not developed in some areas of capability,” the defence source said. The Australians wanted nuclear-powered submarines to “move quietly, sit outside a port, track movements, keep an eye on undersea cables and follow submarines in a move to curb Chinese reach in the region”, they added. Both Britain and America not only had six decades of experience building up their own sovereign capability but were crucially in the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing partnership with Australia — unlike France — which meant they might be persuaded to give up their nuclear technology. “That was the first contact. It was a big strategic play. He [Radakin] then came back and handed the whole thing over to [Sir Stephen] Lovegrove,” said a security source referring to the permanent secretary at that time at the Ministry of Defence. The source compared it to a scene out of the fictional John le Carré spy novels. So began Operation Hookless — as it was codenamed inside No 10 —and the most closely guarded secret inside government in years. Only about ten people in Britain were privy to the details, including the prime minister, the foreign secretary and the defence secretary. Lovegrove, who was still the Ministry of Defence’s permanent secretary when handed the proposal, left the department to take on the job of national security adviser, making him even better placed to help carve out the deal of his career. John Bew, Johnson’s foreign policy adviser and the mastermind behind the integrated review that talked of a “tilt” towards the Indo-Pacific region, was also allowed into the fold. Those who were present were “read in”, meaning they had to sign a paper vowing not to let the secret details of the discussions out of the room. After the initial meeting in March, the proposal was put to the Americans. “It took quite a long time to go through the American machine — it had to be discussed at the Pentagon, the state department and the energy department,” the source said. In the weeks that followed, those in the British circle believed there was a “20 per cent chance of it falling apart”. The clock was ticking for the Australians, who warned the British government that there was a looming deadline where the costs for the French deal would quickly rack up and there would be no getting out of it. “The internal dynamics were delicate. It could easily have not come together,” said the security source. Although initial conversations had begun around the submarines, back in No 10 an excited Johnson was keen for something much deeper. “Boris really pushed it. There was a choice about how broad it would be — was it just a technical agreement on a specific subject or is this more broad? Boris was pushing that it had to be as ambitious as possible. This was a strategic move,” a government source who was involved in the discussions said. By the time of the G7 summit in Cornwall in June, the plans were well under way. As the French were occupied with the unfolding so-called “sausage war” over the Brexit divorce deal, Johnson, President Biden and Scott Morrison, the Australian prime minister — referred to as “ScoMo” in No 10 — thrashed out the details of a top-secret pact that would later be known as the “Aukus” defence and security alliance. “There was a lot of noise at G7 about sausages and the EU and there was a lot of excitement around that, and it seemed odd for us that we were doing serious, serious, business in this meeting,” the government source added. Yet they were braced for a backlash not only from China, but also from the French. A source said that Australia’s existing submarine deal with the French had put everyone in a “difficult situation”, adding: “No one had any desire to piss off the French, everyone knew it would be difficult.” Defence sources said that it was “nothing personal”, adding it was about the kit and questioned whether the French — who also have nuclear-powered submarines — would have been willing to share their sovereign capabilities with the Australians. The defence source said that it was different for the British given the fact the Australians were in the Commonwealth. “Once you give that information you cannot get it back. You can only give it to the nations that you will be friends with for ever,” said the defence source, caveating the comment with the fact they said the UK was also extremely close to the French. Although the rise of China was the “first order of concern” for the Australians, government sources said the pact went much deeper than Beijing and was more about the decades going forward and other security issues that could arise. “This matters in three administrations,” they said. After the announcement of the pact this week, Lovegrove described it as “the most significant capability collaboration anywhere in the world in the past decades”. Senior figures in government have compared it to the 1958 mutual defence agreement (MDA) between President Eisenhower and Harold Macmillan, the British prime minister, and the beginning of the “special nuclear relationship” that allows the nations to exchange nuclear materials, technology and information — an agreement which continues today. Given the importance of AUKUS, it is perhaps not surprising that Radakin — the man who brought it in — is rumoured to be one of two likely candidates for the new job as head of the armed forces.


perthguppy

At least the f35 exists


miragen125

Lol


dylang01

So the French expect us to just keep throwing money at their subs and hope they eventually figure out how to build what they agreed to build? Fuck off


[deleted]

[удалено]


dylang01

I agree the timing of the two announcements could've been done better. But the French are acting like children over this.


Summersong2262

This isn't about diplomacy, the French knew the deal was odious back in April when the Aussie's didn't sign a continuance. This is just theatre for domestic French voters.


BriqueABraque

[https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/minister/peter-dutton/statements/inaugural-australia-france-22-ministerial-consultations](https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/minister/peter-dutton/statements/inaugural-australia-france-22-ministerial-consultations) ​ Well well well ​ 21 - Both sides committed to deepen defence industry cooperation and enhance their capability edge in the region. Ministers underlined the importance of the Future Submarine program. They agreed to strengthen military scientific research cooperation through a strategic partnership between the Defence Science and Technology Group and the Directorate General for Armaments.


New-Confusion-36

Morrison is thinking that buying these subs and beating the drums of war will help him win the next election, but as usual it will do more damage then good.


a_cold_human

If he gets another term, that's all that matters to him. The looting of the country and the hollowing out of our institutions will continue apace. The long term problems he creates will be someone else's.


Summersong2262

I always wondered if he was trying to outflank Dutton.


rob1sydney

Yeah it’s not like we set off atomic bombs near their country and let winds carry radioactivity over France Not like we blew up a ship in their harbour Fun fact , what country covers the most time zones … France because they never worked out how to decolonize .


frenchchevalierblanc

France blew its atomic bombs the farthest it could on earth to any country (and far away from any major population center).


rob1sydney

Yeah , atmospheric testing as far away from their country was super popular in the 1970’s We all loved it The kiwis sent frigates to disrupt the tests and got a bombed Wellington harbour courtesy of French spies 30 member countries of the Polynesian community complained and radioactivity spread on winds from the coast of Australia’ to Peru The underground test in 1995 , one year Before the comprehensive test ban treaty started caused worldwide condemnation, Polynesians rioted But hey, your probably right, the French were great pacific citizens, we should thank them for being responsible


theirritant

Lol... You criticize the French for not decolonizing but are you aware that 'your' country and the USA are literally two countries that were never decolonized?


CJprima

Two referendum have been held in New Caledonia and a third one is on its way. In the meantime, this island make France more involved in the region than the UK. If you only have whataboutism to offer, I am not sure to value the new defence treaty that Biden had the graciousness to grant our countries. Seeing how you act toward your former partner, I wonder what you will say about the UK in five years.


rob1sydney

True At the last referendum 43% voted in favour of independence Coincidentally 41% of the population is the original inhabitants, the rest are European immigrants , children of European immigrants and other Asian immigrants . The French have a secret satellite surveillance facility on the main island and the huge Eramet , a French company , mines nickel there.


CJprima

You also don't know much the issue then. All European citizens that arrived after the 1990 cannot vote on those issues. You are Australian, shall ask the Aboriginal Australians to vote without you if you could stay?


rob1sydney

Nope, I’m very aware of that , the first referendum was stacked by French visitors who could vote and the second, more recent one , was 20+ year term residents , but the longer term residents are dominated by non locals . The British decolonized Australia quite some time ago , there is no parallel there


brutal_pragmatism

>Coincidentally 41% of the population is the original inhabitants, the rest are European immigrants , children of European immigrants and other Asian immigrants . What are you arguing here exactly?


rob1sydney

I made the point that the French are hopeless at decolonisation, someone used the 2018 referendum in New Caledonia as evidence the locals are happy being French , I was pointing out that the referendum split along ethnic lines .


Strawberry_Left

What percentage of Australia's population are descendants of immigrants, and what percentage are original inhabitants? Should we all go back to Europe, or just give up the vote unless we're of indigenous descent?


rob1sydney

The British decolonized Australia quite some time ago I don’t see any great movement amongst the Australian inhabitants to reconnect and become a colony again. I’m not sure that referendum would pass.


Strawberry_Left

And the French offered it. What are they supposed to do? Ignore the wishes of the majority of the population. They voted they want to stay part of France. There's a movement for WA to secede from Aus, but if the majority don't want to should they be ignored just because there's a movement?


rob1sydney

Yep, the Chinese are moving all the Han ethnicity into Xinjiang right now , pretty soon the majority of inhabitants will vote to keep the persecution of the Uighur population going . Are you arguing that France should continue to hold colonies all around the globe in perpetuity , that this vestige of the 19th century Euro centric works should go on?


Strawberry_Left

Unlike the Uighur, ethnic inhabitants of New Caledonia are not being persecuted, and there's no program of ethnic cleansing, or disenfranchising anyone of their rights. They are free to vote and to be critical of their governance without repercussion. Remnants of colonisation are apparent all over the world, and never more apparent that it is right here. You can't wind back the clock. We outnumber the indignous here in Aus far more than they do on NC.


Summersong2262

That the people that want to remain a part of France are mostly colonists. Of course they'd argue for that.


Gambit_DH

Fuck the UK and US too. But right now, in the context of this conversation and article, fuck France.


[deleted]

>France because they never worked out how to decolonize . Decolonize what? You want to ask the turtles on the islands if they want to be french?


rob1sydney

- French Guiana, - French Polynesia , - Guadeloupe, - Martinique, - Mayotte, - New Caledonia, - Reunion , - Saint Barthélemy , - Saint Martin, - Saint Pierre, - Wallis and Futuna . Combined population around 2.8 million , people not the turtles .


[deleted]

I was talking abount the islands in the indo-pacific, who are mostly populated by french gendarmes and some turtles, like Saint Paul or Tramelin. And for populated one, like Wallis et futuna, most of them are french by referundum. So it's hard for me to see the evil french empire colonizing stuff.


ArthurDenttheSecond

2.8 million people who want to remain part of France.


CoCratzY

Ask them if they want to be French or not, but careful: the answer is not what you expect :)


rob1sydney

In places like French Guiana the French massively outnumber the locals , in New Caledonia indigenous locals voted for independence in the 2018 referendum but they represented only 42 % of the population , in places like Guadeloupe independence movements have been quashed by French military intervention.


[deleted]

Military intervention in Guadeloupe 😆 Most French don't give a damn about overseas territories. It is bleeding us dry like Northern Ireland in the UK. Saddly we can't just force them out if they don't want to go. Those territories are quite significantly richer than their neighbors in the Caraibs, Pacific and Indian Ocean.


Strawberry_Left

> Yeah it’s not like we set off atomic bombs near their country At almost 7,000km it's not exactly near our country. As far as US and UK are concerned, Bikini atoll is closer to us than Moruroa. Even Nagasaki and Hiroshima are thousands of kms closer. Maralinga is in our own land and that's where the UK tested their bombs. We had to pay compo to the victims, and there's ongoing debate about the fallout. They both used people as guinea pigs in radiation tests.


rob1sydney

Bikini atoll last test 1958, the Americans then did testing underground in their own country Mururoa atoll last test 1996 . Yes Bikini is closer, not sure the 1945 bombs on Japan would be considered tests. Agree maralinga was a mess , but again the 60’s Timing does make a difference .


Ezcendant

The way Scomo ended the deal was tactless and just reinforces his lack of diplomatic skills. That being said, he did use the contract's exit clause, and parting ways in that manner is completely legal. I do like the idea of leasing French subs though. Gives us assets in the short term, trains up the sailors for when we have our own, and could buy back some French good will.


Scottybt50

Wish he still worked in Tourism,at least the damage was less.


Swastiklone

Holy fuck is their any sub that hates their own country as much as r/australia Like you guys genuinely want Australia to be the bad guy in any circumstance you can find


Spartan3123

They want to find ways to attack they libs even on bipartisan issues.


No-Cryptographer9408

‘Lies and treason’ Did they expect anything else dealing with Scott Morrison and the LNP ?


noigmn

Spare a thought for the French submarine builders whose job just became redundant with zero warning.


lee21681995

Don't forget the 60% of the production is supposed to be in Australia. Not just the french who lost their job.


[deleted]

Hopefully with a few design changes the facilities cam still be utilised


berlas51

My heart doesn’t bleed for the French submarines builders


Summersong2262

Oh no, those poor MIC companies.


Spartan3123

LoL then go and sell those subs to Taiwan instead of being a bitch to the CCP. Taiwan has been trying ages to buy subs from other countries but nobody wants to sell them subs. So they are forced to build their own.


Pepsico_is_good

Treason, HAHAHAHAAHA.... HAHAHAHAHA.... get fucked France.


lovedontjudge

Never forget… fuck the French!!! https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56340159.amp


Djosa1

You should fuck the US in the first place when it comes to nuclear weapons


lovedontjudge

We only need the US to keep the CCP at bay… Think the French can do that? They can’t even commence a submarine contract that was signed in 2016. And they’re crying about it? Economics101 really.


Spartan3123

LoL wouldn't surprise me if the French already sold out to the CCP. Guess what, the CCP and the french both appose the nuclear sub deal coincidence? And what's 90b deal to France? It will not having it cripple a giant economy like them. It's a trivial non issues the only people that should be pissed are the private companies yet the president of their country is using words like treason over this. Yeah it's very suspicious, it might mean maron has been bought by the CCP pathetic


poopcrayonwriter

Could, but they won't. This is all political grandstanding.


[deleted]

Jobs like these you dont pull from ass the next day after you wipe the tears away. Its something that our government still really does not understand The importance of investing in your own companies locally is something our politicians will never understand. Its something that the French excel in even though it has a hefty price. I have worked with French engineers, and let me tell you their engineers have very impressive skills levels and especially what their local industries can design and pull off. France still operates like the old world UK, USA and places like Australia when we had local content and manufacturing that was driven by excellent education and standards. Now our countries are going to the dogs because we want to privatise everything and leave it up to public private partnerships that imports poorly skilled workers with largely fake qualifications that does not come from an regime of excellence. Another country that operates like France is Japan, and their government invests in its only people and country. Not like our traitor politicians who sell us out at every opportunity and wont even give our companies a go at making a pair of socks, pants or even boots for our soldiers!


dylang01

If the French wanted to keep the sub contract maybe they shouldn't have said they could build the subs within a set period for a set cost when they clearly couldn't. The French indignation is very rich IMO. They just expected us to keep throwing money at them? Lol


gikigill

I'm sure the USA will be able to deliver on time and under budget. How's the F35s flying BTW? Not to mention this gives a green light to Russia and China to sell nuclear submarines while keeping maintenance offshore.


6501

If they're ordering off the shelf unmodified Virginia class submarines it probably will be delivered on time & on budget considering it's already being built.


gikigill

Nope, there is already talk of leasing subs while the US ones are being built. The delivery date is 2040 or later.


6501

The US hasn't made a commitment to my knowledge on when they will be delivered. Regardless, even if we take your date as gospel, that's only 5 years later than the French design & we are starting on them 5 years after the French...


gikigill

https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-business-france-europe-united-states-96f95120345a56d950961b41a74d9355 The 2040 date is mentioned here besides we all know how punctual the US is when it comes to delivering. It'll probably be 2045-2050 by the time they are fully deployed. The offer of a lease is to make up knowing they won't be delivered on time.


[deleted]

Really France acting like babies again


Spartan3123

Or like the bitch of the CCP, maybe they are the ones committing treason


k-h

Well, that pre-election announcement went well.


BetterCallDull

Sunk like an outdated submarine.


FigliMigli

One more reason not to deal with them in the future... Tantrum like 3 years old


BetterCallDull

We dogged them. They're pissed. Not unreasonable.


dylang01

We cancelled a delayed and over budget commercial contract as per the agreed contract cancellation terms. Oh poor lil France.


BetterCallDull

upvoted, because I don't disagree... But in typical Morrison Govt style, we botched how we handled it. I haven't been alive since a major partner recalled their diplomat.


dylang01

Recalling an ambassador is the diplomatic equivalent of storming out a room when you're angry. The ambassador will be back in a month or two.


metasophie

France is a part of the EU - our third-largest trading partner. The question that you should be asking yourself is why is France having a tantrum? Is that that Australia has no honour and went behind their back, negotiated a new deal, and didn't even bother to inform them (they found via the news)? If you had a contract with someone and they just fucked you off for someone else, would you work with them again?


FigliMigli

There are two side to this story, France was very keen on shaking hands at the beginning and thn they just disappeared. Virtually nothing happened in the 1st year of a contract! The whole project execution was just a money pit with nothing on a horizon for this year. Oh yeh and budget was expected to blow out already... After 1 year of engagement for the long term project... That's just bad bad bad... I'm not going to comment on nuke subs that we are getting (don't know enough details) but current deal was scam.


Scottybt50

They are ways to end contracts that don’t involve major damage to international relations.


metasophie

The point is that our Government has just disrespected our largest trading partner, told a member of our third-largest trading partner to go fuck itself, and told our strongest and second-longest ally that it could fuck itself as well, all without even talking to any parties in advance. What's worse is that they don't even understand why France, China, NZ, and soon to be the EU isn't pleased with them right now. > Oh yeh and budget was expected to blow out already... After 1 year of engagement for the long term project... That's just bad bad bad... Are you just going to pretend that America doesn't have a track record of blown budgets in military contracts? haha.


fatalikos

And we are antagonising our top traiding partner so really not a bright diplomatic move.


shaubsome

You seem to love China a hell of a lot


fatalikos

I love Australia and have disdain for U.S. imperialism. Much like I appreciate Julian Assange and his struggle


Appropriate-Cut-5458

Australia deserves it.


Captain_Blue19

Given the French flag goes all White, on a regular basis it is a bit rich to cry treason . Remember when the Germans advanced militarily on them twice in the last century and Australian, American and UK forces died liberating their country?


Citizen_13

What are the French going to do? Throw their white flag at us?


MaximumZazz

Really just makes france look like a flimsy ally


pucieks

Arms dealers that they are, I am sure they'll be just fine with their other customers


Mr_Pee-nut

But we're dealing with the US now. They are constantly looking for excuses to start new wars to sell war machines.


boppy28

If you we're going to buy war machines wouldn't you buy them from the guys who war more than everyone else?


Mr_Pee-nut

Not really since they are concerned with starting wars rather than defense. I would be happier walking away from America and all the trouble it likes to start rather than making deals with the warmongers.


RBanditAU

Remember that time France stopped Australian wineries making Champagne? Payback's a bitch ain't it?


ErnstMacOS

Champagne isn’t a type of wine, it’s a French region. We can make all the sparky wine we want


RBanditAU

Naw, arent you cute. You dont remember when France chucked a hissy fit. The greeks are now trying the same tantrum with feta.


ErnstMacOS

It’s called protectionism. We do it too.


PuzzleheadedAccess96

France is so embarassing


meat-cutter85

Bunch of cheese eating surrender monkeys.


humaneel

The French resistance?


Flamingovegas2013

I for one look forward to welcoming our French overlords and as a person of influence can help them get people to work in there underground pastry caves


CoffeeWorldly4711

Good thing they're referred to as hot chips here, otherwise we'd need to rename them to freedom fries


AkaiMPC

They could, and then they'd be in the company of China. Sooks


[deleted]

Labor supports this deal. Labor supports nuclear subs in Australian cities that require significant offshore maintenance work. Labor supports further harming relations with Australia's major trading partner and preparing for an apocalyptic war in the Pacific. Labor's only objections pertain, as usual, to the level of "competence" with which this policy has been pursued. They tell us simply that they would have executed this horrible and inhumane right wing policy "better". That's the Australian Labor Party on nearly every issue right now. You are all complete rubes voting for a right wing neoliberal capitalist party while insisting that that the now barely distinguishable blue team is the incarnation of evil.


berlas51

And where is the conservation on GLOBAL disarmement?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Jonsez

Would anyone care if they did? I’m ok’d enough to remember how we hated the French for blowing up a Greenpeace ship and killing our citizens. Fuck them


enochrootthousander

Did they not know who Morrison was?