This is the end of the “contract of the century”. This Wednesday, September 15, Australia announced that it was going back on its decision to acquire twelve Shortfin Barracuda submarines designed in France, whose companies, Naval Group in the lead, were to receive 8 of the 31 billion euros of this giant agreement. An air of déjà vu? This is not the first time that the United States, the world’s leading exporter and NATO leader, has taken France’s pawn on arms sales. A glance in the rearview mirror makes it possible to measure the formidable commercial and strategic efficiency of the United States, but also the European inconsistency in this area and the shortcomings of the French export system.
When geopolitics prevails
In the long history of Yankee snubbing, the case of Australian submarines holds a somewhat special place. It is clear that the decision to cancel the 2016 contract in favor of a partnership with the United Kingdom and the United States is not totally illogical in the geopolitical context of tension with China. In addition, beyond complacency towards an American defense industry which has always been used, notably through NATO, as a major diplomatic instrument, the choice of nuclear submarines, more stealthy and enjoying operational autonomy superior, is not foolish.
From an industrial point of view, the logic of this stab in the back is much less obvious: while the agreement with France largely benefited the Australian economy, Naval Group having contractually committed that 60 % of the value of the contract benefits him, the acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines supposes an outright purchase in the United States, even though the construction of a shipyard in Adelaide has yet started. Without a nuclear industry, Australia is in fact incapable of building these submersibles itself in a sufficiently short period of time to avoid a “capacity gap” for many years.
READ ALSO : Submarine contract broken: “The United States has opened Pandora’s box”
There is obviously no question of strategic autonomy, since the maintenance and refueling of submarines sold by the Americans can only be done in the United States. On the American side, Joe Biden’s “new look” containment strategy has the merit of being clear: the President of the United States explained on Wednesday that he wanted “ invest in our greatest source of strength, our alliances ” and ” update them to better face the threats of today and tomorrow “. Already sold to Belgium, Denmark, Italy, Norway, the Netherlands, Poland, the United Kingdom, the F-35 fighter, yet weighed down by additional costs, delays and malfunctions, is now playing and already a spearhead role in this regard.
The fact remains that some countries seem to be playing against their camp: in Europe, this is for example the case of Holland, resolutely Atlanticist and member of the “F-35 club”, which systematically favors American equipment, for example. example by opting for the Apache combat helicopter, to the detriment of its Franco-German equivalent, the Tiger. Already purchasers of American F-18s, our neighbors across the Rhine could also be on the verge of abandoning the upgrade to a new Tiger standard, to also turn to the US Apache.
When the US makes offers they can’t refuse
In the matches between it and France, the United States obviously takes great care to defend its economic interests in countries that appear to be square meadows. Several export failures of the Rafale can thus be explained, in large part, by the Yankee influence in these countries. This is particularly the case in South Korea or Singapore, where the French aircraft, yet very well ranked by the military in the competition, was overtaken on the wire by American offers. In Singapore, the Rafale’s cost per hour of flight half as much compared to the F-15 was not enough to tip the scales, in the face of a low dollar rate and intensive lobbying from the American camp. In the Korean case, the fact that 37,000 American soldiers have been stationed in the country, under the influence since the 1950s, is of course not unrelated to the victory of the F-15, yet 25 years older than its French rival, and 8% more expensive.
READ ALSO :In Switzerland, the left at war against the purchase of the American F-35 fighter
The dice sometimes seem loaded: very recently, the Swiss Federal Council thus invoked a financial argument to prefer the American F-35 to the French Rafale. A shame, knowing that the American program has already cost more than 500 billion dollars to the US Air Force, accumulating 871 failures according to the Pentagon itself. The secret of this “light” addition? Replace flight hours with simulator hours! In addition, the F-35 seems oversized in relation to the operational needs of Switzerland, which will not have control over all the maintenance of their aircraft. But it was enough for Joe Biden to ” recall the excellent quality of the two American planes »During his visit to Geneva in mid-June to turn the tide in favor of the F-35.
When it comes to defending their industrial champions, the United States (which nevertheless buys many European weapons) is absolutely unscrupulous. With the support of Democratic parliamentarians, Boeing had succeeded, in 2008, in canceling the contract won two years earlier by the Airbus A330-MRTT to replace 179 of the US Air Force’s tanker planes. Boeing was then back in force, offering a smaller and less expensive model than that of Airbus (which could certainly have offered a more suitable model from the outset). The boss of Airbus, Tom Enders, then had only his eyes to cry on: ” Unlike the first call for tenders, which we clearly won two years ago, the current call for tenders is biased in favor of the competition’s smaller and less efficient aircraft. It’s no longer about the best plane, and fair competition He declared.
When France sabotages itself
Unfortunately, France sometimes seems to be busy making American work easier. This was the case, for example, in 2007, with the sale of the Rafale in Morocco. The French plane seemed to have won a game: in response to the purchase of Soviet fighters by Algeria, the King of Morocco wanted to acquire the tricolor aircraft. Moroccans are so determined that they even refuse American offers for the purchase of second-hand devices. First quack: the General Delegation for Armament (DGA) and the GIE (economic interest group), which brings together Dassault, Thales and Snecma, are conducting parallel negotiations, to the point of proposing two offers of different amounts! And France is no more concerned about who will finance this expensive contract, assuming that Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates will devote themselves.
READ ALSO :High technology, precariousness… Do the French armies have the means to meet their ambitions?
Except no. In 2007, an agreement was finally reached. Everything can be definitively settled by a word from the President of the Republic at the time, Jacques Chirac, but the latter prefers to leave the file to his successor. During this time, the American machine, piloted by the American Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, is set in motion. Result: Morocco ends up buying 24 brand new F-16s, for the modest sum of 1.6 billion euros.
More recently, it is also in Australia that a contract, however acquired, escaped the French. This time concerning the modernization of the Tiger helicopters, again them. The low availability of the export version of the helicopter, whose maintenance costs cooled the Australians, led the latter to refuse the late offer to upgrade its fleet, in favor of the acquisition of the American Apache. Or how to offer a scalp.
–
