by Jean-Luc BASLE for the Saker Blog
In a September 20th interview with French newspaper Ouest France, France’s Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian explains that the Australian submarine contract was part of France’s Indo-Pacific strategy – a strategy which included India* and whose objective was to ensure stability in a region critically important to world peace and prosperity and, incidentally, where two million French people live. This tripartite de Gaulle-type initiative on the part of France in an area the United States regard as its private reserve since the late 19th century, could not be tolerated. Washington DC had to put an end to it. It did it in a rather abrupt and inimical way, considering France is its oldest ally.
In practical terms, what will come out of this new AUKUS alliance? Nothing, if we believe Scott Ritter, former US Marine Corps intelligence officer which views it as a “dangerous joke”. Why a joke? Because Australia has neither the industrial nor the financial wherewithal not to mention the personnel necessary to build (partially) and fully manage a fleet of nuclear submarines. Why dangerous? Because Chinese leaders see AUKUS as a threat directed at China, and also because other countries may follow suit Australia’s example.
Noting that “a US ally could be armed with nuclear weapons anytime” and that the international community has reason to question Joe Biden’s sincerity when he states that the Australian submarines will not be equipped with nuclear weapons, Yang Sheng observes that: “a nuclear submarine is one tasked to launch a second-round nuclear strike in a nuclear war”. Furthermore, Chinese leaders consider the submarine contract as a violation of the non-proliferation treaty and a de facto legalization of “the acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines by all countries”. In a rather corrosive article, the Bulletin of American Scientists stigmatize the members of the AUKUS Alliance, especially the United States, for facilitating “the proliferation of very sensitive military nuclear technology in the coming years”. It further notes that there is little the International Atomic Energy Agency can do to stop Iran from acquiring “enriching uranium to HEU levels** to pursue a submarine program”.
Will this lead to a new arms race between the United States and China, as some people fear? Hopefully not. China knows it is winning its competition with the United States. Why waste useful resources in such a race? Chinese are patient people – a virtue Westerners lack.
In his bi-weekly foreign policy video, geopolitical analyst Alexander Mercouris sees AUKUS as further proof of U.S. amateurish foreign policy. Amateurish, indeed, but potentially devastating for world peace coming after George W. Bush’s cancelation of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. In its January 2020 bulletin, the board of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists move the Doomsday Clock to 100 seconds to midnight – the closest to midnight it has ever been in 75 years. In their January 2021 bulletin, the board left it there. Where will it be in January 2022? The French initiative, for all its shortcomings and challenges, had the advantage of not upsetting the global apple cart. Brutally left in the cold by its Anglo-Saxon friends, the French should waste no time in offering its nuclear-powered Barracuda submarines to India in replacement of the nuclear-powered submarines the Indian Navy leases from Russia. What a sweet victory this would be.
*India is a long-time client of France’s armament industry.
** Highly Enriched Uranium
“It did it in a rather abrupt and inimical way, considering France is its oldest ally”.
The USA has no allies, and never has had any.
‘Yang Sheng observes that: “a nuclear submarine is one tasked to launch a second-round nuclear strike in a nuclear war”’.
The submarines in question are nuclear-powered; they do not carry strategic nuclear missiles. In the jargon they are hunter-killers, not “boomers”.
It is surprising that the Chinese government should make such an obvious mistake.
It is actually way more complex than that. I suggest taking in Andrei Martyanov’s slew of articles, videos and descriptions here. The Chinese .gov is not making a mistake, but the whole balance of power is now thrown into a complexity. Anyway http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2021/09/it-is-only-natural.html
The Chinese cartoons are surprisingly on point here (they have superb cartoons in general):
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202109/22/WS614a70fda310cdd39bc6a8e0.html
Thanks. I have read Andrei Martyanov’s blog consistently for several years, as well as his first two books.
There seems to be a lot of doubt about exactly what type(s) of submarine Austrlia is to build (or buy or lease). American Virginias are a compromise: originally designed as hunter-killers, they have been retrofitted with VLS but have only a small number of tubes; Block III and IV are said by Wikipedia to have 2 VLS tubes each containing 6 missiles.The missiles are Tomahawks – of which salvos totalling over 100 failed to hit targets in Syria.
I questioned whether such submarines can reasonably be considered as “tasked to launch a second-round nuclear strike in a nuclear war”. If your country has been hit by a first strike of scores or hundreds of nuclear warheads, delivered by ICBMs or cruise missiles or a mixture of both, you probably have a better plan for retaliation than 100 or so Tomahawks. Unless you seriously believe China’s coastal defences to be worse than Syria’s.
The US has at least several Ohio-class which can be leased – recently retired or those scheduled, etc.. These could provide the sufficient SLBM payloads to concern China.
Martyanov agrees with you that the main purpose of “Australian” (actually will be mainly US-manned) nuc subs would be hunter-killers tasked to shut down sea lanes (SLOC) beyond the first island chain – in Indian and Pacific Oceans. But AUKUS may not have wherewithal to limit it to conventional war by this gunboat gangsterism. And most countries would be on China’s side as supplies chains are cut and much global trade halted.
https://youtu.be/gPMYBIV0AGA
Are you trying to say that subs can carry no nuclear missiles, if so someone should notify Russia of this fact that they are only hunters.
Such weapons do not have to be SLBMs, they could be cruise missiles (SLCMs) with nuclear payloads.
When they are persistently lurking within a few hundred km of the most vital coastal population and economic centers this is a real threat to China’s security.
The capability is what is most important, not the stated “intent”.
No, no mistake here on Chinese part. It is common sense that if you buy a thousand dollar rifle you will fire high explosive bullets from it and not peas or pebbles. Peashooters for firing peas, nuclear submarines for launching nuclear missiles.
That turns out not to be the case.
There are two distinct types of nuclear submarines – that is, submarines with nuclear propulsion units. One type is what I (rather old-fashionedly) call “hunter-killers”: their main role is to attack enemy surface ships and submarines. That used to be done exclusively with torpedoes, but now it can also be done with missiles.
The other type is what I call the “boomer”: a big quiet submarine that packs a large number of strategic (usually nuclear) missiles. They are intended as a nuclear deterrent: “hit us with a nuclear first strike, and our boomers will hit you back”. They don’t fight other ships or submarines unless cornered.
Nowadays many hunter-killers (alias “attack” submarines) have been equipped with cruise missiles for use against naval or land targets. That is a legitimate compromise, but involves tradeoffs – as typified by the “Astute” class. Six tubes and 38 weapons – presumably any mixture of torpedoes and Tomahawks. If an “Astute” is likely to have to fight enemy subs or surface warships, she had better have enough torpedoes. But that cuts down on the number of Tomahawks. And, of course, firing Tomahawks puts the sub in jeopardy, as the enemy now knows exactly where it is.
the way I see it Tom is that this whole deal has got nothing to do with Australia acquiring nuke powered subs (in the end if anything they will lease along with crews) it’s all about the base and infrastructure that will be built. the docks will become a haven for US/UK nuclear powered subs but also nuclear armed. to me this is the clear intention by the Americans. The Brits might palm off one or more of its older subs on the Aussies without nuke missiles but that is a side show, the main long term aim is the threat of nuclear armed subs in Chinese waters with a localised port at its disposal. Ultimately, by the time all this happens I suspect the Northern Sea Route will be permanently open for business thanks to Rosatoms fleet of ice breakers and thus the south china seas will become less important and will provide no choke point for the West. Combined with silk road infrastructure all goods will travel West overland or via the artic to Europe. Its all a tight fit time wise and THAT is what causes the long term tension.
“it’s all about the base and infrastructure that will be built. the docks will become a haven for US/UK nuclear powered subs but also nuclear armed.”
Absolutely.
I am positive that Scott Morrison has no intention of buying – much less *building* – any nuclear submarines at all. That is just a convenient cover story that he can use to run to the next Australian federal election in mid-2021 without alienating voters in Adelaide (which was were the (now cancelled) conventional submarines were meant to be built).
But once that election is over he will “suddenly discover” that nuclear subs cost too much to build and are much too complex to maintain.
The real plan will then swing into action: the existing submarine base in Fremantle (Western Australia) will be significantly upgraded and will be leased to the US Navy for (say) 25 years.
The US Navy gets what it wants – a place to operate its nuclear subs from – and therefore gets to dominate the Indian Ocean. Sweeeeeeet.
Scott Morrison gets what he wants: submarines! submarines! submarines! off the west coast of Australia and He Doesn’t Have To Pay For Them. Even sweeeeeeeeeter.
But they can be armed with nukes at any time.
With respect, I think you are missing the big picture. Attack and hunter-killer subs can be armed with nuclear warheads on their tomahawk missiles at any time. Who could possibly be in a position to guarantee the ordenance onboard consist “only” of tactical nukes and that it will remain so in the forseeable future?
Simple question: Are the people who control the USA, UK, and Australia the same people who control France? Of course they are! They just rearranged their business for a different geopolitical purpose. They would have all been forewarned, and this is a wonderful show they are putting on for us. Gosh… I’m about to get raving mad and cry over it!!!
“Are the people who control the USA, UK, and Australia the same people who control France?”
Yes, of course they are! The AngloZIONIST Empire is first of all, Zionist. France is also controlled by Zionism. Both the USA and France are monkeys controlled by the same organ grinder. Zionism plays the tune and both monkeys do their little dance, passing their cups to the assembled multitude. We all pony up and most of the proceeds go the MIC, which is also controlled by Zionism. This is indeed a “wonderful show they are putting on for us.” Take a deep breath, Rob. This will soon be over.
Is it not possible that the Aussie faux pas when dancing their own Matildas have some positive sides along the steps thay take while waltzing? First and foremost to my mind it appears that this could possibly postpone the importation of those foreign-baught submarines by many a year. — And You don’t pay except on receipt, right?
India should think twice, before accepting such offer from France! Just a wink from the other side of the ocean would cancel it!
I agree that France is reacting to the loss of the sub deal with Australia in an explosive way, like when two brothers figh. How far will they go in this show of anger? If France is an integral part of the west, then may be it is just ‘putting a show’ for us, as Rob suggested above.
However, the way it is understood above, France’s role may be to get India engaged also in a similar submarine/base strategy that benefits the west. The ‘show’ may be indeed hidding a filthy strategy. Let’s see. If India gets the French sub – and accepts the establishment of a base for the French military –, the situation may become more complex in the south China seas, causing more instability in the world.
It seems that nobody here realizes that France is a ‘Indo-Pacific Power’ itself. France has territories in the Pacific and Indian Oceans (France d’outre-mer). Most of their residents are citizens of France and citizens of the European Union. This makes them able to vote in French and European elections and so far they showed little appetite for independence.
What do you guys think about Victor Gao’s argument in his interview with ABC News Nuclear subs deal means Australia will lose ‘privilege of not being targeted’ ?
Australia is already targeted. Pine Gap, near Alice Springs, and Harold Holt Base at Exmouth, in particular, but also Garden Island naval base near Perth. Hard to reach those places with missiles from the Chinese mainland. But they are targeted.
I detect a certain level of ignorant chauvinism in both the ABC interviewer’s stance, and in the comments on that linked YouTube video.
Victor Gao tried to articulate the reality of a changed strategic context for Australia in acquiring and basing American and / or UK nuclear submarines on the Australian continent, together with all the facilities and interoperability that this implies (including, obviously, support for American and British nuclear submarines and whatever capabilities they bring to the equation).
But apparently no-one wanted to listen.
Nor does the Australian media seem interested in exactly why Australia would seek to acquire this capability, although the target is self-evident.
The West Pacific and the South China Sea are Asian turf, they are the territorial concerns of China and its neighbors. Any feigned concern for the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is a transparent pretext to build up military assets and threaten China – nothing more nor less.
The USA (which is not even a signatory to the UNCLOS, for God’s sake) is openly threatening war against China, and making preemptive moves to choke off China’s sea trade routes.
So please, who is the aggressor?
Unlike the USA, China is a rising mercantile nation, not a collapsing war-mongering empire.
This is an unprovoked existential threat to China, who hasn’t invaded or attacked anyone.
And now God-botherer Morrison wants to boost his war-mongering credentials by strapping Australia to America’s war-wagon? Against Australia’s largest trading partner, China?
None of this can possibly end well for Australia – and rightly so.
When Australia ordered the not even built F-111 back in about 1963, the locals were told that they were not for nuclear weapons systems, but strangely enough the Indonesians had never believed that, and there were always rumours of nuclear weapons stashed at South Australia’s Edinburgh RAAF base.
So now Australia is committing to buying nuclear submarines and of course the sheeple are being told that there will not be ‘nuclear weapons systems’ on those submarines. Of course, our pollies have never lied to the people have they, but now America has increased it’s naval strength and ports in northern Australia, and that’s the way things have always been since 1941.
Australia; the 53rd state of the Union which is something even us schoolkids realised back in 1964.
Andrew, there is a significant difference in this respect between bomber aircraft and submarines. Any reasonably large bomber can fairly easily be modified to carry and drop nuclear bombs or standoff missiles.
Submarines are different; they are more specialised. A boomer – a large submarine designed specifically to fire ICBMs – has a very large vertical launch capacity, typically 16-24 ballistic missiles with intercontinental range and usually multiple warheads per missile. A Russian Borei carries 16 Bulava missiles, each with 6 – 10 warheads, each of 100 – 150 kilotons power. That is a very satisfactory punch for a second-strike (retaliatory) system.
A Virginia can launch 12 Tomahawk cruise missiles, which fly slowly and vulnerably, taking a long time to reach the target zone. Tomahawks used by the US Navy do not currently carry nuclear warheads; only 450 kg high explosive or submunition dispensers are in production.
The British Astute class, which has also been discussed in connection with the AUKUS deal, does not have any cruise missile launching tubes at all.
British Astute class uses torpedo tubes to launch Tomahawk cruise.
OK, that looks like a very awkward compromise. Six torpedo tubes, with storage for up 38 weapons – which presumably can be any mixture of Spearfish torpedoes and Tomahawks.
I don’t think any submarine captain would be happy to sortie towards the enemy without any torpedoes – Tomahawks aren’t much use for fighting enemy submarines, for instance.
So how many torpedoes and how many Tomahawks? At most 38 Tomahawks, which is hardly a big contribution to the nuclear deterrent. (Especially since they are conventional).
Dear Tom,
Does it matter that the ‘Australian’ submarines won’t be carrying nuclear weapons? Not at all as per the comments of Gao (Is he related to George Fe Gao from Event 201) on our ABC news yesterday.
And then I remember John Curtain’s comments in regard to the Australian militia forces defending Australasia. Curtain widen the term of Australia to include the whole South East Asia area, and then Blamey ensured that the remnants of the 39th Battalion (militia) fought to the last man standing (7 Officers and 25 men)
But there is another twist in this narration; Premier Dan Andrews of Victoria, has been to China seeking aid to rebuild Victoria after he has trashed it ($B150), and Andrews has already purged his ALP members of any opposition to his China deals as reported last year by the ACA program, which also featured the former PM Kevin Rudd, the mandarin speaking pro Chinese ALP member and a former NSW ALP member removed for accepting bribes from the Chinese.
Looks like the Anglos have pulled one over the Gauls. Marquis de La Fayette would be turning in his grave.
I agree with Alexander Mercouris’s assessment: the 3 Anglos have cocked themselves up with this one. Mercouris also said that this is Johnson’s idea. I buy that too, looking at Johnson’s nostalgia for the British Empire (and assinine gunboat diplomacy both in the Black and South China Seas), a senile Biden and a clueless Morrison.
PRC makes the appropriate noises, but even if the subs do appear, it actually doesn’t change the picture very much as far as they’re concerned. It would be different if Japan was the country that got the subs (and technology) but militarily, Australia doesn’t amount to much, not against a great power like PRC, and even if acting in tandem with the US. In fact, Aus has put itself in greater danger rather than enhanced its security — PRC has just said it would be targeted in case of hostilities. We await the economic consequences of AUKUS on Aus which I guess won’t be long in coming.
So, France is miffed, and according to Le Drian — a politician talking about ‘trust’ is truly cringe-worthy — more about the stab in the back than the money, all 60 billion of it. Germany is on France’s side in the tiff and talk about a European structure similar to Nato (sans UKUS and with Franco-German leadership, obviously) is again making the rounds. As for Australia, a significant Asean state and it’s immediate neighbour, Indonesia, is not happy as is Malaysia because their interests have not been considered — PRC could start being even more assertive than they already are in the South China Sea. To be sure, the Asean states are playing a delicate hedging game here, caught as they are between a hard place and a rock, and anything that rocks the boat, as it were, is undesirable as far as they’re concerned. NZ look like they want to be left alone and, if possible, move elsewhere. I’ve friends in Australia and I don’t know, but Australia is beginning to look more like a WASP imperialist outpost redux than the Asian country it claims it is. All three Anglos are looking more and more feckless by the day to both Europe and East Asia.
The UK, I think, is the fifth wheel in this arrangement — if Aus were really to acquire nuclear subs, it would be American. They can’t maintain the subs themselves and the nearest facility is in Hawaii.
By the way, it’s called ‘Indo-Pacific’ only by f(lower case)UKUS/Nato and wannabe Pacific player India. RF, PRC, Chile, Peru, and RoW know it as Asia-Pacific.
“Marquis de La Fayette would be turning in his grave”.
Oh, hardly. Remember, he was on the side of the Americans against the British. And the Americans have wound up using the British as puppets.
That’s how it looks on the surface Tom, Washington running London.
But the real deep chain of command runs from the City of London — where the Queen of England has to stop her gold coach to get a touch on a large sword borne by somebody dressed in a fur hat reminiscent of jewish dress (shtreimel) before she proceeds onto hallowed ground, where the headquarters of the corporation that runs the holy city is adorned with statues of Gog and Magog, where the Lord Mayor has a parade grander than the Queen’s birthday parade — to Washington via New York.
Call these observations conjecture; but I believe semiotics, what we’ve been indulging in here all this while — looking for signs/clues by reading speeches, reports, reports of reports, watching videos — can be a useful tool to help us understand the world better.
Thank you, Stand Easy. The Crown/City of London is running this shit-show. Hope others will consider
Crown corporation(s) are easily identified in supreme positions in every field, and in finance/banking in particular. Debt slaves, all.
Those (cough) “Australian” subs will likely be American-controlled, largely American-crewed, and American-maintained.
In fact, Australia will more likely lease American nuclear subs and also allow US subs greater access to Australia military bases than build their own subs, which will take over a decade or so–if in fact they are ever built.
But if they slap an Australian flag and maybe a kangaroo sticker on these US subs, the USA can pacify all the Australian nationalists and soothe their egos. ;-)
Meanwhile, the reality is: Australia is nothing than a glorified American military base/colony masquerading as a nation.
The Aussies never fully got rid of UK control (still not being a republic and having Elizabeth II as their head of state) and now they are submitting themselves to the Americans. Well, it’s frustrating the common people of Australia will have to carry the burden of economic instability caused by the confrontation with China. After all, the US is not really an important business partner for Australia.
There is an interesting story on ZH: “Australian Government Shuts Down Melbourne Construction Sites Amid Protests Over Vaccine Mandates.”
The usual propaganda by the Murdoch media (and the rest) — constructions workers instantly become right wing ‘nazi thugs’ (presumable unemployed as well or they would be most likely …. yeh, construction workers!).
If accurate then we are in interesting “You will obey” times. — (in bold) “”We’ve been clear: if you don’t follow the rules, we won’t hesitate to take action,” he [a Minister] said in the statement.”
Some interesting points in the story, but one comment caught my eye.
“Wrong Story ZH.
The correct story in melbourne the ‘Non authorised MEDIA BLACKOUT’. News networks can be censored. Livestreams can’t.
Social media giants have been instructed by the Victorian government not to carry live streams from Melbourne apparently . What is it that the Victorian government needs covered up? Just stock standard police brutality, or the fact that it’s not just construction works now. They are bringing their families, nurses, teachers. All other unions are joining in. Children, old people. Make we wonder if rubber bullets and pepper spray grandmas might not put the government in good a light (we already have footage of that one).
I feel that a bad situation is about to get worse.”
Not that I believe the opposition (Labor Party) is any different in government but in the complex mix pressure also builds to throw the Pentacostalists babblers out of Canberra corridors. Next federal election is on, or before, 21 May, 2022. The same old ‘law and order’ fear/smear record again? Beware provocateurs.
Can’t anybody get these things right?
All the shit that’s happening in Melbourne is created, implemented and bashed out by the LABOR party; I say again, the LABOR party, headed by their meglamaniac Daniel Andrews aka Dopey Dan or Dictator Dan, who last year visited China in regard to the BRI and the possibility of borrowing $150 billion to restart his NWO or whatever.
Scomo, the headless chook is only the PM, and has neither the competence nor ability to reign in Totalitarian dictator Premiers like old dopey.
And yes, according to some watchers amidst those crowds of construction workers and other ‘Union members’ there are police provocateurs doing their utmost to increase the violence and destruction
And it may not have been noticed by the socialists, but after little Johnny’s fiasco as requested by red Rupert in 1996 and again in Sept 2001, but little Johnny really gutted the Liberal Party in Australia. Come to think of it, even Tony Abbot didn’t really comprehend the devastation created by little Johnny and his bending all the rules to confiscate firearms, but the Aussie shooters have, and strangely enough, when they handed in their old firearms, and were paid for them, they went straight back to the gun-shops and bought better firearms, much to the dismay of the CGC (coalition for gun control) which screamed blue murder, and then the AIC (Australian Institute of Criminology) in Canberra organised for certain police squads to then break into firearm owners homes, especially in the Eastern States and steal their firearms, which was easy as all the firearms were stored in lockers.
And again, one of Scomo’s senators, Jim Moylan a former military commander has already warned that Australia is facing a possible war with China in the next five years, so building submarines, whether in France the UK or USA could be a tad late, so you will find that Australia will be leasing those subs from whoever, and definitely updating their support bases and ports
They never got rid of UK control at all.
Here’s a question for you Lenard. Think carefully before you answer it.
Who would you prefer to be the ‘figurehead’ of your country? Sleepy Joe, snaky Obama, either one of the Bushes or Billy and Killery, or perhaps Old Lizzie.
One of the best things I remember about Lizzie was at the trial of Di’s butler, when she stated to him that there were people far more powerful than she in the country, so Lizzie was telling him a couple of truths that we sheeple are not supposed to know. I think it also inferred that she knew who was responsible for the death of Diana, and it came from somebody higher up than she, after all the monarchy has lived through far bigger scandals than Di, but imagine what Lord R would think if the future king of England had an Arab half brother.
And then if you consider the position of the Monarchy, well pretty much since the Battle of the Boyne all they have been is a ‘wooden figurehead’, or more accurately the Parliamentary Secretary, though I must admit that old Victoria was the first 10% lady who set the example for so many of the Asian presidential Ladies.
I would have thought that most intelligent people would have realised that monarchies, republics or democracies are all ruled by the Bankers regardless, so those differences are in reality irrelevant, and that’s what ‘money’ is all about
nothing intrinsic has changed. The Russians can wipe the floor with the Americans and The US cannot ‘beat’ the Chinese (whatever that even means or would look like from a US perspective – the 101st Airborne parading down Shanghai High street?) The Northern Sea Route will soon be open permanently and the SCS will cease to become a geopolitical and economic choke point. Aus has made a BIG mistake which will haunt them well into the future. It ensures that Perth will have the nuclear cross hairs placed upon it because we all know that the US and UK will use it to berth their nuclear powered and nuclear ARMED submarines, thats the whole point of the excercise. Australia can also look forward to 3rd world status when China cuts all trade ties … so Morrison has shown us who HE is really afraid of (and it’s not the Chinese) secondly he was obviously desperate to get out of the French deal which had risen in price considerably but in doing so he has given up any sovereignty the Australians had and invited nuclear catastrophe onto its doorstep. In true US fashion they have coerced a useful idiot to put his country into the frontline to be pushed through the meat grinder should the situation escalate, thus enabling the Americans to back down before Washington/NewYork finds itself in direct line of fire. If china has the capability, and I’m not sure whether it has or not, they should copy Russia and clearly state than any attack on China will result in a reciprocal attack not only against the aggressors but their control centers(ie. the pentagon, Langley, Washington, London etc.) Bidens speech at the UN yesterday was a joke but Americans are bovine enough to fall for the bulls**t
But the Chinese stated to the Aussies in no equivocal terms what would happen to them: ‘“This would make Australia a potential target for a nuclear strike, because nuclear-armed states like China and Russia are directly facing the threat from Australia’s nuclear submarines which serve US strategic demands.“Beijing and Moscow won’t treat Canberra as ‘an innocent non-nuclear power’, but ‘a US ally which could be armed with nuclear weapons anytime’.”; “ Australian troops are also most likely to be the first batch of western soldiers to waste their lives in the South China Sea”; “Morrison’s ambition could bring destructive consequences to his country if a nuclear war breaks out.”
Once again, the French are standing up against American imperialism in Europe. Does the de Gaulle-era come back? I hope so. It’s about time we distance ourselves from Washington and start to act like independent adults, not like docile servants of Uncle Sam’s empire
Oz started negotiations with UK 18 months ago.
France has only just got its first nuclear Barracuda in the water this July only 4 years late. It i smaller and slower than a British Astute-Class and has inferior reactor technology. UK and US pool technology so Oz needed US clearance for deal
BAe is already building warships in Adelaide
I do feel, like Isreal the UK, and the USA, do not care if Australia gets nuked. After all, both Australia and Isreal are not near the heart of the beast (USA,UK). On a first strike ruling, the UK and USA are willing to take the hits in both Isreal and Australia…minimising damage to the vital organs so that the UK and USA can hit the resistance in the heart…Beijing, Tehran, Moscow. They’re basically swapping their real estate in Isreal and Australia for Beijing, Tehran, and Moscow…worth it in their eyes. As A Muslim, I pray for the Australians, I pray for the average Isreali who just wants to get by with their lives…but there is demons (I use to think demons are fictional, in my atheist times) are willing to sacrifice the public of these locations for their leverage in a nuke scenario. War is coming that is certain..I do not see any other way for this to be settled.
Australia better look for a way to pay for these expensive toys. Their economy is is tatters with the added bonus of riots in the streets over a tyrannical government treating their people like garbage. They canceled the French submarine deal now watch the next administration, if the fascists now in charge allow another election, cancel the American one. No one in their right mind buy this junk regardless who makes it. All the mentally challenged pretender Morrison is doing is painting a huge target on his nation and driving it to the poorhouse faster than it is already.
“All the mentally challenged pretender Morrison is doing is painting a huge target on his nation and driving it to the poorhouse faster than it is already.”
God-botherer Morrison dances around at the Hill-Song Pentecostal Church every Sunday, going into spasms and speaking in tongues, and so forth.
This clown actually looks forward to “The Rapture” because he thinks he’s going to be wafted up to Heaven on a cloud of angels.
This is happening to Australia because we let it happen.
In practical terms, what will come out of this new AUKUS alliance? Nothing!
Exactly!
Australia has been the property of the U.S since Britain was kicked out of the Pacific during WW2.
When you win a war you collect the prizes, the U.S won the Pacific theatre, the democracy in Australia is just a sham like in all so called western democracies, a core group of industrialists and bankers are the chiefs with their Prime minister and head of institutions as minions to run the day to day issues.
As for French pride? I doubt if they will knock back help from the U.S and Australia if some other country starts muscling in on their Pacific assets.
And the prospect of Australia acquiring nuclear weapons, that was supposed to happen after WW2 when Britain used Australian soil to develop a nuclear weapon, Australias nuclear ambitions were stopped by guess who?
The real owners of Australia, you don’t want the natives getting any ideas of independence and real democracy!
China could avoid confrontation, and concentrate on building overland shipping routes. US nuclear submarines in Australia then serve only to increase China’s reliance on Russia.
In general, our actions tend to backfire. Remember the US sanctions against Huawei, the Chinese telecommunications equipment manufacturer? These sanctions effectively blocked Huawei’s exports. What do you do if you can’t export? You concentrate on the home market. China now is leading the world in installed 5G mobile base stations – courtesy of Huawei.
But that is exactly what China does! Not since yesterday. The famous theory of MacKinder about the Heartland stated explicitly that terrestrial communications between China and Russia meant the death of British maritime commerce.
France’s record as a supplier of war material is very bad and decadent. Let’s look at the past.
Exocets codes not transferred to Argentina in Falkland-Malvinas war.
The Mistrales not delivered to Russia.
Now this humiliation of the Anglo Saxons. and Macron as a Rothchild employee will say nothing more than he is dismayed and nothing more blah blah. France needs a new Dee Gaulle. And from Modi I expect anything like obtaining these French submarines at an economical price. They already did it with the Rafales. Greetings
The nuclear powered subs deal, yes will be very much controlled by usuk. Australia is just used as crew and basing and of course to pay.. there is a price to be paid to be a poodle.
Current .gov installed is now going full on climate change and Australia needs to go carbon natural, so expect nuclear power plants annouced very soon.
Perhaps the UK government’s assertion that the pact is not directed against China is true. There is a Muslim-dominated archipelago just north of Australia’s sparsely populated Northern territories: a few political missteps, and an Indonesian Erdogan is possible. Such a character could flood Northern Australia with akincis with a view to a takeover of Australia, much in the manner of the 2015 “refugee” crisis in the EU. Shooting at rubber dinghies would be domestically unconscionable, at least initially: the only defence at the beginning of such an attack is to decapitate the government sending the akincis,.
Nuclear submarines carrying cruise missiles with conventional warheads were used against Gaddafi (by the UK), and the technology works.Their main use by the UK seems to be as a defence against Argentina restarting the Falklands war, by their patrols in the South Atlantic.
I don’t know whether the air burst bombs, which rely for their detonation on creating a fine mist of kerosene in air at exactly the right concentration corresponding to the detonation stoichiometry 2CH2 + 3O2 = 2CO2 + 2H2O, can be fitted onto cruise missiles, but I hope this, if not a reality yet, is being extensively investigated. The advantage over things like nitro compounds is that the oxidant is air, rather than part of the explosive, so you get much more bang per gram (the best conventional explosive is octanitrocubane, C8N8O16 = 8CO2 + 4N2, but it is difficult and very expensive to make). The power of air burst bombs overlaps the bottom end of so-called “battlefield” nuclear weapons, so for regime decapitation they are ideal.
From a eschatological perspective things couldn’t read clearer. France is being encouraged to build its Grande Armee because Macron is the monster foretold. Europe must come to rely on the nuclear umbrella of France. The same thing is in action regards Afghanistan. For eschatological purposes China must be encouraged send two hundred myriads of myriads that eat everything in their path like locusts, so that everything aligns with Armageddon.
France is so weak and insignificant, it is almost completely irrelevant today.
What will happen if the Iranians announce their intention to build nuclear powered submarines?
I suspect Nothing. What do you think?
There would seem to be no political or military reason to build such submarines – which are extremely expensive, and which would constitute a huge provocation.
Iran is a classic example of a nation whose navy has an almost wholly defensive role. (Admittedly, that is largely a political decision, as Russia and China have similarly defensive naval doctrines).
Iran has no wish to throw its weight around in distant parts of the world, and therefore it has no need for nuclear submarines or surface warships. Diesel-electric submarines have great advantages, provided they are intended for service in home waters. They are cheap, small and quiet – some diesel-electric submarines, like the famous Russian “Kilo” class and its derivatives, have been considered the world’s quietest submarines.
When the enemy has to come to you – into the waters of the Persian Gulf itself, or the North Arabian Sea – diesel-electric attack submarines are the boats of choice. Their slow top speed matters less when they can lie in wait for the enemy, whose destination is more or less fixed.
” U.S. amateurish foreign policy.” – Are you sure? it is deliberate and planned and in line with what the entity has been saying about its wish to confront/contain China. So, no, not amateurish at all but clearly in character. Something to be expected. By no means a surprise.
This is all a tempest in a teacup. The real reason for the cancellation was that Naval Group couldn’t deliver on their promises, and kept increasing the contract price. There is a Federal election next year, and to retain Adelaide seats they need the promise of more shipbuilding. These mythical nuclear boats will never be built in Australia. The Collins class can have an extension of life refit and refurbishment in Adelaide, and we might lease an Ohio class boat from the US, similar to how India leased a nuclear boat from Russia. It is highly likely that HMAS Stirling will have upgrades to accomodate USN boats.
“There is a Federal election next year…”
… and chances are God-botherer Morrison will use every possible tactic to delay or even suspend elections, given the rising groundswell against all levels of Australian governments by the Australian populace now enjoying the early delights of the New World Order.
It wouldn’t surprise me one little bit to see Morrison pull some stunt to declare martial law and cancel any elections until the “national state of emergency” is over.
No. There is zero chance that Morrison will attempt to cancel elections. None.
If anything the reverse is likely; if he can delude the State Premier that Adelaide still has a shot at building submarines (thereby keeping him quiet) and if he thinks he can gain some traction with a “Yellow Peril! Yellow Peril!” scare campaign then he would be very tempted to call an early election.
After all, if he does not really intend to build nuclear submarines in Australia (and I’m sure he doesn’t) then it’s better for him to go early, precisely because the longer he waits the more likely it is that his true intentions gets leaked.
And this is a truism: An Australian PM can always call an early election, but he can’t postpone one. Mid-2022 is the very last moment he can hold an election, but he might be very tempted to call it for early-2022.
But cancel an election? No, not gonna happen.
Someone please correct me if I’m wrong. It seems to me only a couple/few years ago on this very site (maybe the Saker himself) that an analysis of the Brexit issue made the case that Brexit was the Anglo/American/Zionist move away from the sometimes-reluctant “old Europe” and the establishment of much closer (and direct) trans-Atlantic ties for furtherance of global hegemony and subduing of their main rivals/competitors. Australia being a subsidiary of the Anglo and irrelevant except as a convenient base, is this agreement then really the first overt display of this Anglo project to (attempt to) maintain control of their declining Empire?
In the 80’s, I remember the general consensus was that Australia would be one of the few places on Earth that could have a chance of surviving a nuclear exchange between NATO and the Warsaw Pact. I’m not sure if that notion was really accurate. But today, Australia has become a major target for ICBMs… Congratulations?… I guess.
This will make Perth in Western Australia a nuclear target, because the Fremantle submarine port will – one way or another – become a base for nuclear submarines.
They may be Australian (or even, less likely, Aussie-built) nuclear submarines. But that is IMHO unlikely in the extreme. More likely, Scottie-from-Marketing will get around to canning that Much Too Expensive Plan once he has the next election out of the way.
It is far more likely that he’ll then go with the plan that he always intended going with: leasing the Fremantle sub base to the US Navy for them to operate their nuclear subs from.
But, regardless, either way Fremantle – and therefore Perth – will be in for a thorough nuking if a hot war breaks out.
Still, not to worry, Perth is the most isolated big city on earth. To the west, water. To the north, desert. To the south, ice. Go east and you have to travel 2,700km to reach the next large city (Adelaide).
Australia would survive Perth’s nuclear annihilation. Sure, it would instantly be smaller by two million people but, hey, other than at census time would anyone really notice?