Anger over burst submarine deal: Paris questions future of NATO

Tagesspiegel Anger over burst submarine deal: Paris questions future of NATO Barbara Barkhausen 1 hr ago | France recalls its ambassadors from the U.S. and Australia over a busted submarine deal - and questions NATO. What the dispute is about. The dispute over the collapsed submarine deal between France and Australia is putting a strain on the future of NATO, according to French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian. The incident has implications for the definition of the defense alliance's new strategic concept, Le Drian told France 2 radio on Saturday, accusing France's allies of "lies" and "duplicity" that have triggered a "serious crisis." France had earlier recalled its ambassadors from Washington and Canberra for consultations out of anger over the collapsed submarine deal with Australia. This is a unique occurrence among allies. Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said Friday evening that this "extraordinary" step was in response to the "extraordinarily serious" announcements by the U.S. and Australian governments. The latter both said they wanted to continue working closely with France. The U.S., U.K. and Australia had previously announced a new security alliance for the Indo-Pacific - prompting Australia to walk away from a multibillion-dollar submarine deal with France. The deal had been kept secret until the very end. Paris reacted angrily. It is the first time in the history of U.S.-French relations that Paris has recalled its ambassador from Washington. Among allies, such a step is considered extremely unusual. Earlier, French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian had called Australia's decision a "stab in the back." France felt that mutual trust had been "abused," he said. What is currently symbolism, however, could have much more serious consequences in the coming months. For example, Peter Ricketts, a former British ambassador to France, tweeted, "Don't underestimate the reaction in Paris." He said there was not just anger but a real sense of betrayal after six months of negotiations behind France's back by the U.K. and the U.S. and Australia. As recently as June of this year, Australia's Prime Minister Scott Morrison was still a guest at the Élysée Palace. French President Emmanuel Macron was friendly at the time, even pledging his support in the region. Morrison confirmed at the dinner that Australia and France are good friends and partners. But at that point, the trilateral partnership with the U.S. and the U.K. must have already been discussed - most likely at the G7 summit in Cornwall a few days earlier. In Washington, the French reaction provoked regret. "We regret that they have taken this step," said a White House representative. "We will continue to work to overcome our differences in the future, as we have at other moments in our long partnership." State Department spokesman Ned Price expressed understanding for the anger in Paris and hope to discuss the issue with France at next week's U.N. General Assembly debate in New York. France, he said, is a very important and "our oldest partner." Pentagon spokesman John Kirby acknowledged that phone calls between U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and his French counterpart Florence Parly showed "that there is still a lot to do in terms of our relationship on defense issues with France." Australia's Foreign Minister Marise Payne said of the dispute with France that there were now "very difficult issues to be dealt with." Australia will continue to work "constructively and closely" with France, she said. Australia wants to effectively deter China Faced with China's expansionist ambitions in the economically important Indo-Pacific region, Washington, London and Canberra had announced their new alliance on Wednesday. Among other things, it provides for Australia to benefit from U.S. technology in the construction of nuclear-powered submarines, their missile armament and expertise in cyber defense. The U.S. also wants to expand its military presence in Australia. The crucial point is that the French submarines are conventional, while the British-American submarines are highly advanced and almost impossible to defeat. With the French submarines, it would not have been possible to deter China. The British-American submarines, on the other hand, caused horror in Beijing. China's increasingly powerful navy has no chance against the new submarines.