Enlarge image
American Ohio-class nuclear-powered submarine
Photo: Mc2 Indra Beaufort / US Navy / imago images / ZUMA Wire
The vocabulary spoke for itself.
French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian accused the Americans and Australians of French television of "lying", "duplicity" and "disregard" on Saturday evening on French television.
Le Drian is actually considered prudent and reserved. He's a heavyweight in government, albeit a very discreet one. The foreign minister rarely gives interviews; he prefers to work in the background. Le Drian is the opposite of a hothead. Not a man for rash remarks that he might later regret. The former socialist, who joined Emmanuel Macron's “En Marche Movement” in 2017, has also been in the political business for far too long - as Defense Minister under President François Hollande and, very long ago, as State Secretary under President François Mitterrand.
But it was precisely his restraint that made the 74-year-old's appearance in the 8 p.m. news on the TV channel France 2 so remarkable.
Because what Le Drian announced there was a targeted further escalation in the submarine dispute between the French and Australia and the USA.
The Australian government had previously terminated a multi-billion dollar contract for the delivery of French diesel-powered submarines and announced the purchase of nuclear-powered American submarines.
Quietly but undeterred, the Foreign Minister declared that this was a serious breach of trust among allies - a process that is prohibited among partners who take each other seriously and respect one another.
The foreign minister did not raise his voice once during his minute-long appearance, but that wasn’t necessary. Le Drian calmly but unequivocally summed up the anger of the French government: “We are currently experiencing a crisis between the USA and France, and the withdrawal of our ambassadors from Australia and the USA is intended as a symbolic act to help our former partners understand how serious this crisis is. "
One does not deal with such brutality and unpredictability with the partner France among allies, said Le Drian. He then corrected the commentary on a film that had previously been shown to the moderator. It alleged that there had been consultations between the Americans and the French before Australia and the US announced the new agreement. "But that's not true."
Political Paris has been in turmoil since Australia unilaterally terminated the contract concluded with the French in 2016 for the purchase of diesel-powered submarines of the "Shortfine Barracuda" type and, according to the French, without prior notice. And President Macron is downright angry. The instruction to recall the French ambassadors from Washington and Canberra to Paris for consultations goes back to him. It is a historic first in France's relations with the United States.
The French ambassador in London is allowed to stay for the time being - but on Saturday evening one could wonder whether the order to bring him back to Paris would have been more hurtful than the foreign minister's reasoning why this was superfluous.
You don't need the ambassador at consultations in Paris to have the motivations explained in London, said Le Drian: "We know their permanent opportunism." In addition, Great Britain was probably the fifth wheel on the car in this agreement.
For France, the dispute is about more than the 56 billion euros that the country is now missing due to the canceled order for the twelve conventional submarines.
It's about geopolitical ambitions and hurt pride, about humiliation and disappointment.
In this case, the anger of the government in Paris applies above all to the Americans.
Like many Western countries, France had linked the election of the Democrat Joe Biden after the leaden Trump years with the hope of better times in the transatlantic relationship.
Macron relied on more reliable cooperation and less national selfishness in Washington.
The failed submarine deal is now the third major disappointment in a short time after the hasty and poorly communicated withdrawal of the US military from Afghanistan and the pandemic-related entry ban imposed by the Biden government on Europeans.
In the French capital, people no longer speak of disappointment, but rather of a political earthquake.
"This time it will take more than one state visit to repair the damage."
The French political scientist Bruno Tertrais wrote in an article for the "Institut Montaigne" that the process had at least the same scope as that in August 2013, when President Barack Obama withdrew his announcement at the last minute that he would launch air strikes on Syria.
But one could also compare it with the French refusal of Washington in the summer of 2003 not to go into the Iraq war alongside the Americans.
"This time it will take more than one state visit to repair the damage," said Tertrais, who is also not known as a hothead.
"It is now becoming more difficult for those who defend an alliance of democracies against China to work with a US government whose methods are abrupt, including with regard to their own camp."
The first statements from Washington showed how little the Americans understand or want to understand the outrage in Paris. Sometimes there are arguments among friends, but that doesn't mean that you are no longer friends, it said. On Sunday, however, the Élysée Palace confirmed that US President Joe Biden had asked for a phone call with Macron. This should take place in the coming days.
The New York Times reported that the US government had tried to inform Paris before the new agreement with the Australians and the British was announced. Due to scheduling difficulties, however, there were no meetings with the French partners. According to information from Paris government circles, however, President Macron was only informed of the end of the French agreement by Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison on Wednesday morning, shortly before the official press conference in the White House.
Australian government sources, in turn, contradict this, and in an interview with SPIEGEL they are clearly trying to smooth things over - and contradict the French presentation. The French could not have been so surprised by the termination, as it is now being told in Paris, it says. After all, the contract had had its problems for a long time, the order had gotten out of hand in terms of costs and schedule, and that could be found out by a simple Google search.
The decision was made to change course because the Chinese capabilities in the Indo-Pacific have improved massively since 2016 - and therefore submarines with a greater range are needed.
And the American, nuclear-powered submarines can also be used as a country that has no nuclear capacities - that does not apply to the French nuclear-powered submarines, which is why they could not be ordered from the French.
The question remains why the Australian Defense Minister, during her visit to Paris on August 30, almost three weeks ago, together with Foreign Minister Le Drian and her French counterpart Florence Parly signed a 25-point communiqué in which both countries signed the bilateral one Celebrate cooperation in the Indo-Pacific region.
France wants to rethink its NATO strategy
According to the Australian account, it is pure coincidence that the time of the termination of the contract and the establishment of the new Aukus alliance (Australia, Great Britain, USA) now coincided. In addition, Paris still has its own strategic interests in the Indo-Pacific because of its overseas territories in the region. You understand that the French are now "bitter", but hope that they calm down.
Whoever informed whom and when, the injuries in Paris run deep.
Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian announced on Saturday evening that France would now rethink its NATO strategy.
For a long time, Macron has questioned the functionality of NATO, which he provocatively certified as "brain death" in an interview with the British "Economist" in November 2019.
The French doubts about the reliability of their US partners are just as old.
The events of this week, it is said from around the Élysée, only increased the need to think about a strategic autonomy for Europe.
"Europe needs a new strategic compass," said Le Drian.
From January 1st, the French will take over the EU Council Presidency.
The topic of a new European autonomy should then be at the top of the agenda.