Tyler Rogoway has a nice overview of the Mistral BPC sale to Russia over at his blog Foxtrot Alpha. Check it out here. For the life of me I'll never understand why the US didn't step in and have these approx 16000 ton ships act as potential "cheap" LHAs/LPDs and test the concept for the USMC before giving them to the US Navy, Coast Guard or even SOCOM to use as they saw fit.
A couple of things are obvious. We don't want Russia to have this type of power projection and more should have been done to stop the sale.
French... sell the weapons tech to China, sell the weapons tech to Iraq, now they sell the weapons tech to Russia. It's some kind of tradition...
ReplyDeleteDon't forget Argentina. Plus all the nuclear technology they have given out.
DeleteFirst :
Delete-USA sold blackhawk to china, Solomon already raged about this !
-France sold aircraft and tanks to irak, USA sold Chimical/ biological weapons,
-USA lock every market to FRANCE ( morocco ), don't be amaze if we sell where they can't lock the sell
-German sell arms to saudis, our enemies of nowadays and tomorrow
-US almost created talibans by arming them !
Don't cry about arms dealing, either you act like former japonese doctrine , either you shut up !
Its really a surprise that other countries still arent buying the Rafale Jet.
DeleteYou mean like everybody, right ? China has started to have US military techs since the...80's...Tiananmen only slowed things oficially.
DeleteThe BPC contract is from 2011, IIRC The Netherlands, Spain and Italy were the losers of this one, but a lot of military European tech (and israeli) have been sold to the russians since the 90's to make IFV's, training planes, etc...
The military market is so competitive nowadays that one more sale is maybe the difference between being alive or dead.
Those ships are only partially made in France, in fact if the contract is cancelled the second one cannot be used without a lot of (costly) modifications and rebuilts, and the first one have been made for Russian systems use, not Nato ones, so it would be necessary to do a lot of changes to have it NATOized.
Even though the cancellation is possible the French will have to return not only the billions for the ship, but also pay Russia a significant compensation for breaking the contract And job loses.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSo... I don't think we had any way of stopping this sale short of buying the ships for ourselves, at a higher price of course.
DeleteThey sell to whoever will make them money, not unlike the USA, Sweden, Russia, China and everyone else in that business.
ReplyDeleteMy question is why so much hatred towards Russia in the west these days? Everything I have seen that can be substantiated points to the US stirring the pot of hatred and discontent in the Ukraine (we want them in NATO). You can't blame the Russians for getting upset about that, it would be like the Soviets trying to get Canada to join the USSR.
I am really starting to question everything being reported on Russia and the Ukraine situation. How much of it is the truth, and how much of it is propaganda to excuse the USA and EU to block Russian economic growth? Are we getting distracted playing games with Russia when there is someone out there building up to potentially challenge both countries militarily, someone like China?
The Russian people have gained freedom in the last 10 years (not saying that it is great over there, but it IS getting better), what has happened to freedom in the USA and UK in that time?
1. everyone is doing propaganda
Delete2. russia has no "economy"
3. China is not/it won't be rusia, they are not a threat to the US, they know how things work.
4. you have the freedom to bow to the lenin's carrion
5. it's an eye for an eye, on a similar subject, people are starting to realise, shouldn't rusia have the same place as nazi Germany in the history books? it was the same.
Actually is not the west it just couple of loudmouths that have their own agendas.In Europe that is the Baltic states and the Poles . Interestingly Canada now joined the fray but you can understand that for them its the arctic not Ukraine that matters.
DeletePeople seem to forget that Russians were promised no Nato expansion will take place in the former east block , promise that has been broken time and time again. Ukraine is just a last step .People also fail to realize that much of the post war Europe stands on agreements made during ww2.
You do not need to imagine anything look at Cuba that has been under trade isolaton by US for the last 40 years for what ?
Mat, you can be upset... but this is the reason to invade other country, steal it's land, kill it's citizens. This is not an XIX century... the hard sphere of influences are don't existing anymore. If Ukraine want to join NATO why it's should be punish for it? If Ukraine want to be more directed in to western type of civilization and join EU... why it should be punish for that? You have a choice to do what you want but not if Russia don't agree with that?
DeleteDon't listen of Mr.T he is a Putin troll. Think for yourself, if the only Baltic States and Poland would concern about aggressive move of Russia... you think that EU would put sanctions as whole organisation against Russia? You think they have such power in EU that can dictate what rest will do?
The anti Russian propaganda is just response for t's actions. When you start to threat every neighbor and try to piss them off... don't be surprise if they will start to be piss off.
i've been enjoying watching the conversation but i have to add this.
DeleteIT ALL STARTED BECAUSE THE UKRAINIANS WERE IN THE MIDST OF AN ECONOMIC CRISIS WHILE TRYING TO GET ITS ACT TOGETHER TO JOIN THE EU!!!!!!
yes this has taken a military turn but at its heart its all about politics and economics! don't forget that! the govt was going to have to implement severe austerity on the people to get into the EU and even then it wasn't guaranteed.
this NATO gambit in my opinion is just a backdoor attempt at the real prize for Ukraine. EU membership...which will lead to something that makes me much less sympathetic to the Ukrainian people...A FREAKING MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR BAILOUT OF THEIR ECONOMY!!!!
eyes on the prize people. NOT SAYING THAT PUTIN IS RIGHT BUT AM SAYING THAT THEIR ARE DEVILS ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS THING!
Putin troll LOL . Ever heard of the snowball effect . Spheres of influence are very real and hard as steel. We will see more of that soon in the pacific.
DeleteAgain i have yet to hear of any atempt by Ukrainian goverment to come to a nogotiationg table with the separatists as that is what it will take to solve this ,geting arms form the west solves nothing russians can always match with gear and support needed resoult even more death and you do realise that for now Russia is not recognising DNR LNR independance from Ukraine, but if the things get far enough that will happen and these will become states that are recognised by whatever russian friends there are round the word and Ukraine will not be able to do anything any more . Russia will station 'peace keepers there any military solution will then include full Russian armed might.
Last thing Kosovo that was the pandoras box that opened the way for these kind of states,just in that case Nato bombed Serbia and took away a teritory that still has international troops and administration overseeing the corupt locals. In any case that was a first and for russians it was a bit of a red flag.
And then the elected president of the Ukraine realised, probably after much scolding by people who know far better than him, and by his russian counterparts, that by entering the EU they would enter the EU Customs Area, and would then be forced to impose the same restrictions on russian goods and services as every other EU nation has to. Because it is a common customs zone.
DeleteThis would mean leaving the CIS customs zone, and this would be devestating to the Ukrainian economy which is heavily deependent upon russian trade and handouts, and subsidized fuel, whereas on the other hand there is very little trade between ukraine and the EU. Furthermore, it would threaten the deal they have with svestapol in exchange for almost free-gas, and cause a military buildup on their border. In light of all of this, the elected president decided not too proceed with the EU deal.
In exchange ukraine was subject to a Western Psy-ops campaign to oust the elected president and sew anti-russian sentiment, as a result of this the Eastern and Russian parts of ukraine rose up in revolt. Now this is being used as an excuse for further agression against Russia. Despite the fact that the USA were supposed to not expand nato and specifically guaranteed the independence of ukraine.
Now France should give out anti-ship missiles together with the licence for the black sea countries, for free
ReplyDeleteExocet are ready to sell to everybody there...
DeletePlus It would be useless to stop the deal, they have the ship plans since 3 years ! They build half of the second ship : too late !
Us builded for higher cost , less capable ship but US ships are constructed following military standards : Mistral are builds like civilian ships. Nowadays, Mistral and America class aren't buig deals with modern anti ship... I'm almost thinking of peace keeping ships... remembers Artic conveyor, with small enemy, few 70's vintage exocets and the cold war heavy brittish army !
Why, Russia is not the cold-war type enemy that the warhawks are making it out to be, infact their economy is really small, slightly larger than the size of Scandanvia. The only reason why it is a military threat is because the EU chooses to allow it too be, mainly by spending is military budget poorly (they spend way more than russia, and what do they have too show for it..), and by spending a very small percentage of GDP on military expenditure.
ReplyDeleteAnd the EU wouldn't even be importing their energy from russia, without the green tape put in place to stop the extraction of hydrocarbons within the EU. Denmark alone produces 1/3rd of europes gas needs, I am sure there is plenty more gas in the north sea, and the mediteranean. Not to mention we are fairly certain there is a lot of shale gas in Eastern and southern Europe and probably everywhere. Then there is Gas, and nuclear, and all these other forms of energy. France produces most of its electricity by nuclear power, and they used to mine most of their own nuclear fuel, ofc they probably still could without the green tape.
And FYI they are sold now, if they didn't deliver the goods that russia paid for it would be theft. Two small amphibious assault ships are not going to make much of a difference except maybe in the baltic sea.
I'd be curious how much damage these things can take, as they are supposedly more of a civilian naval design vs military. That said, so many weapon systems costs that are out of control it would make sense to have ships like this for low intensity conflicts, peacekeeping and humanitarian missions, which seem to make up the majority of missions these days. It's almost like a hi/lo concept for naval usage. Why send a heavy (expensive to operate) carrier or America class ship to a humanitarian relief mission when a Mistral will do. It sounds like a ship design and concept that western navies should take more seriously.
ReplyDeleteThere is confusion regarding this, civilian standards just means they are built to international maritime standards which are quiet high, it doesn't necessarily mean they do not have the sorts of damage control systems you would expect to see in a military vessel, nor does it mean they have a particularly weak hull.
DeleteOf course it doesn't help that some civilian spec military vessels are basically just straight civilian vessels. Anyway nowadays the armour you see on these ships is very thin, you can see demonstrations of this when even large heavy-hitters like burkes have had big wholes blown in the side of their hulls by speed boats and attacks in ports and whatnot.
If you are just talking peacekeeping then all you need is to rent or use a bassically civilian spec RORO and pull up to a dock or a sea-dock like the MLP, and offload a whole regiment at a time. For other cases you could fly stuff in, I have a feeling though the types of things you are talking off, i.e. the Mali crisis and the situation in south sudan, those could have been taken care of by paratrooper units, or possibly even gunships (similar to the C130 gunship) and some survailance planes, supporting local armies.
Not that america, or any other country should make a habbit of involving itself in the internal affairs of others, that is against the ideas of democracy.
civilian standard ship have thinner inner wall and doors, and they are less compartimented. The kneel is thicker too, less resisting to mines.
DeleteIn Fact, BPC is like the new tech ship that abandonnedthe idea to resist to attack. whether we have see and air superiority, or we don't send them.
If stating some kind of sobering and factual comment makes someone a "Putin troll", what should we make of the hysterical nonsense that we've been hearing from some posters ?
ReplyDeleteOn a more factual note, regarding French weapons exports, I would like to underline that they also were the main provider of weaponry of Israel 1950 and 1967 (which enabled us to win two wars) and they helped us with the development of the Dimona power plant and the (alleged) Israeli nuclear arsenal ! Now unfortunately times have changed since then, but thx France for that !
As for weapon exporting/importing countries, anybody who's really interested in getting the numbers right should check for the real figures ... there are other much more suprizing combinations then the France-Russia deal !
why do every thing have to be from the point of view of americans ? the disgusting part of this mistral deal was the US attempt to blackmail the french by using trumped up charges created by USJD.. The lording over their allies move by america is pretty plain and disturbing, why they treat their Allies like that ?
ReplyDeleteand those who keep demonizing russia and putin , do you realized you been taken in by the endless western mass media propaganda ? Why russia got blamed for protecting its interest , especially on their doorstep so to speak..
Americans? what an arrogant response! you bettter look around the EU and find the real people that are genuinely upset by this development.
Deletei'll be honest. if we didn't have a pact that means that we defend much of Europe i wouldn't give a damn. but since many of you socialist bastards don't believe in the notion of self defense and want to pawn it off on the "Americans" then that gives us a right to tell you fuckers when YOU"RE FUCKING UP!
Sol, I wouldn't even bother replying to crack-pot posts like that one ... I'm not even sure they're able to understand the point you're making.
DeletePersonnally, whenever I'm tempted to send a "spiced up" reply to some lunatic, I try to think about Danny Glover's "Im getting too old for this shit" reply in Lethal Weapon ... better for my nerves ;-)
It's always fault of US... always. That's the main chant of one propaganda machine, whatever happen it's always US fault. You feel bad, US fault. You think you don't earn enough, US fault. Your dick is not hard enough... of course US fault.
DeleteThe other is... the US did that.
I'm almost sure that there is some psychological state that describe this. Everything US done good or bad in it's history it's always excuse for doing the something... because US done that. Like everyone want to be like US.
Just for the record: in addition to what Sol said about countries most opposed to that sale ... It definitely wasn't the US that were most adamant about this. It was the Baltic States, Poland, Georgia and Japan.
DeleteThink the US Navy consider both these ships more a potential nuisance than any real threat ... Let's keep this real and not turn the blog into another Area 51 forum.
The Baltic States and Poland are of course always unease when someone sell weapons tech to bear. But they were not the louder voice in that. Both ships in official news (that can change and did change couple of times now) are going to Pacific Fleet. They would not risk them on Baltic where they would be more then easy to sink. Even the Germans or UK were stronger opposing this deal then Poland or Baltic States. And it's in the largest interest for Japan (especially with rising tension and game of nerves around Kuril's) and US that those ship would not end in Pacific... but that's fight was already lost.
DeleteShas, when you don't know about something, it's better not to say anything that shows you don't know about it ... The Germans and Brits couldn't care less about the sale, only wish they had got the contract instead of the French !
DeleteBy the way, only one of these ships - the 'Vladivostok' - will go to the Pacific fleet. The other one - the 'Sevastopol' - will go to Black Sea Fleet and will be based in Novorossiisk or maybe even Sevastopol.
Say what you will, but at least get your facts right.
Are you out of your mind? I should get my facts straight?
DeleteDo you even care to read the article Sol' post here? I would put for you some part that you maybe by overlook.
"Yet this initiative was met with little support from the White House, but a second initiative originating from GERMAN NAVY has proposed that the European Union purchase the ships and operate them cooperatively."
In Jul. 21 the Prime Minister Cameron said that "France's plan to sell Mistral helicopter carriers to Russia, saying fulfilling such an order would be unthinkable in Britain after the downing of the Malaysia Airlines plane in Ukraine"
Yeah... they don't care about the sale... not at all.
I almost forgot to ad. Ships are not the problem, ships can be sink without too much then single missile. The main problem is tech transfer. This is the core of that deal, not some ships.
ReplyDeleteWhat technology transfer ? Technology transfer is a specific term referring to the transfer of skills, knowledge, methods or facilities in the context of military or weapons development programs. There is no technology transfer here ... All the Weapons systems will be Russian, so will be the helicopters ! Half the hull is Russian. Not even sure the landing barges will be French.
DeleteAnd for the French, the core of the deal is to sqeeze as much money out of it as they can, in order to save their dying ship building industry. And for the Russians, the core is to get some modest power projection capabilities.
We're basically talking about a large heli pad, not a 4th generation fighter jet.
I will quote a single thing from RIA Novosti.
Delete"On 1 November 2010 Russia's United Shipbuilding Corporation (USC) and France's shipbuilders DCNS and STX France signed an agreement to form a consortium. The agreement includes a transfer of technologies and is a move that may bring a pending helicopter carrier deal closer to completion."
And you think they buy it because it was nice looking or it was more cheap?
Again, I would refer to what i wrote to you in the MSG above: get your facts rights, before emptying your mag at an imaginary target.
DeleteThe source you're quoting is from 2010: at that time, the deal was for the Russians to buy 2 LHDs (to be built entirely in France) and to take an 'option' on two more which would be built in Russia this time, under certain technology transfer provisions indeed.
The option for these two more LHDs has been canceled by the Russians themselves, so no tech' transfer. Update your info, dude !
I don't think anything, i'm just giving you the info. It's not with those ships they gonna invade Poland anyway !
And I presume you posses copy of NEW deal that don't say a word about tech transfer like the previous one. I'm sure you will be such nice and give that to us, we will be more then happy to read it and acknowledge that you are right.
DeleteShas, up until now i did reply to your messages because although i don't agree with you, i didn't consider you part of the lunatic fringe. So here's a last reply to the questions you're raising.
DeleteRegarding the opposition to the sale, the most adamant opponents at the time the deal were the countries I mentioned (Poland, Baltic States, Georgia and Japan). The Brits and Germans didnt care and the US were only slightly annoyed.
What you're doing is quoting from sources or documents from 4 years ago or from this year, which ever suits you better. That's not a factual analysis, that's cherry picking ! So of course everybody said the French should cancel the deal once the shit with ukraine started. but for reasons you obviously could not comprehend, that is not a option.
As for the deal and its provisions, you've quoted RIA Novosti before when it suited you, so just google the stuff and you'll learn a thing or two ... like which fleet the ships will go to !
Now if you want to carry on waging your propaganda war, please be my guest, I don't mind, but in my book, pretending you know stuff about a line of business you have no clue about doesn' add any inches to your dick !
You don't show any type of information, document or... anything that show that this deal was change. Not... a single... one. Even this article say that Germans did care in opposite of what you say... you pick one thing, deliberate ignore other, speculate without any thing to support your statements.
DeleteThey change deal... why? Because you say so. I say show that new deal, show info about changes in it that suggest lack of tech transfer. And what you do? you repeat the same words and still don't show any info.
It's look that your line of bushiness is chicanery.
The mistrals are nice ships, I really like them, and I mean that, they are. They have IEP, azimuth thrusters (for manoeuvrability and independent docking) and nice RCS reducing curves, and are very reasonably priced, although they are a bit underpowered on the ASuW and ASW side, but that could probably be mostly fixed with better point-defence.
DeleteBut it isn't like any of this is stuff the Russians couldn't easily do themselves, nor is any of that technology particularly bleeding edge or new, its just that it hasn't been commercialized yet, sort off...
The ship that launched a thousand comments. Not necesarily bright ones.
ReplyDeleteCertain weapon systems like the Scorpene Submarine, Mistral, Type-212 submarines (German), Gripen (Sweden) etc. are designed to make a big spash at the export market.
DeleteAnd this is France we are talking about. The country that gave to the world the Mirage fighter. Literally gave it to the world with more 4 aircraft being sold internationally for every 1 in French service.
This is also the same France that got almost 10,000 MW of Nuclear Power Business in India without us signing up with the NSG or the CTBT, the NPT and without Nuclear Civil Liability Law.
I am sure France has many more deals like this where they have sold weapons though weapons being too narrow a term......"Stuff"......where they have sold "Stuff" to countries where the deals and transactions are questionable at best.
In the end its not only about money but also about setting a precident. Once a precident is set about external countries having influence about sovereign weapon sales, people will just scratch of France as a reliable weapons supplier. Incase you havnt noticed, the French weapons Industry does need a shot in the arm.
Also like Israel...I am also grateful to France for those Mirages and Nuclear power. Along with all those electronic now being mated to our legacy Soviet equipment.
P.S- If there ever was a case to be made about the French being closet commies......this is as close as you will get to make it.
O. K. Do Not Panic.
ReplyDeleteThese are FRENCH NAVY ships.
When was the last time the French Navy fought a real Gut Bustin' Navy war?
1884 Foochow China where they beat the Chinese Navy hands down.