The new military alliance concluded by the three countries of the Anglo-Saxon world has become a bucket of icy water on the heads of continental Europeans. The unification of Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States into the AUKUS union caused, as they say, a bolt from the blue in France. In Paris, it even came to proposals to withdraw from NATO and to refuse to open a new NATO center in Toulouse. The head of the French Foreign Ministry, Jean-Yves Le Drian, summoned the ambassadors of the aforementioned powers to the carpet, and the French ambassadors were simultaneously recalled from Washington and Canberra. The scandal turned out to be grandiose.
And what exactly is the reason? Why did France react like that?
There are actually several reasons.
The first is that the French were simply thrown. A few years ago, they signed a contract with Australian partners for the construction of diesel-electric submarines. Moreover, initially the value of the contract was estimated at $ 40 billion, and then, for a number of reasons, it increased to more than 60 billion. French shipyards were already calculating profits, but a military-political thunderstorm broke out. Australia refused contractual obligations with regard to Paris, instead signing a contract with Washington. Moreover, what attracts special attention, the American partners promised Canberra to build not just submarines, but to build NUCLEAR submarines. The Australians agreed. And was it possible not to agree ... Firstly, the American side offers the price at the same values that the French requested. Secondly, the boats are atomic. And this is an additional reason for Australia to raise its chin higher, pointing out that the United States "recognizes its importance."
At the same time, the Australians and Americans pretend not to notice how they undermine strategic stability with their contract for the construction of nuclear submarines. In fact, we are talking about a direct violation of the nuclear non-proliferation Treaty. There is food for thought in the United Nations. But how much the UN is really working today to raise and sharpen such issues is a separate question.
The second reason for the shock state of the French authorities and the military is due to the fact that the same United States and Britain actually spit on the so-called transatlantic partnership in relation to Paris and its other continental neighbors. The notorious NATO solidarity remained only on paper. And the United States has once again shown its European partners that their interests are not interested in Europeans at all. When it comes to geopolitical interests and big money (and $ 40-60 billion is a lot of money even for the United States), then Washington is ready to "move" anyone. The French, who wanted to stake out a place on the world arms market, got in the way, moved the French. Everything is simple. Nothing personal…
Other EU and NATO countries are well aware that the United States can throw them at any moment. An additional example of this is the situation with Afghanistan. For twenty years, out of all the "irons" they broadcast about building democracy there, and then in a short time, forgetting even to confer symbolically with their NATO colleagues, they simply withdrew the troops, abandoning literally everything that could be abandoned at all. They abandoned not only weapons and equipment worth a total of $ 85 billion, but also those Afghans who helped them. European countries had to withdraw their contingents at the same time as the Americans, in fact, in an emergency mode.
It turns out that Washington itself makes it clear to its "partners– - yes, give up hoping that we are acting in the format of protecting common interests. There are no common interests, but there are only one interests – American. And to satisfy these interests, it was necessary to create a new alliance – the same AUKUS, which is now aimed at the Pacific region. With their new alliance, the Americans are trying to solve two tasks at once – to get the opportunity for additional military pressure on Russia (not only from the west, but also from the east), as well as to launch a full-scale strategic operation to contain China's military potential in the Indo-Pacific region.
For Russia and China, this is a serious challenge in terms of strategic security, and for NATO countries, it is a challenge in the sense that the United States is ready to throw even the partner who considers himself the most loyal friend of Washington to achieve its goals.
Comments