Image source,Reuters
French Foreign Minister Le Drian also accused the two countries of “serious violation of trust (between allies)”.
The French Foreign Minister accused Australia and the United States of lying about a new security agreement and forced France to recall its ambassadors to Australia and the United States.
In an interview with French TV, French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian also accused the two countries of “seriously violating the trust (between allies)” and reflecting the “contempt” of the French allies.
This agreement, called AUKUS, will give Australia the technology to build nuclear-powered submarines. This defeated the multi-billion-dollar agreement signed between France and Australia.
The parties to the agreement also include the United Kingdom, which is widely believed to be to counter China’s influence in the disputed South China Sea.
France was only notified of the news a few hours before the agreement was publicly announced earlier this week.
Le Drian said in a speech on Saturday that a “serious crisis” is occurring between allies.
AUKUS: How will the heads of Australia, Britain and the United States express their views after signing the new security agreement?
“For the first time in the history of the relationship between the United States and France, we recalled the ambassador for consultations. This is a serious political act, which shows the severity of the existing crisis between our two countries.” He told French TV 2 that the recall of the ambassador was To “re-evaluate the situation.”
But he said that France did not think it was necessary to recall its ambassador to the UK, but he accused the UK of being a “constant opportunist”.
He said: “The United Kingdom is a bit like a third wheel in this whole incident.”
The newly appointed British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss defended the agreement in an article in the Sunday Telegraph, saying it shows that the UK is ready to “bite the bullet” to defend its interests.
The agreement means that Australia will become the seventh country in the world to use nuclear-powered submarines. It will also cooperate with allies in artificial intelligence, quantum technology and cyber security.
This new agreement makes the agreement signed between France and Australia worth 37 billion U.S. dollars (27 billion pounds) to build 12 traditionally powered submarines in 2016 was ruined.
When leaving Canberra on Saturday, French ambassador Jean-Pierre Thebault called Australia’s unilateral decision to cancel the deal a “great mistake.”
At the same time, China accused the three major powers participating in the security agreement of having a “cold war mentality.”
A White House official said that the Biden administration will contact France in the next few days to resolve differences.
Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne said she understands France’s “disappointment” and hopes to work with the country to ensure that it understands “we value bilateral relations”.
Image source,Getty Images
The agreement involves the sharing of information and technology in multiple fields, including military intelligence and quantum technology, as well as the procurement of cruise missiles. But nuclear-powered submarines are the key.
“The removal of the ambassador is just the tip of the iceberg”
“This is far more than a diplomatic dispute.” Peter Ricketts, former Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs and former British ambassador to France, told BBC Radio 4’s “Today” program that “the removal of the ambassador is just the tip of the iceberg.”
“France has a deep sense of betrayal, because this is not just a military contract, it is a strategic partnership between France and Australia, and Australia has now abandoned this, and is behind France, the United States and the United Kingdom, two NATOs. Allies negotiate and replace the original contract with a completely different contract.”
“For the French, this seems to be a complete failure of trust among allies, which makes people doubt the purpose of NATO’s existence. This has caused a big crack in the NATO alliance… Britain needs a functioning NATO alliance. “
Ricketts added: “I think people underestimate the impact of this incident in France, and in a year when President Macron is close to the far right, it will be seen as a humiliation and betrayal.”
The historic order to recall the French ambassador came directly from French President Macron. A spokesman for the Elysée Palace said that the “seriousness” of the situation requires a response from the president. “In addition to the issue of breach of contract and its consequences in terms of employment, there is also the harm this decision has brought to the alliance’s strategy. This kind of behavior is unacceptable among allies,” Elysee Palace said.
AUKUS: A wake-up call to Europe for embarrassment
Jessica Parker, BBC Brussels correspondent（Jessica Parker）
How to pronounce the AUKUS (abbreviated from the English names of the three countries) defense agreement signed by Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States? A diplomat in Brussels made a bitter proposal this week-it seems to be similar to the English “awkward” (embarrassing).
France condemned the security agreement signed between Australia and the United Kingdom and the United States as “stabbing in the back”, which is of course embarrassing for the European Union.
First of all, they are not only unable to participate in the discussion about the AUKUS security protocol, but they don’t even know where to participate in the discussion.
Josep Borrell (Josep Borrell) is the European Union’s senior representative for foreign and security policy. This title is quite big, but in this matter, he does not have any privilege to participate in the discussion.
The AUKUS defense agreement between Australia, Britain and the United States is seen as a major attempt to counter China’s influence in the South China Sea.
When Borrell, the EU’s high representative for foreign and security policy, announced the launch of the EU’s own “Indo-Pacific strategy” at a press conference this week, the subsequent questions were not about his statement, but about other people’s declarations (Australia, Britain, and the United States announced the signing AUKUS security agreement).
Borrell said: “We regret that we were not informed and did not participate in these talks. I understand how disappointed the French government will be.”
The head of foreign policy admitted that he was not “happy” with the argument that there was a conflict in timing, and declared that this has sounded a wake-up call for Europe and that they must take the initiative. However, this caused the second embarrassment. Why do you say this?
The EU is not a military power, although we heard this week from Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, calling for the establishment of a “European Defense League.” Some people think they have heard all this before, which surprised them.
Even if the EU can figure out how to show more power, it must decide what it is for. This is not easy.
Ian Lesser, vice president of the policy think tank of the German Marshall Foundation in the United States, said: “Whether it is Warsaw, Athens, Paris or Berlin, the strategic environment looks different.”
However, he believes that the EU is very clear about what it does not want, which involves the third issue.
The EU does not want to be caught in the middle of the escalation: as he said, it must “choose between the United States and China in an increasingly tense environment”.
Finally, EU member France is also very annoyed by this. France itself is an important military power with interests and presence in the region. Its transaction with Australia is a key part of its strategy in Australia.
It is one thing to lose billions of dollars in contracts, but another to take a blow to a carefully constructed regional strategy.
In short, for the European Union, the timing of Australia, Britain and the United States‘ announcement of the signing of the security agreement is terrible, and this lack of advance warning is embarrassing, if not surprising. And, like the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan, it raises more acute questions about the EU’s own strategic autonomy.
This week, the situation between the West and China began to heat up, but the European Union did not know where to look.