B2 The Daily of Geopolitical Europe. News. Files. Reflections. Reports

Blog AnalysisEU Defense (Doctrine)

The AUKUS agreement between Australia and the USA provokes the Europeans. What possible reactions?

(B2) This agreement is not just for the purchase of submarines. It has a wider resonance for the Atlantic Alliance and Europe. Beyond legitimate French anger, reacting is not easy for Europeans. Because Paris plays it solo from the start. Here are some thoughts...

A rather unusual act

A textbook case

Contrary to what some commentators say, Australia's decision is not just another case of competition in defense markets. A sector where competition is fierce, including between allies. The American victory of the F-35 in Switzerland (or in Belgium before) or that of the French Rafale in Croatia bear witness to this. All moves are allowed normally. But, here, we are in a real case study: a contract signed, within the framework of a strategic partnership, broken without any notice, in a way at least not elegant. NB: an amount of 900 million euros has already been committed by the Australians with Naval Group in preliminary studies.

A certain Australian duplicity

The word " treason posed by the French is not just a fit of anger. On the very day of the announcement of the agreement with the Americans and the British, " the Australians have thus notified Paris of the 'system functional review' (functional review of the program) “Said an official from the Ministry of the Armed Forces to a few journalists, including B2. An important note. It certifies that the technical preliminaries have been passed and that we can " proceed to next steps ". It's only " a few hours before the announcement of the AUKUS agreement that Australian Defense Minister Peter Dutton picks up his phone to call his French counterpart Florence Parly and tell her the news.

The betrayal of the Allies

This betrayal is not just Australian. It also applies to Americans and British. Very close Allies who consult each other on a daily basis within NATO to deal with various threats, and in particular to define a policy vis-à-vis China. The pill is difficult to pass in Paris. And it could leave scars.

A few lessons on the Australian agreement

The block of Five Eyes is solid

This agreement certainly has a certain logic. Australia is clearly linked to the Anglo-Saxon, American and British world, in particular through intelligence agreements. The agreement with France was in a way a prank in the face of this geopolitical axis with historical roots. We are thus witnessing the strengthening of the bloc of Five (USA, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand) to which Europe will have to react if it really intends to exist.

A pilot project of a larger alliance?

Will it go further than submarines? Without a doubt. Other avenues have already been mentioned by the participants, particularly in terms of research or artificial intelligence. Should we see in this the prefiguration of a kind of Pacific military alliance, the counterpart of NATO for the Euro-Atlantic zone? We can think so... Especially if the NATO Allies remain reluctant to engage behind the closed eyes behind the American flag in its political, economic and strategic 'combat' against China.

De America First à America Back, a constant

The policy of the Biden administration does not differ significantly from that pursued by the Trump administration. This will in no way surprise the most knowledgeable (especially those of B2, read: America is back, says the Biden administration. What policy with Europe?). Less imprecations, more efficiency! America intends to stay leader in the world, and the Allies are following. The implementation of the withdrawal from Afghanistan had shown this, the AUKUS partnership confirms this. NB: even when Donald Trump broke the agreement signed by all with Iran, this procedure only came to an end after many months. And not without warning.

Britain's unfriendly attitude

Britain's desire to weave a web of alliances turns out to be more than just a Brexit campaign slogan. With this AUKUS agreement, Boris Johnson signs one of his first successes. And it might not be the only one. London intends to compensate for its exit from the European Union, by strengthening its ties with its traditional allies, North American and Commonwealth.

France alone

In this affair, France first appeared somewhat alone. It's logic. The contract signed by Paris with Canberra is not a European act nor has it even been agreed at European level. It was France, alone, which negotiated an agreement with the Australians. While being careful not to associate other Europeans with it. Competition was even the rule before the signing of this contract - or even after - with the Germans in particular from TKMS.

A verbal condemnation

LEuropeans have started to react. The Foreign Ministers, meeting informally on Monday evening in New York, on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, thus expressed their " clear solidarity with France. And the various European leaders (Ursula von der Leyen, Charles Michel, Josep Borrell) did not hide their " astonishment », their condemnation of « lack of loyalty of their partners and allies (read: The AUKUS case takes a European turn. All options are on the table).

What reaction for Europeans?

Beyond the words, will there be other reactions?

A question mark over relations with Australia

Beyond a possible slowdown in the negotiations initiated by the Europeans with Canberra on a free trade agreement (read: The AUKUS case takes a European turn. All options are on the table), one might wonder whether certain EU-US projects will not also suffer a certain slowdown.

Transatlantic relations: a bit complicated

American demands for greater involvement in European defense tools — such as the Permanent Structured Cooperation and the European Defense Fund — could be considered... very, very slowly. The request to sign an administrative arrangement with the European Defense Agency (EDA) could thus come up against a 'No' from France (already reluctant to such an agreement). The negotiation of the administrative arrangement on the American association with the PESCO project of military mobility could also experience some delays. Ditto for the arrangement on American access to Galileo's public secure signal (PRS).

European preference : to develop

The arms development model based on exports finds a limit here. If Europeans want to maintain a vibrant European defense industry, they will first have to buy the armaments produced on the continent. The European preference must be as strong and present as the American preference. The VAT exemption alone proposed by Ursula von der Leyen in her State of the Union address will not suffice (read: Defense. Europe must be able to act alone! The six (bold) proposals of von der Leyen).

Group negotiations: to consider

Europe could also think of uniting more in the negotiation of external contracts. If the Australian contract had associated Germans, the reaction across the Rhine would be a little more 'dynamic'. It's very complicated. You don't have to hide it. But as long as the Europeans do not unite to make common offers to certain countries, they will be exposed to these setbacks, from competitors... or allies.

The attitude towards China: to be defined

The discussion between allies on the attitude to have vis-à-vis China, conducted mainly within the Atlantic Alliance, for the definition of a future strategic concept, could be impacted. Either the Allies side with the desire of the Americans (which is in itself the political message of this agreement). Either they maintain a semi-autonomous path, as defined so far.

European defense

The idea of ​​developing the Europe of defense comes out stronger, it is said. But will she be able to convince beyond those already intimately convinced? Will we get out of " We want doing » to switch to « We do »? The challenge is real. And the important geopolitical leap. It will take more than an event of this type to cross the ford.

(Nicolas Gros-Verheyde)

Nicolas Gros Verheyde

Chief editor of the B2 site. Graduated in European law from the University of Paris I Pantheon Sorbonne and listener to the 65th session of the IHEDN (Institut des Hautes Etudes de la Défense Nationale. Journalist since 1989, founded B2 - Bruxelles2 in 2008. EU/NATO correspondent in Brussels for Sud-Ouest (previously West-France and France-Soir).

s2Member®