Presumably, the warranty has expired at that point. Dang planned obsolescence…
Not knowing a ton about submarines, what’s the expected hull life of the Virginia class? Are the same metal fatigue problems related to pressurization observed as in airplanes?
I am sure this dispute will continue for some time, and France will still be seeing red this October.
Best I could come up with would be that they think America made the deal conditional on Australia not telling France.
Honestly, though, I’m pretty sure this is just the way it is done in international diplomacy. It’s “a poker game where everybody cheats.” France just didn’t have enough spies be able to read Australia’s and America’s hands.
“You call that a submarine? This is a submarine!”
“That’s not a submarine, that’s a spoon.”
“All right, all right, you win. Heh. I see you’ve played subby-spoony before!”
“On the same day that President Biden and Prime Minister Morrison made the announcement, the defence ministry and Naval Group received an official letter, a letter with an official stamp on it, from the Australian Navy.”
He said this came from the defence ministry and a senior official – “the admiral who is overseeing the project” – telling France he had “taken a close look at the state of progress in the contract, in line with the contract, and was extremely satisfied that performance of the French submarine was excellent, which clearly means that we were to move to the next phase of the contract”.
Grandjean added that the announcement that same evening of a US-Australia deal showed the lack of preparation about the decision, which he said was probably made within “a tiny circle” in Canberra.
The Australian government confirmed it had sent the letter to Naval Group on Wednesday last week, but played down its significance.
…I don’t understand this thread?
Australia broke the contract. It’s Australia’s “temper tantrum.” The reaction from France seems proportionate.
If the U.S. Navy follows the example of Apple, a few years down the line the subs they’re selling Australia will start losing speed, and batteries won’t hold a proper charge. Time to upgrade to NucSub 14S.
France’s reaction is appropriate to Australia. It’s not appropriate to America.
That’s definitely good evidence Australia probably could have done things better–I remain unclear on how it justifies “recalling an Ambassador” from the U.S. for the first time in 240 years.
…:: shrugs ::
Is that seriously what this thread is about? It’s not as if they blew up a boat in one of your harbours killing a man. That’s a real temper tantrum.
What you are seeing is a mild diplomatic rebuke. I’m sure the United States is going to be just fine.
“The next phase of the contract”, of course, being unilateral temination. 
It’s quite possible that the Navy procurement staff had no idea their contract was being axed. Often, the folks working to execute the contract are the last to know.
Recalling the ambassador is not a mild rebuke. It is totally disproportionate. The only wrong America has done with respect to France in this affair is that we didn’t inform them of our negotiations. Which is not expected at all–France doesn’t tell America about France’s defense sales either.
My guess is the French government is trying some sort of “rally around the flag” effect for upcoming elections. The French public doesn’t actually care about Australia that much, but America is something they do care about.
It isn’t entirely unlikely the political leadership really didn’t want France to know about this until it was a fait accompli, there was probably an understanding this would cause a temporary diplomatic rift. But if France had known about the negotiations with the United States say, four months ago, they could have positioned themselves to more forcefully try and stop Australia from getting out of the deal–which could have put Australia in a worse position. The foreign policy consideration from Australia’s perspective is “we want the nuclear subs, France can’t offer what the U.S. is offering, it’s cleaner to hit France with the news we’re breaching the contract as we announce the new one.” You get all the pain out at once, and whatever France’s reaction is, it likely dies down over time.
There probably isn’t a diplomatically clean way for Australia to back out of the contract, but this was possibly their best bad option because it compresses all the problems into one cycle.
French politicians have made hay off of anti-Americanism since de Gaulle, it’s one reason why the French are a poor ally to the United States across a range of issues, and have a habit of posturing like children.
…nah, you are blowing it out of proportion. Australia screwed France over here. Badly. France are doing the only thing they can do. Did America get caught up in the middle of a cancelled contract dispute? Sure. But that happens all the time.
And yes: they care about the cancellation of a billion dollar contract. Its a pretty big deal.
Exactly. Australia screwed France over. Not America. The redirection is obvious. France is throwing a tantrum like a three-year-old child (who also are very calculating about their tantrums).
Recalling ambassadors does not happen all the time. The proportionate response that France didn’t take would be to call America’s ambassador to the Élysée Palace and chew them out. Maybe our representative to NATO, too.
Wow you must have been one hell of a two-year-old. 
…no it isn’t.
Biden concedes they could have handled it better. France withdraws their ambassador. In a few weeks time they go back.
It isn’t a temper tantrum. It’s just diplomacy playing out. It really isn’t a big deal.