Good to see ya again.

 

I have a question. Now that the U.S. has a largely liberal, peaceful president by the name of Obama. Is French opinion swayed more towards expanding their military capabilities or has the call to rearm toned down now that the cowboy is out of office? I guess i mean is the idea of a multi polar world still popular or yesterdays news?

GF0012

h*tp://secretdefense.blogs.liberation.fr/defense/2009/04/larme-de-lair-t.html

Outre le C-130J, la dernière version du vénérable Hercules, l'armée de l'air étudie également une option pour le C-17A, mais sans enthousiasme. Elle s'intéresse également au C27J Spartan, une version modernisée du C-222 italien.

Also link

 

As a gap filler we study purchasing of  C17 OR C130 OR C27 OR (anticipated delivery of some A330 MRTT) to reduce strain on our existing fleet

My favorite solution would be 4 C17 and 4 A330 MRTT dual use transport./tanker to increase also our tanker fleet where we have not enough capacity I think

 FS,  thanks for the citation assist.

what is your view on the A400's future?  even some of our french contractors are not as confident as they were 6 months ago.  there was even a view that it was at terminal risk due to peformance issues and cost recovery issues

btw.  welcome back.  all we need now from the old "garde" is "Couac Attack" :)

@Jimme

Diagnostic has been done in 2003 that we need to reequip our armed forces faster and to expand their capabilities in foreign projection.

It was initiated under Chirac with a +20% for procurement budget but badly managed and priority was first and rightfully given to nuclear deterrent which costs a lot.

A single SSBN cost the price of a super carrier.A intercontinental SLBM like M51 costs a lot also.Plus the supersonic long range ASMP-A we develop and warhead simulation program with cost equivalent of 3 aircrafts carriers alone to develop robust nukes.

We were late to reequip conventional forces and the delay was not reduced.We have accumulated a 30 billions euro equipement delay compared to initial plans in a decade.

To accelerate procurement, current goverment has increase again of 20% procurement (even double the procurement this year) for the next five years so almost +50% in annual weapons procurement since 2003!

At the same time nuclear program are diminishing since they are close to completion so leaving more funding for conventional procurement part.

 

Funding will be essentially done by economies on personnals by re-engineering support and administration within armed forces which were greatly oversized while maintaining combat troops numbers.Not so easy.

 

However intial plan to procure 21 news frigates, 6SSN, 1 carrier was delayed and sized down. Still 6 SSN but 6 years late, 13 frigates instead of 21 (but door is open to complement with a new program), and new carrier (probably a 55 000 tons nuclear one) decision will be taken end of 2011. New decision was to get 4 LPH instead of 2.

Rafale is maintained as A400 likely.

Futur combat aircrat are investigated: post F3+ and stealth Rafale, new 6th generation fighter after 2023, UCAV, even strategic stealth bomber/UCAV...in partnership or not.

For army helicopters, VBCI, or "Scorpion" program equivalent to US FCS program, are maintained but will be likely reevaluated for the later since it cost a lot and seems too much expensive in the current way.

On space capabilities , program are extended on ELINT and early warning and ABM defense will be evaluated.

 

It is for France interest and defense, and its ability to stay a major power with a real capabilty to deter and act (likely in coalitions, NATO or not).

The new defense white book says that priority is given to Indian Ocean as likely war theater where France as to remain a major power and actor along India or USA.

Of course France think that multipolar world already exist even USA is the most powerful military power (and an historical ally), and that we should take in account that and leverage it in diplomacy and military operations for our interests and those of Europe.It is why we do a lot of common training manoeuvers with India for exemple or UAE.

France will rely on Ad Hoc coalition with partners non necessarly in NATO when acting will be necessary.Nothing has changed even the anti Bush campaign in retaliation of anti french campaign and Irak war are over.

 

 

Hi guys,

I am back for a short time since I have too much work at the moment.

Thanks Harald for the warm welcome. Godo, how are you doing? It was nice to read your interactions with FS. Cher compatriote, je vous salue!

 

I was kind of bored reading so many listings about french weaponry compared to UK's and USA's... enumerations do not prove anything when it comes to comparing military forces in a clever manner. In 1940, as I already mentioned, the French outnumbered and outgunned the Germans and still lost. Likewise, it's been a long time we've been in kindergarden so give it a rest.

 

I have already argued with Godo regarding the threat of prolonged unrest by France's "musulim minority" and would now add some water to your mill (to literally translate a french expression). Justin Vaïsse has an interesting analysis that adresses the leverage the french assimilation model has in integrating foreigners who had become citizens. You can read this interesting paper at this adress: http://www.brookings.edu/testimony/2006/0112france_vaisse.aspx

 

So I disagree again with Godo and even more strongly with FS who is supposed to know what is happening in their own country. Now this does not mean there is no threat of islamic (and regional altogether) terrorism but it means there is no threat of guerilla and no asynnetrical threat at the borders of metropolitan (emphasis) France.

 

There is also the saying that the French are 'more' prone to resort to covert ops than the US. I am not sure! The only thing I take for granted is that the French have strong spec ops capabilities and use them discreetly. The italian story of a plane shot down by planes of the French Navy is dubious too. The say (I can read italian too) the plane was shot down in a rather indirect manner.

'i nostri servizi segreti che informarono Amato e me che erano stati i francesi, con un aereo della Marina, a lanciare un missile non a impatto, ma a risonanza. Se fosse stato a impatto non ci sarebbe nulla dell' aereo».'

 

Translation: 'Our secret service informed Arnato and I that the French had, with an airplane of the navy that launched a 'non impact' missile with a 'resonance' missile. It there had been an impact there would be nothing left of the [italian] plane'

So what is the difference between an 'impact missile' and a 'resonance missile'? Do they mean the missile exploded next to the plane and damaged it to the extent it crashed? I know so far only two types of AA missiles: IR and EM.

In the 1980s, the French fielded the IR R-550 Magic 1st generation (similar in shape and performance to the AIM9J) and the semi-active EM Super 530 (similar in performance as the AIM7 with greater range but in shape to the AIM154 Phoenix).

 

Russia is nothing but a great power in decline. Their demographic projections are terrible and their life expectancy has dropped below 60 yrs old for their males. Their industrial and technological base has not been upgraded since the times of the USSR. And even then, they were lagging behind their major western competitors.

There is this interesting empirical research by Robert Gilpin which found out that the most aggressive nations were those in decline. Confronted with a loss in status, theses nations tend to overreact to reassert their influence... until the time comes when they cannot sustain it and either collapse or accept their new downgraded status. Strikingly, Russia's behavior fits well in the picture of a decadent and insecure Great Power.

Well put. The only thing I don't agree with is the  notion that Russia is behind in technology to western nations. This is true on some aspects, but not all. Russia still has the second most advanced aerospace sector in the world, very close to the US. No other western power comes close. They still make better fighters than the French, Italians, Spanish, Germans and the British.

 

I disagree with the fact our world has already become multipolar. It is still hugely unipolar and is likely to remain so for many decades. There is no comparison to be made between the USA and their closest competitors in every domain that one might conceive... unless they hold in high esteem the kind of fascist propaganda which states that the Westerners and the Americans more particularly are decadent because they love life more than death or that they are accustomed to comfort and does not cope well with human losses among their ranks. So was yesterday the Japanese view of the US untill the latter accepted they were at war, such is today that the islamists' and conceivably of some Chinese generals' opinion...

 

The multipolar world was nothing but a new form of wishful thinking by the former French administration. Its most outspoken proponents were Chirac and his dashing accomplice Dominique de Villepin (both of them, I think, are inconsistent populists). In fact, France is more likely to evolve as the second pillar of Western preponderance in a world where unipolarity is only slowly waning. The French area of interest is anything but shrinking. With the inauguration of a new military base in the UAE, France is positioning herself at the nexus of the Persian Gulf... and strengthening its presence in the Indian Ocean while keeping strong capacities in every ocean.

 

 

The future of the French military might

AdG, good to hear from you; i was wondering where you had gone. I too am quite busy these days. As for the theory of declining nations becoming more aggressive, it is interesting, but smacks of psychcoanalysis! And since a nation cannot have a subconscious, strictly speaking, i don't believe it can be psychoanalyzed. Therefore, although this theory is interesting, i remain sceptical.

 

I agree with many of your assessments, except that of Russia; it is not merely "flexing its muscles" due to a loss of prestige but is actually fighting for survival. None of its actions are superfluous or mere sabre-rattling....

 

As for the assimilation of minorities in France, I would be happy to hear that assimilation is working , but I think it is a mixed bag. The end of the French system of conscription, as FS once pointed out I believe, has actually done some damage in this respect as it used to be a powerful force for assimilation. Its absence has left a vacuum to be filled.

 

 

 

 

Here's a quick answer to the skepticism raised by my assertions by usajoe1:

According to a UN projection (http://www.wilsoncenter.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=wq.essay&essay_id=519403):

"The falling fertility rates in large segments of the Islamic world have been matched by another significant shift: Across northern and western Europe, women have suddenly started having more babies. Germany?s minister for the family, Ursula von der Leyen, announced in February that the country had recorded its second straight year of increased births. Sweden?s fertility rate jumped eight percent in 2004 and stayed put. Both Britain and France now project that their populations will rise from the current 60 million each to more than 75 million by ­mid­century. Germany, despite its recent uptick in births, still seems likely to drop to 70 million or less by 2050 and lose its status as Europe?s most populous country. "

 

It should be added that in the last 3 or 4 years, French demography has been rising steadily to 2.02 children per woman (2008 figure) while Britain's remains below 2. Alain Minc, a renowned French politist argued that the rising birth rate, in France, has surprised everybody and that these projections are underestimating the gap that is widening in between the French and the British. Ten years from now, there were about 60 millions french and 59 millions britons. Now the French number over 65 millions while the Britons number 61 millions.

 

You should also pay attention to Chinese demographics. It is very likely developing countries are going to experience weak birthrate figures giving a chance to western and well developed countries to reduce the demographic gap.

 

Regarding Russia:

I am not sure Russia's armaments are comparable in performance to those of Western great powers like France and Great Britain. I think you are overestimating their fighters' capabilities since it has been widely observed French planes outclass Russian planes. Israel's Mirage IIIs have had the edge over the Soviet made Mig-21s and Mi-23s the Arab air forces deployed in the 60s and 70s (even when they were manoeuvered by Soviet pilots as it happened over the Suez Canal in the war of Attrition and in 1973). The Mirage 2000 is roughly similar in performance to the F16 and F18 and thus able to counter the Mig-29 and Su-27. The Rafale is a 4th generation fighter and is, like the Typhoon, far more advanced than the latest versions of the russian Migs and Sukhois. You mentioned a russian 5th generation fighter which I heard of as being projected but not actually operational.

I, nevertheless, agree that the russians are good at designing SAMs but would not concede their submarines are comparable to those of the US and UK. French submarines, are, not russians. A month or so ago, a French Triomphant-class submarine collided with a British Vanguard-class sub. Both subs did not detect each other... implying both powers were on par regarding their submarine technology.

The Russians simply do not have the means to maintain a strong technology base as they have become a kind of petromonarchy, not an advanced industrial power. Their tanks are obsolete and their industry is not capable to keep pace with the R&D and high tech productions of the Western powers.

 

This is why I disagree with Godo about Russia waging wars for survival. It is rather the mere survival of a certain perception is its own rank in the world. A rank it will not be able to retain in the future and that arouses among its political class a ferocious nationalist sentiment.

Godo, the theory I was talking about was about hegemonic wars in a systemic perspective and has nothing to do with psychoanalysis. Prestige is a kind of asset that is most useful in the diplomatic arena and that is, I agree, rooted in perception.

This perception can be 'objectified ' and internalised by the members of the international hierarchy of powers and shifts in the hierarchy are destabilising. Some members will overeact to their loss of prestige by resorting to force against weaker opponents (Russia vs Georgia is a good example) in order to bully the rest of the world. But since they are a power in demise (e.g.: their GDP, weak and arbitrary institutions, limited ability to innovate, etc.) the bullies will one day have to face an impossible endeavor to reassert through force their status.

"enumerations do not prove anything when it comes to comparing military forces in a clever manner."

 

Les énumérations de FS ne constitutent qu'un point de depart pour une analyse plus detaillée.... donc a mon avis, c'est de bonne guerre....:)

France is one of the world's most developed countries^[18] and possesses the fifth largest economy by nominal GDP^[19] and Europe's second largest economy. France enjoys a high standard of living as well as a high public education level, and has also one of the world's highest life expectancies.^[20] It is the most visited country in the world, receiving 82 million foreign tourists annually.^[21] France has the world's fourth largest nominal military budget, the third largest military in NATO and EU's largest army. France also possesses the third largest nuclear weapons stockpile in the world^[22]-with ~300 active warheads as of 25 May 2010- and the world's second largest diplomatic network (only second to the network of the United States)^[23].

SOURCE : WIKIPEDIA

 

Recently, Jane?s defense weekly of the UK published the newest rank of world military powers. China ranks the forth place and the top five of the list are United States of America, France, Russia, China and United Kingdom.

 

Well I found this article.