# UK and France to pool defense assets and share costs



## Dissident (3 Nov 2010)

What!?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101102/ap_on_re_eu/eu_britain_france

By DAVID STRINGER, Associated Press David Stringer, Associated Press
Tue Nov 2, 9:34 am ET

LONDON – Europe's two nuclear-armed powers will strike a deal Tuesday for unprecedented cooperation on defense — sharing warhead testing facilities and aircraft carriers to preserve their military might in an era of austerity.

British Prime Minister David Cameron and French President Nicolas Sarkozy were holding talks in London and pledging a new era of collaboration — seeking to spread the hefty costs of defense as their economies recover from the global financial crisis.

"This is decision which is unprecedented and it shows a level of trust and confidence between our two nations that is unequaled in history," Sarkozy told reporters.

The continent's two largest military powers will also announce the formation of a joint expeditionary force — a pool of about 5,000 troops able to deploy together at short notice on peacekeeping, rescue or combat missions.

Senior British officials said the two countries will also agree to some shared use of each other's aircraft carriers, as defense cuts mean both nations will have only one carrier each in the future.

Fighter jets will be able to land on carriers from either country — initially during training — providing cover when one nation has its carrier in dock for maintenance.

Cameron told a Cabinet meeting that the nuclear testing plan alone would save "hundreds of millions of pounds." However, officials declined to estimate how much overall the defense agreements will save from budgets.

Last month, Britain announced an 8 percent cut to the annual 37 billion pound ($59 billion) defense budget over four years and confirmed that 17,000 troops, a fleet of jets and an aging aircraft carrier would all be lost to cuts.

The two nations will cooperate on the development of new unmanned aerial drones, satellite communications and submarine technology. London and Paris are also likely to strengthen intelligence sharing under the deal, officials said.

"There are many areas where we can work together and enhance our capabilities — and save money at the same time," Cameron told lawmakers on Monday.

Under the nuclear warhead plan, Britain and France will share equipment and facilities at the U.K. Atomic Weapons Establishment in Aldermaston in southern England, and the Valduc facility, close to Dijon, southeast of Paris.

The French laboratory will host British defense scientists to carry out tests on their country's nuclear warhead stockpile — soon to be cut to 120. In return, French officials will be stationed at the U.K.'s facility to work on nuclear test technology.

British officials acknowledged the deal would involve closer cooperation than ever before on their nuclear weapons program with the French, but insisted they would not divulge nuclear secrets.

Both nations will retain "full sovereignty over their results," in tests, the French president's office said.

In a letter published Tuesday in Britain's Daily Telegraph and France's Le Figaro, senior retired security officials — including former armed forces chief Charles Guthrie and ex-MI6 spy agency chief Richard Dearlove — urged leaders to consider an eventual joint nuclear weapons program.

"Cooperation on warhead maintenance would be an essential first step towards a possible joint deterrent in the future," the letter said.

Cameron said the deal would not compromise the ability of either country to carry out military operations alone in the future. "Partnership, yes. But giving away sovereignty? No," Cameron told the House of Commons.

A combined pool of British and French troops will be able to carry out missions from next year and will also conduct training exercises in 2011. The pool is likely to include special forces.

Other allies welcomed the deal. The U.S. said compatibility of equipment — such as aircraft carriers — was a key NATO goal. "Such increased bilateral defense cooperation among NATO allies will make us all more secure," said a spokesman for the U.S. embassy in London, on customary condition of anonymity.

Though France and Britain worked closely in Bosnia and Kosovo, Paris opposed the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq and only rejoined the NATO command structure in 2009 after an absence of about 40 years.


----------



## George Wallace (3 Nov 2010)

What Politics and War haven't accomplished, Economics has.


----------



## Old Sweat (3 Nov 2010)

It worked really well in the Crimea.

Seriously, as long as their national interests coincide, it seems like a workable solution.


----------



## Journeyman (3 Nov 2010)

While it is a defence agreement, I see its strength as providing a counterpoise to Germany's growing dominance -- a balance of influence.


----------



## TimBit (3 Nov 2010)

> While it is a defence agreement, I see its strength as providing a counterpoise to Germany's growing dominance -- a balance of influence.



I am not so convinced "realpolitik" is the underlying motive here. I seem to remember France siding with Germany more often than not in the last decade, and save for a few crusty characters in Whitehall, I think the British "divide-and-conquer" strategy on the continent is somewhat forgotten. Just a personal take.


----------



## Journeyman (3 Nov 2010)

TimBit said:
			
		

> I am not so convinced "realpolitik" is the underlying motive here.


I tend to think that all _practical_ politics* is based on realpolitik; idealism may make for nice sound-bytes, but at the end of the day, pragmatic realism wins out. 

Maybe we have different definitions of realpolitik, but its opposite is generally accepted as moral idealism -- which is absent from this agreement.


* Which, by definition, precludes anything coming out of the UN, and any non-binding "declarations" regardless of the level of government making the pronouncement.


----------



## TimBit (3 Nov 2010)

> I tend to think that all practical politics* is based on realpolitik; idealism may make for nice sound-bytes, but at the end of the day, pragmatic realism wins out.
> 
> Maybe we have different definitions of realpolitik, but its opposite is generally accepted as moral idealism -- which is absent from this agreement.



I see. By _realpolitik_ I myself meant meant geopolitical power calculations and balance of power as the cornerstone of foreign policy. I see you mean political realism as a whole. Then obviously they are being completely realist, not moral  

Put it that way, I believe their realism is more the "purse" kind than the "number of ships" kind. My  :2c:


----------



## jollyjacktar (3 Nov 2010)

Great cartoon here, won't allow me to post the image.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1326054/Mac--The-Entente-Frugale.html


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (3 Nov 2010)

Great cartoon JJ.

The news article, however, seem to imply that that either the French PA2 (future aircraft carrier supposedly purchased as an additional carrier to supplement Charles de Gaulle) will not be built or Charles de Gaulle will be retired when PA2 commissions.

Either way, this means that Europe will be going from a situation where the French and the British could each deploy an aircraft carrier at all time, making two available at all times, to a situation where they may (depending on refit timing) be able to deploy only one between them.

That is a severe blow to European naval defence.


----------



## GAP (3 Nov 2010)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Great cartoon here, won't allow me to post the image.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1326054/Mac--The-Entente-Frugale.html



took 2 tries, but here it is...


----------



## jollyjacktar (3 Nov 2010)

Thanks GAP.  I'm afraid I am a bit of a caveman when it comes to that stuff.


----------



## ironduke57 (4 Nov 2010)

This was the first what came to my mind:
- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wltv12Hx9Bo

SCNR,
ironduke57  8)


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (4 Nov 2010)

Another article:
http://defensetech.org/2010/11/03/its-official-british-jets-to-fly-from-french-carrier/

It’s Official: British Jets to Fly From French Carrier



Wow, it actually happened. After months of discussions on the matter, Britain and France have signed a 50-year defense cooperation agreement promising to form a joint expeditionary force, share aircraft carriers and more, according to the New York Times. 

Britain and France signed defense agreements on Tuesday that promised cooperation far beyond anything achieved previously in 60 years of NATO cooperation, including the creation of a joint expeditionary force, shared use of aircraft carriers and combined efforts to improve the safety and effectiveness of their nuclear weapons.

It gets better:

The agreements envisaged a new combined force available for deployment at times of international crisis that is expected to involve about 5,000 service members from each nation, with land, sea and air components, and rotating French and British commanders. The pacts also foresee each nation alternating in putting a single aircraft carrier to sea, with the vessels operating as bases for French, British and American aircraft in times of need.

I’ll refrain from making a reference to Nelson.

The article goes on to say that while the two nations will collaborate on nuclear weapons they will absolutely retain their operational sovereignty (kind of a no-brainer when it comes to nukes). It also points out that the pact may give the two greater negotiating power in buying weapons.

The cooperation pact was set to last 50 years and could transform the way the countries project force, fight wars and compete for defense contracts with the United States. One goal appeared to be to give the two militaries greater buying power to support the struggling European defense industry.

Mr. Cameron, who has navigated deep hostilities to European integration and deep skepticism toward France in his Conservative Party, emphasized the budgetary benefits, saying the agreements would contribute savings of “millions of pounds” to Britain’s plan to make deep cuts in its $60 billion defense budget.

But don’t forget this!

Previous efforts at military cooperation between the countries have more often faltered than succeeded. In the late 1990s, Tony Blair, then Britain’s prime minister, and Jacques Chirac, then France’s president, promised deeper defense cooperation, but the understanding was undone by differences over the Iraq war. In both countries, there are significant political forces arrayed against anything that smacks of too close a military partnership with the age-old foe.

Well, the Brits will be training with their F-35C carrier model Joint Strike Fighters on France’s Charles De Gaulle aircraft carrier (and U.S. carriers) while they wait for their two Queen Elizabeth class carriers to be completed over the next decade. How much extra time and money will it take to redesign the Queen Elizabeths — originally designed to carry the STOVL F-35B – with catapults and arresting gear?

To be fair, the ships were designed to accommodate cats and traps at a later date. Still, I wonder how long it will be before Britain regains its very own carrier-borne jet strike force? Modifications like those now needed for the British ships have a way of getting complicated.

Here’s the full article.

– John Reed



Read more: http://defensetech.org/2010/11/03/its-official-british-jets-to-fly-from-french-carrier/#ixzz14KyXm5nu 
Defense.org


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (7 Nov 2010)

They forgot to mention the very recent Type45/Horizon Frigate debacle: The Brits got out of the Horizon program and went it alone on the type 45 instead because of the development problems  of the Horizon's and because they did not like some of the compromises (there are always compromises in multi-nations programs, especially in Europe) that were put forward by the French and the Italians.

I wonder if this "50 years" agreement will survive the first procurement program ???


----------

