Russian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter Spacearrow99
- Start date
Mistral Negotiations under eay
France, Russia on the Way to Mistral Deal Solution - Hollande / Sputnik International
They should. As it seems the possibility to sue France for delivery delays is about to expire ...
I'm not sure I'd trust Sputnik (a Russian quasi-official news agency) on this one.
I'm sure negotiations have been on-going for awhile...doesn't mean a deal will be made.
I'd like to see it cancelled. One to NATO. one to another buyer, perhaps NATO or EU financed
Hollande says that if they do not deliver the ships, they will refund Russia. This comes right after a statement by Putin that Russia would not seek damages payments, merely a refund, if the Mistrals were not delivered.
Берлога Бронемедведа - Может налом возьмете?
Берлога Бронемедведа - Может налом возьмете?
Why, what threat do these vessels pose to any NATO member state?
They give the Russians an improved ability to deploy "little green men" globally rather than in their immediate neighbourhood. Giving them Mistrals is more dangerous than giving them frigates or destroyers.
I think the Russians would be content just for a refund. The French are quite pro-Russian and while litigation might succeed it would be a strategic loss given the damage to that relationship.
I think the Russians would be content just for a refund. The French are quite pro-Russian and while litigation might succeed it would be a strategic loss given the damage to that relationship.
Nick underscore
Member
Yes, this seems to be the scenario likely to happen. France's Hollande moots cancellation of Mistral deal
Some linking this to Poland's pressure. I can't see that angle personally.
Still leaves the Russian navy with a capability hole.
With both vessels 'completing' or 'having completed' initial trials, it will be interesting to see who eventuates as the actual 'end user'.
What a load of nonsence, I struggle to think of any country which Russia would want to deploy little green men in that they couldn't deploy by walking them over the border. I think you've been watching to much Fox news.
IIRC France is trying to flog SSK's and MdCN to Poland, could potentially be a larger sale than the LHDs (in my mind, i have zero numbers to back that up) to a friendly state than a lower sale to an unfriendly state.
Nick underscore
Member
True Rob, but the 'other side' agreeing to just a refund, makes this a little more puzzling. I realise that the RF would prefer to have the money now, considering the alternative protracted legal proceedings & recent economic downturn.
That's true, I always thought they'd pursue damages whatever cost simply down to principle. Unless they're thinking about another (cheaper) way to stick it to the French in response.
Nick underscore
Member
Financially, the RF should make a nice little uptick if/when the €1-1.2bio is repatriated back into local currency. Putting this directly back into local build contracts, surely should see some of the previous naval projects currently on the backburner, getting a dust off and review.
I'm not saying the RF can initiate a build of LHD-type (20k+) vessel in the short-term, but this redirected funding could address some of the short comings, they still have in the amphibious capability spectrum.
They could just be biding their time until things settle down so they can restart this project or kick off a new one in a few years.
Personally I am surprised the project ever got off the ground after what happened in Georgia, I know it was that conflict that highlighted the need for such vessels to the Russians but the pattern of events that led to it should have been more than adequate warning of what was in line for other neighbours Russia thought may be straying to close to the west. It was glaringly obvious that that Russia wanted the ships to better be able to project power and to give them another option, another way into any troublesome neighbours or republics.
Personally I am surprised the project ever got off the ground after what happened in Georgia, I know it was that conflict that highlighted the need for such vessels to the Russians but the pattern of events that led to it should have been more than adequate warning of what was in line for other neighbours Russia thought may be straying to close to the west. It was glaringly obvious that that Russia wanted the ships to better be able to project power and to give them another option, another way into any troublesome neighbours or republics.
This isn't Fox News nonsense. You don't contain your enemy by selling them one of the most valuable expeditionary capabilities. It would be akin to America building a carrier for the Chinese navy.
This whole deal seemed like France was trying to have its cake and eat it. They only rejoined NATO in 2009 and this deal was signed in 2010. There was plenty of objections raised then but it was argued that Putin could still be potentially won over. France was playing cute and now it's become a giant mess.
The worst thing is Georgia was in 2008, the world saw what Russia was prepared to do to protect their interests and then France turns around and signs the Mistral deal, just the sort of asset Russia found they needed in that conflict.
Certain islands in the Kuril chain come to mind for me.
Not saying that they would use the MISTRALs for that...but it'd be useful for exactly that.
All the islands in the Kuril chain are currently under Russian administration.
No need for Russia to build vessels to seize Islands which they already control.
My guess is they use the refund to build there own vessels. My guess is they already have the full class designs from building the aft sections at Baltisky, so it shouldn't be all that difficult for them to build a complete vessel.