Posted on 09/19/2021 12:10:32 PM PDT by george76
The United States would achieve three objectives by purchasing a number of Shortfin Barracuda submarines from France and then giving them to Vietnam.
First, the Biden administration would repair relations with America's oldest ally. Second, it would supply a rising security partner with newly potent means of challenging China's imperialism. Third, it would test President Emmanuel Macron's commitment to international security in the South China Sea.
This option bears note as France rages over Australia's cancellation of a submarine contract worth tens of billions of dollars. France is mixing justifiable anger (it has lost a lucrative contract worth thousands of jobs) with a healthy degree of hypocrisy (France's government-owned Naval Group was playing games with its timetable, cost estimates, and production/sourcing commitments).
Still, these submarines would provide outsize value to the U.S. and broader international security interests were they built for Vietnam. The Shortfin Barracudas would be very quiet and a major threat to the People's Liberation Army Navy.
Vietnam remains in the control of a communist authoritarian government. That said, its people enjoy a degree of freedom and a heavily capitalist-influenced economy. In 2021, Vietnam is defined by a strong export market and a young, internationally connected population. This population is also hostile toward China — angered by Beijing's arrogant claim that the South China Sea is its own private swimming pool and angered more by Beijing's not-so-veiled expectation that Vietnam exists as its feudal state.
Recognizing China's challenge, the U.S. and Vietnam are moving closer together. Though her trip was overshadowed by the chaos in Afghanistan, Vice President Kamala Harris recently visited Hanoi. Top line: the U.S. knows that Vietnamese sentiments, Vietnam's proximity to China, and its possession of a deepwater port at Da Nang (capable of forward basing for the U.S. Navy) make the former enemy an ideal security partner for the future.
China's threat is growing : The U.S. needs partners.
China says that the South China Sea and all its fishing and resource deposits belong to Beijing. These waters see at least $3.5 trillion in annual trade flows. By militarizing control over the South China Sea, China can extort political fealty from regional states and, gradually, international powers relying on the waters for trade. This is a profound threat to the post-World War II U.S. international order. China cannot be allowed to succeed.
So even as the U.S. rightly consolidates Australia with the new AUKUS security agreement , so too should Washington pursue strong relations with France. While France's pursuit of economic ties with China has undermined Macron's credibility as a leader for democratic values, he has shown sub-surface support for upholding the South China Sea's international status. From a U.S. perspective, Macron is certainly preferable to the isolationist-minded and pro-China Marine Le Pen, who seems set to be the president's major challenger in next year's elections.
Absent U.S. efforts to consolidate Macron, he risks being caught between an ever-present well of domestic anti-American populism (now being fueled by his foreign minister) and Chinese investment offers. Xi Jinping is no idiot. He will sense that now is the time to offer Macron vast new investments in return for his rejection of U.S. overtures targeting China. At the same time, Beijing is holding firm on its threats to Australia . China's message to U.S. allies: Choose between its easy economic boosts and its uncomfortable coercive pressure.
Biden should use the two leaders' upcoming phone call to offer to buy some of Naval Group's Shortfin Barracudas — but only on the condition that most of the submarines are transferred to Vietnam (others can be used for U.S. Navy training and special operations purposes).
China would be enraged by such a deal, seeing it as a means of dramatically strengthening Vietnam's Navy and thus the strategic depth of the PLA's South Sea Fleet . Macron would face a choice: accept an economic boon and support the international values he so eloquently salutes, or show that his rhetoric is paper-thin.
Either way, Biden should make the offer, then let us know what Macron decides. The stakes in the South China Sea demand it .
Another dumb aspect to this switcher-roo by Australia is that Australia apparently did not notify France of reaching a terminal boiling point on their dissatisfaction with ballooning cost for the package of submarines. If accurate, this is a royal screw up. I have read that the cost originally was about $50 billion and has increased to about $80 billion with the delivery date slipping by several years.
Something I have occasionally been able to put into commercial contracts for services and long lead time equipment are penalty and reward clauses. Exceed a benchmark and earn a bonus to the contract. Miss the benchmark and incur a reduction in $$$ owed. People and companies work their butt off when chasing a bonus on top of the base amount.
Clever use of ‘real politik’, but I don’t like giving anything to communist governments. I’d nix it.
People should understand that the French product was not only a turkey but its delivery date was postponed many times, and the subs probably would not have been delivered before 2030.
Because Vietnam has such a rich submariner history. Not worth it.
If Vietnam cannot be convinced to cough up the money and buy their own to protect their own economic rights, then come up with a cheap, effective, and right now plan— until US/UK can deliver 8 boats.
There are too many subs in Hawaii. They are too far from the fight and AUS needs subs now. Homeport 6 SSNs in AUS with the understanding husbanding services will be secured for port calls to Vietnam, Singapore, PI, Japan, S Korea. Force AUS with a sweetheart deal for home-porting with US Marines.
Move a SSGN to Hawaii. Shocked PACOM doesn’t have one.
That fixes everything to include shorter deployments for the SSNs. It’s cheaper, it pisses China off, and it alleviates the likelihood of Hawaii tipping over due to an overabundance of military and families. Hank Johnson (D-GA) will be relieved.
They probably didn’t need submarines until China started building islands off their coast.
Bingo! Winner!
Vietnam owes us money...
Let’s buy em some snails!
You don’t need nuclear subs unless you have a blue water navy. If you don’t have a blue water navy, Air Independent Propulsion is a much better option because it matches nuclear in every category except endurance but only costs a fraction of what nuclear does to buy and maintain.
And Vietnam’s navy is strictly brown water.
Vietnam’s only submarines at present are Kilo-class Soviet diesel-electric boats armed with little more than short-range anti-ship and ship-to-shore cruise missiles, nothing that justifies (or benefits from) a switch to nuclear. So if they bought nuclear boats that would more or less obligate them to also spend to get (or invent) sub-launched ballistic missiles or sub-launched cruise missiles.
Not only that, Vietnam created its own governmental atomic energy agency in 1976 with the intention of electrifying the country with nuclear power plants. But they abandoned the project in 2016 because they finally figured out what should have been obvious in 1976: there are cheaper ways to make electricity on the limited scale they need it than with nuclear power plants.
Which means Vietnam doesn’t have any nuclear reactors. ZERO. Which means they would lack the means to produce fuel for their White Elephant nuclear submarine.
So imagine that your most powerful instrument of war can’t serve its primary role unless some other country agrees to supply you with fuel and munitions.
And on top of that, adding a nuclear sub to your armada definitely will raise the profile of your fleet, and the nuclear pigboat automatically becomes the first vessel any sufficiently sophisticated adversary would target if hostilities should erupt. Which offsets the dependency on foreign aid for munitions and fuel, because it likely will be the first vessel sunk.
I doubt the Vietnamese are that stupid.
Vietnam has six conventional subs, Russian Kilos. They've been operating them for some time now.
They are too far from the fight and AUS needs subs now.
There are four submarines homeported in Guam. Just increase that number.
Move a SSGN to Hawaii. Shocked PACOM doesn’t have one.
They have two. USS Ohio and USS Michigan. Homeported in Bangor.
Just NO.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.