What does the US-France-Australia submarine row mean for Israel?

• Published date: 23 September 2021
• Author: AMOTZ ASA-EL
• Publication title: Jerusalem Post, The: Web Edition Articles (Israel)

The French master of six tongues launched his 40-year diplomatic career in Belgrade, where he landed the year after the legendary Josip Broz Tito's death, and was thus witness to the beginning of his legacy's demise.

Étienne then witnessed the end of the Cold War from its three focal points: Moscow, where he served when the USSR fell apart; Brussels, where he served when the Berlin Wall collapsed; and Bonn, where he served when the leaders of East and West Germany met for the first and last time.

cnxps.cmd.push(function () { cnxps({ playerId: '36af7c51-0caf-4741-9824-2c941fc6c17b' }).render('4c4d856e0e6f4e3d808bbc1715e132f6'); });

>

It was therefore only natural that Étienne would also be there as the ambassador to Washington who was recalled by his government, the first time such a thing happened since Louis XVI installed the first foreign envoy in the newborn US.

As his airplane flew eastward across the Atlantic, the 65-year-old diplomat must have wondered how the French-American row compares with the many dramas that have checkered his illustrious career since its inception back in his twenties.

Well, Ambassador Étienne will be returning to Washington next week, but the meaning of the row he has just experienced is profound, not only for its protagonists, but also for the Jewish state.

AS IF written for a Netflix political drama, the conflict that involves money, honor, history and four continents originated with a $66 billion arms deal, whereby France was to supply Australia with 12 submarines.

That was in 2014. The plot thickened last month with Canberra's cancellation of the deal, and climaxed when it turned out that it struck an alternative deal with Washington.

Technically, Australia's move reflected its assessment that China's growing aggressiveness demands nuclear vessels rather than the French deal's diesel engines, and a shorter deadline than the French deal's 2035.

Strategically, however, the technical change of course reflected a diplomatic change of heart. That is what France understood when it turned out that Australia's recourse was inspired by the Indo-Pacific alliance unveiled last month by the leaders of Britain, Australia and the US (AUKUS).

Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian's charge of "a stab in the back" is therefore understandable. France was indeed betrayed. Still, this affair is not about fidelity, but about interests. It's about the new geopolitical order that will effectively replace NATO and define the international system...