Mistral News thread

AFAIK that is not true, the sanctions don't impede existing contracts.
It's just political pressure from US, EU etc, because it would "look bad".

I believe each member state is supposed to set it's own penalties for violating sanctions,
and they could set that as low as they wished, but again, political pressure to play along.

mutantsushi wrote:AFAIK that is not true, the sanctions don't impede existing contracts.
It's just political pressure from US, EU etc, because it would "look bad".

I believe each member state is supposed to set it's own penalties for violating sanctions,
and they could set that as low as they wished, but again, political pressure to play along.

Everything on this list is banned...

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52014XG0409%2801%29&from=EN

And this list...

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1406553915752&uri=CELEX:02009R0428-20140702

Putin wanted to show good will to the France by buying this ship. If you remember correctly Hoillande first said that they will deliver the ship... couple of days later he was talking in a differrent tone... The pressure from Washington was big and he was a weakling to give in... Anyways as somebody said earlier Russia does not need this ship urgently... but it is true that what France should pay is not just the price of the ship but also price of the supporting infrastructure the Russians had to build up, cost of training of ship crew and additional costs as compensation of change of plans...

MOD should wait for the court to bring out the ruling. I have my doubts that it will be just but they will have to wait. If the ruling is against Russia - which would obviously be politically motivated, then there is a choice of cutting the gas and oil deliveries to France as compensation... Its time west should find out that tinkering with Putin is not a good idea...

Russia should seize french technologies, since for some years russia lacked Thermal Imagers technology and in recent years they had cooperation with Thales and Catherine XP/FC thermal imagers aswell Thompson, they should just seize this technology and develope themselfs, nothing the west can do about it, Russia is already under sanctions from US and their EU vassals so who cares. Besides the west uses courts as a political tool just like the Lukoil decision to pay bln's based on political decision and not the actual facts of the event. Russia has power like no other country, resource mean power use it wise and no country can have leverage over you, but the 5th columnists and laziness is witholding russia from using its power.

I don't mean abusing as becoming some new bully, no just using it whenever it is necessary to keep the game fair...can't win a game when your opponent cheats and breaks the rules while you try to follow all rules.

Vladimir79 wrote:

mutantsushi wrote:AFAIK that is not true, the sanctions don't impede existing contracts. It's just political pressure from US, EU etc, because it would "look bad".
I believe each member state is supposed to set it's own penalties for violating sanctions, and they could set that as low as they wished, but again, political pressure to play along.

Everything on this list is banned...
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52014XG0409%2801%29&from=EN
And this list...
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1406553915752&uri=CELEX:02009R0428-20140702

The list of relevant goods was not the issue, but rather whether sanctions impeded existing contracts (of those goods) or not...

The item lists you quoted reference the base Code of Conduct for Arms Exports, which states: (per EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports)

An export licence should be refused if approval would be inconsistent with, inter alia:  (a)the international obligations of Member States and their commitments to enforce UN, OSCE and EU arms embargoes;

Likewise, per thisCouncil document:

Selected denial criteria for conventional arms trade (EU Code of Conduct)
1) EU Member States will not issue export licences when they contravene the international commitments, such as sanctions decided by the UN Security Council and the Community, agreement on non proliferation or similar made by the Member State. Furthermore an export license should be refused if approval would be inconsistent with (...)

When the Mistral's export licence was already previously approved, so CoCoAE preventing granting of export licences doesn't matter.

Beyond that, numerous sources repeat that the Russian sanctions specifically didn't impede existing contracts, allowing not only Mistral deals, but not impeding ongoing service/parts contracts for Eastern EU members with Soviet military hardware:

After tense negotiations, France succeeded in getting existing contracts excluded from the European Union's package of sanctions against Russia over its role in supporting rebels in eastern Ukraine. At the time, French President François Hollande told reporters:
The Russians have paid. We would have to repay €1.1 billion [if they were not delivered] ... at this stage, there are no sanctions imposed that would oblige us to renounce [the contract].

The sanctions would not prevent EU member states from honouring existing contracts, a decision that will enable France to complete the delivery of two Mistral warships commissioned by Russia. Dalia Grybauskaitė, Lithuania’s president, immediately tweeted her unhappiness, writing: “Welcome EU decision on a wide range of sanctions on Russia. Unfortunately nothing to stop the deal of Mistral yet.”

If Dalia "The Anti-Putin" is saying there is no legal impediment to Mistral deal, are you really going to argue with her?
I've seen absolutely nothing since then to suggest any change has occured in that matter of law, only a shift in French public diplomatic position, i.e. due to political pressure from US/et al.
If you HAVE seen such a change in the legal regime, I'd be interested to see it, that would be 10x more relevant than bringing up the sanctioned goods list.

Regardless, arbitration tribunals in similar cases have refused to negate contracts because of arms sanctions,
so Russia should easily be able to win contractual costs & damages, not sure if costs like dock construction/training will be covered, but I've read that the contract includes penalties (beyond lateness) which may effectively cover other costs of Russia's.
Swiss arbitration courts can't necessarily enforce payment within French jurisdiction, but they certainly should be able to within Switzerland where I'm sure France keeps/transits many accounts,
and in any case, France would be liable, and would thus need to pay up in full whenever relations wtih Russia do clear up.

Werewolf wrote:Russia should seize french technologies, since for some years russia lacked Thermal Imagers technology and in recent years they had cooperation with Thales and Catherine XP/FC thermal imagers aswell Thompson, they should just seize this technology and develope themselfs, nothing the west can do about it, Russia is already under sanctions from US and their EU vassals so who cares. Besides the west uses courts as a political tool just like the Lukoil decision to pay bln's based on political decision and not the actual facts of the event. Russia has power like no other country, resource mean power use it wise and   no country can have leverage over you, but the 5th columnists and laziness is witholding russia from using its power.

I don't mean abusing as becoming some new bully, no just using it whenever it is necessary to keep the game fair...can't win a game when your opponent cheats and breaks the rules while you try to follow all rules.

Oh! Lukoil case , Russia ain't gonna pay a penny .

Pff... As i thought the cowards capitulated to Washington pressure, pathetic, De Gaulle must be rolling in his grave.



The above is a picture of what was ones the great nation of France, i don't think they were the capitulating type.

max steel wrote:

Werewolf wrote:Russia should seize french technologies, since for some years russia lacked Thermal Imagers technology and in recent years they had cooperation with Thales and Catherine XP/FC thermal imagers aswell Thompson, they should just seize this technology and develope themselfs, nothing the west can do about it, Russia is already under sanctions from US and their EU vassals so who cares. Besides the west uses courts as a political tool just like the Lukoil decision to pay bln's based on political decision and not the actual facts of the event. Russia has power like no other country, resource mean power use it wise and   no country can have leverage over you, but the 5th columnists and laziness is witholding russia from using its power.

I don't mean abusing as becoming some new bully, no just using it whenever it is necessary to keep the game fair...can't win a game when your opponent cheats and breaks the rules while you try to follow all rules.

Oh! Lukoil case , Russia ain't gonna pay a penny .

Agreed. Not... one... single... kopek....

Russia got the technology and the money will be refunded ...

Russia Needed Mistrals for the Tech, Not the Ships Themselves

mutantsushi wrote:

Vladimir79 wrote:

mutantsushi wrote:AFAIK that is not true, the sanctions don't impede existing contracts. It's just political pressure from US, EU etc, because it would "look bad".
I believe each member state is supposed to set it's own penalties for violating sanctions, and they could set that as low as they wished, but again, political pressure to play along.

Everything on this list is banned...
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52014XG0409%2801%29&from=EN
And this list...
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1406553915752&uri=CELEX:02009R0428-20140702

The list of relevant goods was not the issue, but rather whether sanctions impeded existing contracts (of those goods) or not...

The item lists you quoted reference the base Code of Conduct for Arms Exports, which states: (per EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports)

An export licence should be refused if approval would be inconsistent with, inter alia:  (a)the international obligations of Member States and their commitments to enforce UN, OSCE and EU arms embargoes;

Likewise, per thisCouncil document:

Selected denial criteria for conventional arms trade (EU Code of Conduct)
1) EU Member States will not issue export licences when they contravene the international commitments, such as sanctions decided by the UN Security Council and the Community, agreement on non proliferation or similar made by the Member State. Furthermore an export license should be refused if approval would be inconsistent with (...)

When the Mistral's export licence was already previously approved, so CoCoAE preventing granting of export licences doesn't matter.

Beyond that, numerous sources repeat that the Russian sanctions specifically didn't impede existing contracts, allowing not only Mistral deals, but not impeding ongoing service/parts contracts for Eastern EU members with Soviet military hardware:

After tense negotiations, France succeeded in getting existing contracts excluded from the European Union's package of sanctions against Russia over its role in supporting rebels in eastern Ukraine. At the time, French President François Hollande told reporters:
The Russians have paid. We would have to repay €1.1 billion [if they were not delivered] ... at this stage, there are no sanctions imposed that would oblige us to renounce [the contract].

The sanctions would not prevent EU member states from honouring existing contracts, a decision that will enable France to complete the delivery of two Mistral warships commissioned by Russia. Dalia Grybauskaitė, Lithuania’s president, immediately tweeted her unhappiness, writing: “Welcome EU decision on a wide range of sanctions on Russia. Unfortunately nothing to stop the deal of Mistral yet.”

If Dalia "The Anti-Putin" is saying there is no legal impediment to Mistral deal, are you really going to argue with her?
I've seen absolutely nothing since then to suggest any change has occured in that matter of law, only a shift in French public diplomatic position, i.e. due to political pressure from US/et al.
If you HAVE seen such a change in the legal regime, I'd be interested to see it, that would be 10x more relevant than bringing up the sanctioned goods list.

Regardless, arbitration tribunals in similar cases have refused to negate contracts because of arms sanctions,
so Russia should easily be able to win contractual costs & damages, not sure if costs like dock construction/training will be covered, but I've read that the contract includes penalties (beyond lateness) which may effectively cover other costs of Russia's.
Swiss arbitration courts can't necessarily enforce payment within French jurisdiction, but they certainly should be able to within Switzerland where I'm sure France keeps/transits many accounts,
and in any case, France would be liable, and would thus need to pay up in full whenever relations wtih Russia do clear up.

Quality post... I appreciate the response and bow to your knowledge.

No prob... BTW, if you notice that quote of President Hollande, there you have it straight from the horse's mouth
that France owes 1.1B if they don't deliver, not the ~600m they are trying to get away with now... ;-)
President of the Republic's statements seem pretty relevant corroborating evidence to bring before arbitror, hm?

Hm, Kiev couldn't possibly complain if Russia pulled the same stunt they did in selling aircraft carrier to China,
call the 2 Mistrals "floating themeparks" destined for amusement park in Crimea, let RusNavy change their mind after delivery... :-)

mutantsushi wrote:No prob... BTW, if you notice that quote of President Hollande, there you have it straight from the horse's mouth
that France owes 1.1B if they don't deliver, not the ~600m they are trying to get away with now... ;-)
President of the Republic's statements seem pretty relevant corroborating evidence to bring before arbitror, hm?

Hm, Kiev couldn't possibly complain if Russia pulled the same stunt they did in selling aircraft carrier to China,
call the 2 Mistrals "floating themeparks" destined for amusement park in Crimea, let RusNavy change their mind after delivery... :-)

It depends on the contract conditions and the case law of where arbitration would be held.  The arbitration seat is in Geneva and based on Fincantieri v Iraq MoD the decision would be based on French law as was their relying on Italian law in that case.  Lucky for us French law means we can take it to court.  I don't really take what Hollande has to say at face value.  He is playing political games with this deal.  On one hand he has to appease the anti-Russian sentiment running through NATO and on the other needs to keep France an open market for the arms trade that employs 120k high skilled jobs.  He is walking a fine line...

I doubt he could play the games of China and get away with it.

Bad Business Practices: France Unwilling to Follow Mistral Contract Clause
21:06 21.05.2015(updated 21:11 21.05.2015)

It seems that France is really bad at math. Otherwise, how could French representative Louis Gartier offer to refund Russia 785 billion euros after the failed Mistral deal, if Moscow already paid 1.2 billion euros?

Earlier this week, Louis Gartier, the head of France's Secretariat-General for National Defense and Security, arrived to Moscow in attempt to find a solution out of the failed Mistral deal.

However, it turns out that the official representative from France had no idea about the details of the arms deal contract, French weekly Paris Match reported.

The arms export contract was signed between DCNS, a French company that specializes in naval defense and energy, and Rosoboronexport, Russia's agency for defense-related exports and imports, in 2011.

The Russian side already paid 1.2 billion euros for two Mistral-class helicopter carriers. The first ship should have been delivered in November 2014 and Russia expected the second ship in 2015. However, France cancelled the delivery, citing Russia's alleged involvement in the Ukrainian crisis.

The contract signed between the two parties in June 2011 said that in case DCNS cannot fulfill its obligations, the company will have to refund Rosoboronexport all payments made according to the contract. Meanwhile, the government of France will take all appropriate measures to ensure that DCNS makes all required payments or reimbursements on time.

Earlier, Gartier said that France could only refund 785 million euros. The amount is much less than the actual sum that the French side must pay back. According to experts, the refund of 785 million euros offered by France does not even cover Russia's down-payment amount.



Read more: http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150521/1022428531.html#ixzz3aoRcAYmJ

Werewolf wrote:Russia should seize french technologies, since for some years russia lacked Thermal Imagers technology and in recent years they had cooperation with Thales and Catherine XP/FC thermal imagers aswell Thompson, they should just seize this technology and develope themselfs, nothing the west can do about it, Russia is already under sanctions from US and their EU vassals so who cares..

Volga buy blue print + machine

No need thale. fab the chip easy

Mistral no more for RN ! Good news lads, but also bed news because this thread will be inactive soon

Russia refused "Mistrals", there is a debate only about the amount of compensation

Army and defence industry  May 26, 15:21 UTC+3
According to the Deputy Chairman of the Board of the Military - industrial Commission of the Russian Federation Oleg Bochkarev, Russia will be building similar ships
KAZAN, may 26. /TASS/. Russia refused ordered in France helicopter carrier type Mistral (Mistral), is now discussed only the amount of compensation, said Tuesday the Deputy Chairman of the Board of the Military - industrial Commission (MIC) of the Russian Federation Oleg Bochkarev.
"The fact that Russia (Mistrals) does not take fact happened, and now only one discussion about the amount of money that must be returned to Russia," he said.
The Chairman of the Board MIC also announced that Russia will build the ships like the Mistral, but another class, target copy ship no.
http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/1995497

Me thinks Russian ship this class shall be
a) nuclear powered
b) well armed (as Russia has not enough blue waters escorts so far)
c) last but not least - be able to be used as V/STOL drone and helicopter AC

As for pure troop transports/landing ship  kinda Karel Doorman.

MIC: Russia will not copy the "Mistral"

KAZAN, May 26. / TASS /. Russia after the failure of the helicopter type Mistral ("Mistral") plans to build a landing craft, but another class - the target is not to copy the French sample, said Tuesday the deputy chairman of the board of the Military-Industrial Commission (MIC) of the Russian Federation Oleg Bochkarev.

"We have planned such ships they have in the project, but we have built on another class, we have a different ideology landing. Objectives copy" Mistral "no" - he said.

Russia ordered a French helicopter carriers in 2011. The first such ship of the Russian fleet was to receive in the fall of 2014, but its transfer to Paris was suspended because of the situation in Ukraine. The transfer of the second ship, scheduled for 2015, has also been frozen.
Russian officials have repeatedly stressed that the country's defense capability will not suffer from the failure of the contract for "Mistral". The United Shipbuilding Corporation expressed their willingness to build their own similar helicopter, if it received the appropriate order. However, last week, an industry source told Tass that the establishment of helicopter is not on the agenda in the national "defense industry".

http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/1995519

GunshipDemocracy wrote:Mistral no more for RN ! Good news lads, but also bed news because this thread will be inactive soon


The Chairman of the Board MIC also announced that Russia will build the ships like the Mistral, but another class, target copy ship no.
http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/1995497

Great news!
*RUSSIA TO BUILD OWN HELICOPTER CARRIERS INSTEAD OF MISTRAL: RIA

We can assume that it will be generously funded by French compensation for the breach of contract - and presumably using some borrowed technology!

max steel wrote:

GunshipDemocracy wrote:Mistral no more for RN ! Good news lads, but also bed news because this thread will be inactive soon


The Chairman of the Board MIC also announced that Russia will build the ships like the Mistral, but another class, target copy ship no.
http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/1995497

Great news!
*RUSSIA TO BUILD OWN HELICOPTER CARRIERS INSTEAD OF MISTRAL: RIA

We can assume that it will be generously funded by French compensation for the breach of contract - and presumably using some borrowed technology!

I hope it's the upgraded Kiev class.

You mean the Project 11780? That would be nice, an upgraded version of that with current technology would be even better than a Mistral (if only because it will strictly comply with RN requirements as opposed to being an adapted foreign design). It was a bit bigger at 25-30,000 tons and also much faster at 30kt, whether they would want it a tad smaller (or bigger!?) than that and/or not that fast we'll have to see. Probably it will take a few years until the keel is laid though.

Sounds like it would be similar in size to the Mistral's but like mentioned above, with nuclear propulsion....it's to have anti-aircraft and anti-sub weaponry

Deputy Chairman of the Industry Committee of the State Duma Vladimir Gutenev noted that in the case of the need for a ship like "Mistral" for the Armed Forces, it would be similar in size to the Mistral, but with a nuclear power plant. Equipped with "air defense and antisubmarine defense. "

РИА Новости http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20150526/1066636532.html#ixzz3bHsqYjfO

Cyberspec wrote:Sounds like it would be similar in size to the Mistral's but like mentioned above, with nuclear propulsion....it's to have anti-aircraft and anti-sub weaponry

Deputy Chairman of the Industry Committee of the State Duma Vladimir Gutenev noted that in the case of the need for a ship like "Mistral" for the Armed Forces, it would be similar in size to the Mistral, but with a nuclear power plant. Equipped with "air defense and antisubmarine defense. "

РИА Новости http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20150526/1066636532.html#ixzz3bHsqYjfO

I am delighted to hear it. IMO Russia is far more better of having couple of such ships than any number of Mistrals or 1-2supadupa AC. I hope for kinda universal (both as landing ship or V/STOL drone and helicopter carrier).

max steel wrote:

GunshipDemocracy wrote:Mistral no more for RN ! Good news lads, but also bed news because this thread will be inactive soon


The Chairman of the Board MIC also announced that Russia will build the ships like the Mistral, but another class, target copy ship no.
http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/1995497

Great news!
*RUSSIA TO BUILD OWN HELICOPTER CARRIERS INSTEAD OF MISTRAL: RIA

We can assume that it will be generously funded by French compensation for the breach of contract - and presumably using some borrowed technology!

WE'LL MAKE OUR OWN MISTRAL, WITH BLACKJACK, AND HOOKERS111
AND IT WILL HAVE A PAIR(of anti-aircraft and anti-sub systems) FROM THE START, NOT LIKE THAT MISTRAL THAT HAS TO BE RETROFITTED WITH!

i wonder what France will do with the Mistrals

Now I wonder what France is going to do with the Mistral ? Sell it to... China ?

higurashihougi wrote:Now I wonder what France is going to do with the Mistral ? Sell it to... China ?

and then maybe China sell them to Russia. Imagine?