Hardly a breeze: selling the Mistral to Russia

On Monday 30th June, after a few days’ delay, the RFS Smolny docked in Saint Nazaire, France. This marked another crucial milestone in France's controversial programme to sell two of its Mistral Class amphibious assault ships to the Russian Navy.

Referred to by the French as a Projection and Command Vessel, the Mistral can be host to 16 helicopters (medium lift or gunship), 70 vehicles including up to 13 main battle tanks (or 40 is fully loaded with MBTs), 450 soldiers and 69 hospital beds, alongside all the necessary command and control facilities from which to conduct its many missions. Three currently serve in the French Navy (their flagship the Mistral, followed by the Tonnerre and the Dixmude) have participated in numerous missions from Lebanon, Libya, Ivory Coast and Mali to name a few. The Russian Navy expressed interest in the platform and a deal was announced back in 2011 for two ships, adapted to Russian specifications.  

The 400 Russian sailors aboard the Smolny (a training ship) will begin formal training on their new vessel, christened the Vladivostok, under the supervision of the Défense Conseil International (DCI), an agency specialising in training and handover of French military equipment to foreign customers. The second vessel, ironically dubbed the Sevastopol, is still under final assembly in France.

The deal came under immediate criticism from the US first and foremost, followed by the Baltic and Scandinavian states, always wary of possible Russian aggression. US Republicans had been vocal in opposing the sale of such highly advanced platform to Russia since 2009, following a statement by Admiral Vyssotski a year earlier that the possession of such a platform would have had allowed him to project forces in 40 mins rather than 26 hours during the Russian intervention of South Ossetia in 2008. This statement, although hyperbole, helped fuel the idea that modern arms sales would enable Russia to further destabilise its border regions. Further concerns were expressed about NATO technology and protocols potentially falling into Russian hands: asimilar criticism was levelled at Turkey (the second largest NATO partner) after it expressed the desire to purchase Chinese made SAM systems earlier in the year.

Fast forward and the Ukrainian crisis has once again brought the sale of the Mistral to the fore. Joining the rest of the West in condemnation of Russia's actions, the French have yet to firmly announce the cancellation of the contract -  to the renewed disapproval of the US. And in a move that would have been unthinkable a few years ago, Polands' own Defence Minister has publicly declared his opposition to the sale.

However successive French governments have held firm.

Cancelling the contract now would incur large penalties for the French state and put its reputation at risk. The French arms industry is the fourth largest in France and is still highly dependent on French acquisitions, especially the land component. Exports account for around a third revenue, and with dwindling French defence budgets, the industry is increasingly looking outwards. France is the world’s fifth largest arms exporter, so a cancellation of such an important, high profile contract would be an unwelcome blow to its standing. Something the Russians have picked up quite astutely. Following a visit to Washington by French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius who was questioned regarding the sale, Rosobronexport, the Russian state-owned arms export agency, made a statement declaring that the Mistral acquisition process was on track and praising the reliability of their French partners. And more recently, President Putin declared that he believed the record fine imposed by US authorities on the French bank, BNP Paribas, was blackmail to get the French to back off and cancel the contract. A statement that has no doubt caused significant irritation in Washington and Paris. Probably because there is some truth to it. 

Some have suggested that France sell or lease the two ships to other other NATO members, or even to NATO itself, though there has been little appetite for either idea so far. But do these ships actually pose a significant threat to European security if they were to fall in Russian hands? Probably not. Or at least they would not significantly upset the current balance we see today.

Firstly, only the Sevastopol will be deployed in Europe (the name is the give-away). The other ship will be deployed to the Pacific fleet to address China's and Japan's growing assertiveness in relation to the various ongoing territorial disputes there. Disregarding Admiral Vyssotski's rather grandiose statement, the real added value of these ships to the Russians lies not in their amphibious assault capabilities (which they already possess), but rather in their command and control capabilities. These ships are intended as stopgaps anyway, whilst the domestic Russian industry matures enough to build their own amphibious assault ships. Cancelling the contract would simply delay the inevitable, not  prevent it altogether. The sale of the Mistrals is simply a reality that the Baltic States (and NATO) will have to come to terms with. Perhaps sooner than anticipated.