Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How France helped the UK to win the war in the Falklands

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How France helped the UK to win the war in the Falklands

    How France helped us win Falklands war, by John Nott

    By George Jones, Political Editor

    Last Updated: 11:03PM GMT 12 Mar 2002

    FRANCE was Britain's greatest ally during the Falklands war, providing secret information to enable MI6 agents to sabotage Exocet missiles which were desperately sought by Argentina, according to Sir John Nott, who was Defence Secretary during the conflict.

    In his memoirs he reveals that while President Reagan was pressurising Lady Thatcher to accept a negotiated settlement France helped Britain to win the conflict.

    Although Lady Thatcher clashed with President Mitterrand over the future direction of Europe, he immediately came to her aid after Argentine forces invaded the Falklands in April 1982.

    "In so many ways Mitterrand and the French were our greatest allies," Sir John says. As soon as the conflict began, France made available to Britain Super-Etendard and Mirage aircraft - which it had supplied to Argentina - so Harrier pilots could train against them.

    The French gave Britain information on the Exocet - which sank the Sheffield and Atlantic Conveyor - showing how to tamper with it.

    "A remarkable worldwide operation then ensued to prevent further Exocets being bought by Argentina," Sir John says.

    "I authorised our agents to pose as bona fide purchasers of equipment on the international market, ensuring that we outbid the Argentinians, and other agents identified Exocet missiles in markets and rendered them inoperable."

    He contrasts the French attitude with America's attempts to find a face-saving deal for President Galtieri, the Argentine dictator."For all Margaret Thatcher's friendship with Ronald Reagan, he remained a West Coast American looking south to Latin America and west to the Pacific. Sometimes I wondered if he even knew or cared where Europe was."

    Caspar Weinberger, the US defence secretary, supported Britain but the State Department was "dominated by Latinos".

    "There was incredible pressure from the White House and the State Department to negotiate. It was hugely damaging," Sir John told The Telegraph. "They couldn't understand that to us any negotiated settlement would have seemed like a defeat."

    Asked if he found it irritating that the Americans expected Britain's total support in the war against terrorism, Sir John said: "I am against the Americans smashing things up with bombing raids, then letting us be the auxiliary policemen to pick up the pieces."

    Sir John says he held the Foreign Office "in deep contempt" for the caution it displayed when Lady Thatcher proposed sending the Task Force to the Falklands.


    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...John-Nott.html

  • #2
    And they could have made it a lot simpler Oscar just not sell them in the first place......just by putting a freeze on ....... the French are masters of intrigue, and very good at talking out the side of there mouths.

    And what concessions did we give regarding the EU to the French for this so called help?
    Last edited by T_igger_cs_30; 30 Nov 08,, 23:10.
    sigpicFEAR NAUGHT

    Should raw analytical data ever be passed to policy makers?

    Comment


    • #3
      The guys an idiot. The Us gave Britain 15 million gallons of aviation fuel, 48 sidewinder missiles, KC-135 tankers, took over RAF duties in NATO, provided satellite intelligence, access to the US sat communications grid, told Argentina it was not going to side with it vs Britain, gave the Royal marines laser designators and a radar for their SAM system. Regan was knighted for the US efforts on Britain's behalf.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by zraver View Post
        The guys an idiot. The Us gave Britain 15 million gallons of aviation fuel, 48 sidewinder missiles, KC-135 tankers, took over RAF duties in NATO, provided satellite intelligence, access to the US sat communications grid, told Argentina it was not going to side with it vs Britain, gave the Royal marines laser designators and a radar for their SAM system. Regan was knighted for the US efforts on Britain's behalf.
        Z yes I know mate, I was awaiting his response before I brought that equation into it
        sigpicFEAR NAUGHT

        Should raw analytical data ever be passed to policy makers?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by zraver View Post
          The guys an idiot. The Us gave Britain 15 million gallons of aviation fuel, 48 sidewinder missiles, KC-135 tankers, took over RAF duties in NATO, provided satellite intelligence, access to the US sat communications grid, told Argentina it was not going to side with it vs Britain, gave the Royal marines laser designators and a radar for their SAM system. Regan was knighted for the US efforts on Britain's behalf.
          Thats what I thought too.

          Comment


          • #6
            Sorry for the late response, bit sleepy and had a problem with my computer.

            [QUOTE=T_igger_cs_30;583863]
            And they could have made it a lot simpler Oscar just not sell them in the first place
            No one knew the Argentinians would have attacked the Falklands at the time of the purchase, not even the increasingly impopular general Galtieri who launched this operation out of the blue, it was a desperate attempt to divert the attention of the populace hit hard by the economic crisis.

            just by putting a freeze on
            That's what they did.

            the French are masters of intrigue, and very good at talking out the side of there mouths.
            :)

            And what concessions did we give regarding the EU to the French for this so called help?
            Nothing. Thatcher had still her check signed at the Fontainebleau summit in 1984. And the EU unanimously condemned the Argentinians and applied commercial sanctions.

            And frankly, when you look at the origin of the ships that were in the Argentinian navy during this war, the French were hardly the only ones to supply the dictatorship with dangerous weapons. ;)
            Last edited by Oscar; 01 Dec 08,, 10:54.

            Comment


            • #7
              Oscar reply:

              Its my understanding they still shipped during the war and also sent specialists (as someone eslse has pointed out) to help.

              What about your claim:
              "There was incredible pressure from the White House and the State Department to negotiate. It was hugely damaging," Sir John told The Telegraph. "They couldn't understand that to us any negotiated settlement would have seemed like a defeat."
              there may have been detracters, as there always is, but the US supplied instant and valuable support from the get go.
              sigpicFEAR NAUGHT

              Should raw analytical data ever be passed to policy makers?

              Comment


              • #8
                [QUOTE]
                Originally posted by T_igger_cs_30 View Post
                Its my understanding they still shipped during the war and also sent specialists (as someone eslse has pointed out) to help.
                I would like to see your source to back your accusation.

                What about your claim:
                I didn't know I was the British defence secretary during the Falklands war. ;)

                there may have been detracters, as there always is, but the US supplied instant and valuable support from the get go.
                This thread was dedicated to France's help to GB ,not this particular person's ill feeling towards the Americans. I posted the whole article. OK my fault. That being said, he was in the governement at the time, so about the US pressure to force Thatcher to find an agreement with the Argentinians he may know of what he's talking about.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Argentina used A-4s and IAI Neshers. I wonder where those came from..... ;)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Falklands Islands is another example of how NATO is *******s. A NATO member gets invaded by a foreign country but the only thing all the other nations can provide is mutual/materiel support.

                    Yet when the USA gets attacked, and NATO actually goes and helps out in Afghanistan with real support. Everyone cries about France/Germany/Spain/NATO members "not doing enough" and then you had the whole massive anti-French sentiment for not helping out in Iraq. Ridiculous. The world is full of cocks, I hope NATO is disbanded once and for all.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Diplomatic Failure and why GB was right:

                      An old conflict, sometimes the importance of GB's stance maybe overlooked.

                      In fact, Argentina misunderstood the United States’ position as much as it did Great Britain’s. According to Haig, Argentina had always believed the United States would be willing to trade acceptance of the invasion for Argentina’s help in pressuring the new socialist Nicaraguan government, the Sandinistas. While it is true that President Reagan had been developing closer relations with the junta to help assure that its powerful sway in Latin America would be used against the Sandinistas, the United States could never have supported an armed takeover by an undemocratic government against its most important ally.
                      When Haig first met Thatcher after the Argentine invasion, he told her that President Galtieri would not survive in office if the British Task Force made it all the way to the Falkland Islands. Thatcher responded by saying that she would not survive if the force were stopped
                      One of Haig’s most significant problems was the United States’ need to appear strong before the Soviet Union. The Soviets had been flexing their muscles in areas like Afghanistan and had made significant inroads in Latin America, especially in Nicaragua with the Sandinistas.
                      Appearing weak in the balance of power was especially troubling for the West because the Soviet Union had begun to make ties with Argentina.
                      Whether caused by Western ideological steadfastness or not, it seems that the Soviets were prevented from siding too strongly with the Argentines. On April 28, Lev Tolkunov, chairman of Moscow’s Novosti press agency, declared that the Soviet Union would not necessarily fight for Argentina. Indeed, although the Soviet Union consistently condemned the British for failing to give up their colony,
                      Nations outside of NATO had reason to condemn the invasion as well. If Argentina could establish the precedent of solving territorial disputes with force, then any country with disputed territory would be in danger of an attack.
                      http://www.historymatters.appstate.e...islandswar.pdf

                      The primary source in your link: Sir John Nott

                      He became Minister for Defence in Jan 1981, who was described once in an interview by Sir Robin Day (Oct 82) as a "here today gone tommorrow politician" causing him to storm out of the interview.

                      Nott offered his resignation to PM Thatcher after the launch of the Task Force that was set to retake the Falkland Islands. It was refused at that point.

                      He had previously been severly criticized by the Royal Navy for his decision to cut back on Naval expenditure, prior to the Falklands conflict.

                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Nott

                      the US came through for GB no matter what was going on in diplomatic circles, thus maintaining the ties we still have to this day.
                      sigpicFEAR NAUGHT

                      Should raw analytical data ever be passed to policy makers?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        [QUOTE=Oscar;584180]

                        I would like to see your source to back your accusation.
                        Maybe in 2012 you will be able to source it yourself



                        I didn't know I was the British defence secretary during the Falklands war. ;)
                        Obviously a Nott supporter, so if you had been no change there



                        This thread was dedicated to France's help to GB ,not this particular person's ill feeling towards the Americans. I posted the whole article. OK my fault. That being said, he was in the governement at the time, so about the US pressure to force Thatcher to find an agreement with the Argentinians he may know of what he's talking about.
                        And maybe NOTT
                        sigpicFEAR NAUGHT

                        Should raw analytical data ever be passed to policy makers?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I can't beleive people even talk about the USA supporting Argentina...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            The Argentinians had no previous experience with antiship missiles, and the Exocet was a complicated and cranky weapon. The Argentinians experienced a lot of trouble fitting the Exocet launch system and rails to the Super Etendards. In November 1981, Dassault Aviation, owned by the French government and builder of the Super Etendard, sent a team of nine of its own technicians (and some additional French Aerospatiale specialists) to work with the Argentine navy to supervise the introduction of the Etendards and Exocets. Although France complied with the NATO/ Common Market weapons embargo, the French technical team remained in Argentina and apparently continued to work on the aircraft and Exocets, successfully repairing the malfunctioning launch systems. Without the technical help and collusion from the government of France—Britain’s NATO “ally”—it is improbable that Argentina would have been able to employ its most devastating weapon.18

                            This is an account from an investigating Journalist,you know What,He´s Argentinian.

                            He also goes on to say that the U.S. provided the British task Force with Information about Planes taking off from overhead Satallites.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by zraver View Post
                              The guys an idiot. The Us gave Britain 15 million gallons of aviation fuel, 48 sidewinder missiles, KC-135 tankers, took over RAF duties in NATO, provided satellite intelligence, access to the US sat communications grid, told Argentina it was not going to side with it vs Britain, gave the Royal marines laser designators and a radar for their SAM system. Regan was knighted for the US efforts on Britain's behalf.
                              And...More then likely gave the Brits the Belgrano's (ex-USS Phoenix) signature on the IDFF system for tracking her amid the other ships in the area.;)
                              Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X