French arms sales in T2K

[Legbreaker]

Would France have sold AFVs after 1996?
If so, when and if would they have ceased exports to non-aligned countries?
When (or if) would sales cease to allies?

[RN7]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Would France have sold AFVs after 1996?
If so, when and if would they have ceased exports to non-aligned countries?
When (or if) would sales cease to allies?

They probably would have honoured most existing orders that were on their books, although not to any members of NATO or the WP after German Reunification. However NATO sort of split into two factions after the West Germans crossed the inter-German border. Italy, Spain, Greece and Portugal sort of followed the French and Belgians and dropped out of NATO, but then Italy and Greece sort of allied themselves with the Soviets. Then there is the issue of Yugoslavia splitting and Romania siding with NATO.

French arms shipments to neutral Europe, French allies in Africa and the Middle East and non-aligned states would probably have continued, maybe some low key sales to China as well.

[Olefin]

I would think also to Mexico - per the game canon they were operating a lot of French equipment - and pre-1998 I dont think the US would have cared much if the French sold them APC's and AC's

[Raellus]

This a very complex issue, involving macro-economic factors and realpolitik.

I think that the speed at which a given country is capable of increasing military protection is the key factor.

The nation's geo-political goals and strategies will also factor in in a major way.

And, to a lesser degree, whether arms producers are privately or state-owned.

Presumably, France would see the writing on the wall and seek to bolster its own military in order to be prepared for the impending global crisis. As a result, production capacity would be devoted to domestic "consumption." Unless overall capacity was simultaneously increased, production for export would likely decrease somewhat. Unless, that is, unless France is willing to expand its production capacity pretty dramatically.

Then again, maybe France thinks it can better position itself to weather the coming storm by bolstering others' military forces.

Whether it's French gov't contracts, or foreign buyers, either way the French arms industry makes money.

France could kill two birds with one stone too, by upgrading it's own military with newer/better equipment and sell the stuff that's being replaced to foreign buyers. For example, if France is able/willing to expand and/or speed up its LeClerc production (for its own army), it would have surplus AMX-30s to sell to China or Mexico, etc.

So yeah, it depends.

[Olefin]

Keep in mind that most likely France wasnt selling their top of the line equipment - and also you need to consider the timeline you are using

V1 - Cold War never ends - France would have probably been building up their army and increased military production as the Cold War continues - thus what they would have sold would have been either very old equipment originally in the French Army or lower end equipment made to be sold for export only

V2 - France and other European countries have to reduce their inventories of equipment and thus you would have had newer equipment - still older models but not castoffs or relics but actual pretty decent vehicles, ATGM's, armor, etc. - that now have to be disposed of - that is how, for instance, Mexico got a lot of older but still very functional and useful French APC's from Belgium and France that had to be disposed of so they could keep their best stuff for themselves in our actual timeline

[pmulcahy11b]

Maybe I'm not looking in the right place, but what real, "Good" in both a T2K and RL sense, reason does Yugoslavia have for going over to NATO without dissolving into a civil war first? And why would we accept them -- as sort of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend?" Or just one less thing to worry about? One thing the Yuguslavians and former Yugos have proved themselves is not entirely trustworthy. (Even my mother says the Croatians are untrustworthy -- and some of those on this board know about my mother's background in Yugoslavia.)

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Maybe I'm not looking in the right place, but what real, "Good" in both a T2K and RL sense, reason does Yugoslavia have for going over to NATO without dissolving into a civil war first? And why would we accept them -- as sort of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend?" Or just one less thing to worry about? One thing the Yuguslavians and former Yugos have proved themselves is not entirely trustworthy. (Even my mother says the Croatians are untrustworthy -- and some of those on this board know about my mother's background in Yugoslavia.)

I also have issues with how Yugoslavia fought in the war - and even the way it broke up per the two different timelines of the game - and the whole idea of Civgov sending troops there and how they ever thought they could support them once they got there as well

[ChalkLine]

France, Greece and Yugoslavia are all the major sources of my dissatisfaction with the T2k timeline. I think Italy does something weird too from memory.

However, if we do stick with those whacko hand-waves I suggest that France just ups its output to cover their own needs plus foreign sales