Politique Internationale — What are today’s criteria for assessing the power of a navy?
Admiral Nicolas Vaujour — For a long time, tonnage was the benchmark for assessing the power of a navy. But this is no longer sufficient. Today, we need to consider the number and diversity of units, the technological level of onboard systems and, finally, the know-how of sailors and crews. These three criteria generally give a fairly accurate picture. I would even add that there is a fourth fundamental parameter: partnerships. At present, no country is able to deal with multiple crises on its own, and no geographical area can be neglected. The ability to work together is a decisive factor in our effectiveness.
P. I. — In terms of these criteria, where does France stand? In other words, how strong is its navy?
N. V. — It’s always complex to venture into this kind of conjecture. What I can analyse, however, are the main characteristics of the navy I command. First and foremost, it’s a global navy, because our interests are global, and because our strategic flows are global too. But also, more simply, because we are responsible for protecting our maritime zones and our fellow citizens overseas, spread across all the oceans.
I also command the navy of a nuclear-armed Nation. This means that it is our responsibility to guarantee the permanence of the nuclear deterrent at sea, based on nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBN), and the deployment of the nuclear- armed naval aviation force from the aircraft carrier. This is a key mission for the navy, with extremely high standards to match the credibility of our nuclear deterrence. It’s a mission that highlights both our know-how and the technological level of the equipment we deploy. Finally, we deploy resources capable of acting across the entire spectrum of conflict at sea, based on our five organic forces: surface ships, submarines, naval aviation, Navy Seals and special forces, and maritime gendarmes. With these resources, the navy acts at sea, under the sea, on land and in the air.
P. I. — World navy, nuclear navy and combat navy: can we say that these are the three pillars of the French navy?
N. V. — In any case, these are the factors that contribute to making the French Navy a navy that is both recognized and relied upon by our partners, but also feared by our competitors. This sums up our ambition and focuses our day-to-day efforts. All navies are conceived, built and operate in two very different timeframes: we need to be agile in the short term, to adapt to rapidly changing conditions, and determined in the long term, with lead times for skills generation and equipment development that stretch over several years. Building the new-generation aircraft carrier and assembling its crew will require fifteen years of continuous effort. At the same time, we need to adapt without delay to the reality of conflict at sea.
P. I. — How is conflict evolving at sea?
N. V. — The French Navy has the resources and skills to act around the world in any waters, from policing action at sea to high-intensity combat. In this respect, I’d like to highlight the often overlooked work of our coastal surveillance sites, patrol boats, naval bases and all the coastal units that, on a daily basis, ensure the security of coastal areas, in a context marked by increasing use of the sea, but also by the rise in illicit behaviour. In 2023, the Navy seized 33 tons of drugs. This figure reflects the effectiveness of our resources. It also reveals the scale of the task ahead.
Offshore, we are witnessing the “verticalization” of maritime space. The prospect of naval combat in a contested environment means mastering the column that runs from the seabed to outer space. The current period is marked by the opening up of new fields of conflict. I’m thinking in particular of the seabed, which is becoming an area of competition, but also of cyberspace and outer space. These new areas bring with them new threats, which means we have to deal with new vulnerabilities. These areas are added to the others.
P. I. — What are the main lessons to be learned from the naval operations of recent months?
N. V. — Every engagement, and even every crisis, is watched very closely, analysed and scrutinized, so that we can learn from them and adapt as quickly as possible for tomorrow’s battles. I’ve noticed a situation that is blocked on land can spill over to sea. This is the case in the Black Sea, where Ukraine, a country whose navy was wiped out at the start of the war, has managed to defeat a powerful navy using drones and missiles. We shouldn’t draw any definitive conclusions about naval tactics from this, as the Black Sea is a closed sea, which doesn’t allow the Russian navy to use the strategic depth of the open sea. But it does prove that agility and adaptability are factors of superiority.
The situation in the Red Sea reminds us that the transition from patrol to combat at sea is a matter of seconds. This requires us to be ready materially, in human terms and morally. During the first drone engagement on December 9th by the Languedoc frigate, the weapons were loaded, and the sailors were ready. Thanks to years of training, patrols, and knowledge of the area, they instantly understood that they were under attack, and responded accordingly. These theatres give a central place to drones and, more broadly, to hybrid action. Once again, in combat at sea, it’s the one who adapts fastest who wins. It’s a call for agility that translates into an effort to innovate not only technically, but also doctrinally, and tactically. On March 20, a Houthi drone was shot down by the helicopter from the destroyer Alsace. This had been imagined and tested before the ship sailed from Toulon. When the day came, we were able to provide a new response to this threat.
To continue on the subject of drones, their use in combat at sea or in the air is nothing new. What is new is their massive and diversified use. So there isn’t a technological breakthrough, but rather a breakthrough in terms of use. The consequence of this dronization at sea is a disinhibition of the level of violence. We can see this in the Red Sea, but also in the Black Sea.
P. I. — There are many different ways of thinking about strategic concepts. There’s talk of high-intensity warfare, war of attrition, hybrid warfare... Does the navy embrace any of these theses in particular?
N. V. — Let’s be wary of overly dogmatic approaches. The range of concepts is vast and subject to the validation of reality. The aim of doctrinal reflection is to determine the best strategy, to optimise the use of resources to acquire superiority. At sea, our ships are in direct contact with those of our competitors. Their mission is not to be ready for a putative threat: they operate like this every day. The question of superiority is therefore very acute for us.
The war in Ukraine has reminded us what a war of attrition is. We have spent thirty years developing cutting-edge weapons. This heritage is invaluable and keeps us in the club of leading navies. What has changed is that we now need to be able to wear down our adversaries and counter their wear and tear. This means taking a close look at the “price per shot” and finding solutions that endure. That’s why we’re working on laser weapons.
P. I. — By definition, budgets are always a central issue for armies. Does the French Navy have sufficient resources to meet these challenges?
N. V. — You can always ask for more resources. But we have to admit that the French government has taken the measure of the efforts required. The budget for the 2024-30 military programming law is the highest it has ever been. My responsibility as Chief of the French Navy is to ensure that the ambitions of this program are realised in practice. It’s a question of getting the best out of it, it is a complex problem in terms of economics, the unstable geostrategic situation, and the conflicts already under way.
Here we find the structural tension between long and short timeframes. At present, it takes fifteen years to build an SSBN, ten for an attack submarine and seven for a frigate. This calls for perseverance and determination if we are to maintain our superiority in the future, despite the technological, industrial, human, and societal upheavals that are bound to occur. At the same time, we need to adapt as quickly as possible in the face of accelerating disorder. This is the purpose of the “war economy” called for by the President of the Republic and launched by the Minister of the Armed Forces. Finally, I’d like to emphasise that we have a remarkable industrial base. Alongside the armed forces and the DGA, our industry has succeeded in building technological flagships of which we can be collectively proud. This is the case, for example, with the Duguay-Trouin, our newest attack submarine that I commissioned into active service in April, and which is more powerful, more efficient, and more versatile than its predecessors.
The nuclear deterrent offers other emblematic examples. In France, we have the ability to manage large-scale programs, from the first sketches to operational commissioning, using our own resources and decision-making channels. The firing of the M51.3 missile last November, from the Biscarrosse test centre, is the most striking example of this. It is proof of the alignment of a strong political will with remarkable industrial capabilities. It also demonstrates the quality of the dialogue between DGA engineers, manufacturers, and the military on these major programs.
P. I. — Who are your main partners today?
N. V. — First of all, of course, there’s the United States, the United Kingdom, and our NATO and European Union allies. We share a kind of de facto strategic intimacy, since our interests are so closely linked at sea. In the navy, NATO is like our second mother tongue, as the organisation’s procedures and standards are closely integrated into our know-how. This is what enables us to work on a daily basis with all Alliance navies. It’s also what led us to place the Naval Air Group and the Charles de Gaulle under NATO’s operational control last April.
But the French Navy also works on a broader front, and maintains numerous bilateral relationships around the world.
Partnerships with India and Brazil are just two examples of recent significant developments.
In Africa, our exchanges are intensifying in the Gulf of Guinea. Every year, for example, I take part in a symposium with my counterparts from across the region. It’s an excellent opportunity to build trust and work together on issues such as maritime safety and security, illegal fishing, and environmental safety.
Finally, we take part in numerous international forums, such as WPNS (Western Pacific Naval Symposium) and IONS (Indian Ocean Naval Symposium), which bring together the heads of navies in these areas. These are forums for military-to-military dialogue. This doesn’t mean that we agree on everything, or that there are no political differences, but our duty is to maintain an open channel to avoid misunderstandings that could potentially result in escalation.
P. I. — What are the characteristics of partnerships?
N. V. — We need to understand what we mean by interoperability, i.e. the ability to work and fight together, the aim being to achieve what our British friends call “plug and fight”.
Interoperability is the result of a combination of three conditions: the connectivity of equipment, which must be able to talk to each other; shared, operationally tested procedures and know- how; and, last but not least, trust. Without trust, connectivity and know-how quickly lose their usefulness. When I commanded the Chevalier Paul, I was in charge of protecting an American aircraft carrier. We were alone in this mission. This type of action cannot take place without a deep bond of trust, patiently established and nurtured.
This trust cannot be decreed: it has to be built. In this respect, the Carrier Vessel Battle Group formed around the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier is a formidable tool for aggregating our partners. Not one deployment goes by without an allied frigate or aircraft being integrated into the group. In terms of the criteria I have just mentioned, we gain considerable mutual benefit in terms of interoperability.
P. I. — In this context, how do you see the role of Chief of the Naval Staff (CNS)?
N. V. — In my opinion, there are two qualities that characterize the work of a Chief of the Naval Staff: being both an heir and a builder. An heir, first of all, because I’m benefiting from a passing of the baton: major projects were launched long before me. In this sense, the renewal of the navy is a continuous cycle. It’s up to me to understand them, to pursue them, and sometimes to amend them. This is what the Chief of the Naval Staff has been doing since the creation of the Navy in 1626.
I’m also a builder, because it’s my job to continue this effort, to launch new programs and new training courses, and to build the future of the navy. In the cycle of renewing the navy’s capabilities, the two structuring programs on the horizon are the new-generation aircraft carrier, which will replace the Charles de Gaulle, and the SNLE 3G (standing for third-generation nuclear ballistic missile submarine). These two types of vessel will join the fleet in around fifteen years’ time. They will sail until 2080, 2090, almost sixty years from now. This future is being decided today.
P. I. — Is the French Navy facing recruitment difficulties?
N. V. — At the start of the year, the Paris Naval Conference brought together the chiefs of the US, British, and Italian navies, as well as a representative of the Indian Navy. Our discussions revealed the extent to which human resources are a shared priority. The challenge for our navy is not just to recruit. The technical nature of the resources we deploy requires cutting-edge training, which is by its very nature lengthy and often non-existent in the civilian sector. You won’t find a submarine nuclear technician or a radar operator at the job centre. This puts the issue of retention at the heart of our concerns. It’s essential if we are to continue operating effectively at sea in the future.
If we look at recruitment, overall we’re achieving our annual targets. It’s a never-ending battle, but at this stage we’ve succeeded. Our ambition is to broaden as much as possible the range of young people we reach through our training programs. This starts just after the third year of secondary school, with the “École des Mousses”, and continues all the way through to the Naval Academy. In this field, we are obliged to innovate as is the case with the Nuclear Energy technicians course which has just opened its doors in Cherbourg.
For the first class, which has 15 places available, we received almost 140 applications. It’s one of the most selective courses of its kind! We are also going to re-create an Apprentice School in Toulon for the start of the 2025 academic year, to generate skills in the field of computer networks and electrical engineering, which are increasingly in demand for new-generation automated ships.
Last but not least, we need to enable our sailors to progress, encouraging them to move forward, undergo ongoing training and take on new responsibilities. In this area, the navy regularly reinvents itself to define attractive career paths by developing appropriate management tools.
P. I. — How can we explain the navy to our fellow citizens?
N. V. —At the end of last year, at the inauguration of the Musée de la Marine, the French President said: “The sea is what the French have in front of them when they think about their future.”
The challenges of the open sea are often overlooked because they are not very visible. But globalization, which governs the functioning of our economy, is above all a process of maritimization. The vast majority of our processed consumer goods have at some point passed through a container. Almost 99% of our information flows pass through underwater cables laid on the seabed. Examples abound, and we could cite them ad infinitum to illustrate our heavy dependence on the sea. The French Navy is at the forefront of protecting these interests.
I believe that the majority of our fellow citizens are aware of what is at stake, and of the need to preserve the security that lies at the heart of the French Navy’s missions. However, what happens offshore is far away and therefore hidden. It’s up to us to explain what happens on the high seas.