Fifth August Kremlin administration issued a message saying that the negotiations on the Mistral ended successfully . But the Kremlin seems to be well- heated for money.
The Mistral contract terminated, France Russia returns the money paid from the ships set off there Russian equipment, after which France acquires the right to dispose of the ships in its sole discretion. (Just note parenthetically that in reality France disposes of the Mistral in its discretion has long – since September of last year, not particularly looking at the view of the Kremlin on this part. Their rights France knows and so).
Further, Interfax and Kommersant reported, citing "informed sources in the Kremlin" that the talks were held in a businesslike and friendly atmosphere, and monetary compensation France – already paid. And thus, "a question Mistral fully settled". Moreover, informed sources said that the payments by Mistral passed in conditions of strict secrecy and so rapidly – because of fears that they may seize upon the request of the lawyers of Yukos.
Well, it should be noted that informed sources in the Kremlin we have repeatedly told us stories on the Mistral – then calling the exact date of the transfer vehicle (14 November), revealing a secret the amount of the claim to $ 3 billion of penalties (already prepared by the Russian lawyers). Furthermore, it was surprising (to put it mildly) a statement about our past secret-supersonic paying money to bypass the French Parliament? and contrary to the decision of its own Supreme Court (Yukos) ?
But then, two weeks ago, I decided that one of bewilderment enough for the post. Well, now that I have accurate information in reliable sources is another matter :)
Before dealing with the facts – some legal and economic foundations. Fear not, there will be really little, I had only one course – "Introduction to Macroeconomics" (though I passed on his "A+"). So:
In contracts of this caliber, as the construction of a large ship, payment is always upfront and in stages. That is, work on the next phase of construction begins only after received full payment for this phase.
Termination of contract by mutual consent does not provide for any compensation of damages from the word never. Because in the civilized world, the amount of compensation you can define talkoo the court – these are the laws. If it is the "only" try to bypass – the bypass is a criminal and becomes the object of the corruption rassledovanie.
Termination of contract by mutual consent provides for the mandatory and full refund of all advance payments for the goods and/or services that were not delivered to the customer. And more – nothing.
The first conclusion that follows – voiced claims of the Russian side to return amounts in excess of the total amount of the Russian payments were unrealistic from the beginning. Want to recoup their losses – go to court. Strictly speaking, using in this case the term "compensation" is generally incorrect. Because there is an impression that it is "damages", and this speech is not and can not be (except in court). Here we are talking only about "payment refund", "refund".
Second, the refund Amount will be less than the total amount paid, and here's why: the money that has been paid for the goods and services received by the Russia – they are non-refundable. Examples:
Under the contract Russia was transferred to computer technology krupnoserriynoe build ship hulls (it will be at the St. Petersburg shipyard produced the aft Mistral). The product (technology) provided to the customer – the money is non-refundable.
As part of the contract was held aft towing parts from Russia to France. The service provided to the customer – the money is non-refundable.
In the framework of the contract were trained Russian crews. The service provided to the customer – the money is non-refundable (Training of crews, in my opinion, was not completed. If so, a portion of the money for education will return).
These are only examples, and these points can be more.
That's the whole economy – as promised, a little (in 300 words missed :)
Now another note, just short of legal. The bottom line is that the termination of this contract, the French side is a legitimate fully and unconditionally. Why?
I already писал об этом this early last September to explain that no penalties and no fines will be (many then I believe :).
So – what's the matter here?
France is a NATO member, and NATO Charter prohibits members of the Alliance to sell weapons to countries that have the status of "unfriendly countries" against the Alliance. Another paragraph of the same Octavarium Alliance members not to sell weapons to countries that have the status of "malicious violators of the peace principles of the UN". So – although I have not seen the text of the contract on Mistral – I know that there is bound to have paragraphs ("a provisional clause"), which strictly determine the effect of contract – observance of these conditions.
The Assembly recognized the annexation of Crimea is an act of aggression, while Russia is a violator of the principles of the United Nations in March 2014. In September 2014 the NATO Summit has assigned Russia the status of an "unfriendly country." After that France had every reason (and in fact was required) contract freeze/terminate.
Well, now, finally – FACTS and FIGURES (all amounts are in Euro).
----------------------------------
*** Original contract amount = € 1.2 Bln (known only approximately, the exact amount was never officially called).
*** The amount paid Russia = €892.9 million – according to Defense News so much has made advance payments of Russia, not including fees of the crews.
It is worth noting that earlier in the press called it (€780 – 790 million), but the BBC was much closer to the truth (“about €840 million“)
*** Russia claimed payment = €1.163 billion (Kommersant reported back in may, and this is confirmed in Defense News)
*** However, France has offered to return much less = €784.6 million, i.e., approximately 2/3 of what Russia wants.
It was as if the terms of puzzles, the questions now.
Question # 1: what amount was agreed between the presidents in "business friendly environment"?
Question No. 2: - was there a payoff?
The first question, the direct answer is no – not in the Коммюнике Елисейского Дворца of the Elysee Palace and the Kremlin пресс-релизе.
However, Rossi (with informed sources) quickly became known as the sum – one steeper than the other – and €1.2 billion and €1.5 billion, then even €2 billion, and a record was €2.4 billion (sorry, I will not link to give, and so they all know RT, Lifenews, etc.). And as in the discussion of "enormous damage to France" is included and some French Newspapers – that was followed by the official response to President Hollande, and then from the Minister of Finance Sapana –
payment of French Mistral will amount to less than one billion euros.
The exact amount neither't call for a simple reason – the amount of payment should be verified by the Cabinet of Ministers and then the ratification by the Parliament. Here is the answer to the second question – there is no payment yet, because France is a parliamentary Republic. The President is there, gives interview, poses autographs and posing for photos with other presidents on the background of the Elysee Palace. And money is being managed by the Parliament, and – slowly.
And with the speed of sound (and beyond) – only fly the ducks and the sources of Kommersant and Interfax.
Oh, by the way, is called and the approximate date of the ratification by Parliament of the sums return for the Mistral will be held in September.
And only then will the last episode of this series: as soon as the Parliament legally determine the amount of the repayment is lawyers of Yukos appears the opportunity to apply for a writ of execution for seizure. Since the Supreme Court of France has already been made on this account the correct decision.
Russia in this process to can not interfere, and we – we can stock up on popcorn, sunflower seeds and candy.
Well, that, and, of course, we can play the guessing game – who will be sold Mistral.
By the way, it will not be easy – there is a list of buyers already quite long.
And last, that two times not to rise – about another bike "informed sources". That, they say, the contents of unsold Mistral France costs (i.e., taxpayers) to €5 million on a monthly basis (though at first it was 5 million a week – but then the sources of the "reduced" price :).
So here is another supersonic duck, and denied опроверг её Hervé Guillou , CEO of DCNS:
the content of the Mistral is not French taxpayers a dime. Pays STX, and much more modest amount: 400 000 euros в месяц.
And it's not so much the content/storage and preparation of ships for sale, preparation of background materials and presentations, booklets, etc.
Instead of an epilogue:
It Olesia Fediv, a member of the informal movement NoMistralForPutin - there, on this link, much more interesting.
I just liked this photo, and comment to it – “Haruna!”
