>> welcome live from paris. the diplomatic fallout continues from australia's move to scrap a defense deal with france. the french foreign affairs minister recalling the ambassadors of australia and the united states. the tragic mistake. the united states admits it targeted the wrong man in a drone strike that killed 10 afghan civilians in kabul last month. another blow for russia's opposition as voting gets underway in parliamentary polls. apple taking down a strategic

voting app after pressure from the kremlin. the diplomatic fallout continues from australia's decision to ditch a 31 billion euro deal to buy french submarines in favor of american ones. france's foreign minister has recalled the ambassadors for consultations. he said given the seriousness of the event, president ma ron made the request. australia is teaming up with the united states and united kingdom in a new defense pact that would see cam barra get a fleet. the french foreign minister

added that the decision would cast a lasting pall over relations with europe. >> this is a very important issue, serious issue with australia, of course, because here is a bridge breach of , seriously. and then there are broader questions about the position of the u.k., global world, what is global britain about. i think we see through this partnership, this strategic alliance and after the kabul crisis, he seems to be more about being a u.s. trading partner than working with allies julia: the french ship builder is disappointed by australia's decision to scrap the deal. tension had been mounting over cost blowouts and delays. the company insists it's delivered on all commitments.

it's now assessing how much australia will have to pay the unilattary ending the contract. >> the biggest defense contract in australian history goes under. >> we will not be continuing with the attack class submarine program and advise the group and the government of that decision. reporter: cam barra unilaterally ended the deal, instead using technology provided by united states and britain. the deal was designed to replace australia's two-decade-old class of submarines. >> first pillar of a construct.

reporter: the project has been plagued by potential delays, cost blowouts and disputes over local industry involvement. initially estimated at 50 billion australian dollars, the figure had risen to close to 90 billion. the french ship builder committed to spend at least 60% of the contract value within australia to create hundreds of jobs. in a statement, the company said it was assessing the consequences of the move. according to a leaked detaid contract signed two years ago. naval would receive 90 million if it completed the basically design and 250 million euros if the completed design was delivered. the first construct was not expected to be delivered until the 20 30's. julia: let's speak with our

guest. this does not feel like an ordinary diplomatic spat. can you give us an idea of how serious this row is becoming? >> it's not just a usual diplomatic spat because there is much more than a contract involved. when the french minister said this is a breach of trust, it clearly indicates that what's at stake is the building of a partnership which was going to be lasting, opening oortunity for development and so on. and building the security architecture in the pacific. all of that has been broken without any por announcement, without even the usual matters used in that kind of case. this is not the first time a contract has been broken. it is usually through an agreement between the parties

with notice. there is also involvement of the u.k. just on the very day that the e.u. strategy was being announced so there is more than just a contrt about it. there is a whole economy of the relationship which is being questioned right now in paris. so this is likelyo end -- this is not just about the submarines. julia: can you give us more detail about what the foreign policy implications are? guest: the french mintry of affairs and diplomacy would like to know what the u.s. position is about. u.s. is a country which has been asking for a long time for the europeans to be more involved. then when that is happening at this very moment, the u.s. clearly showed they had no interest in the implications of.

and the europeans decides to go along with the one country tha exited and said no to the e.u. we have to understand what the policy is about in the region. this is clearly a security partnership which is not itself a bad thing but indicates the approach seems to be purely military at the same time. france has built this partnership with australia which had ten a long time and it was very slowly political partnership which went far beyond commercial issues and suddenly seems to be in existence so there is a lot of clarification to be done on the side of the initiator of the paris will wait for beforewhat interesting is involved politically. julia: all these countries have

a common antagonist, china, in the indo-pacific region and beyond. do you think there is a way out, a resolution among these countries in the future? guest: clearly, the fact that this is about china doesn't exain the y it's bei done because i don't think that anybody else has anythg else about china in mind so this is clearly not the issue. the way it's going to be resolved, let's s how the countries are. they initiated the move. that's probably what paris is trying to understd now and get explanation as to the next step. don't expect paris to give you right w the way out of the crisis when first of all it did not initiate a crisis and second, there are no real indication as to what the australian country will do next. we are at the beginning of a crisis which will probably last

and probably leave traces in the relationship. let's wait until it develops and see how it develops. it is too early to tell anything about future developments. julia: what kind of message do you think the united states, u.k. and australia are trying to send to their european partners by doing this? guest: i'm not sure they're all trying to send the same message. boris johnson it clearly to say, look, this is a global -- is at the core of it. we don't know what it's about. the last talk, the corporation with the europeans and those talks with the corporation announced nothing right now and you've seen the reaction of all the european leadership yesterday and today. this is just a continuation of that. as i indicated earlier, we don't

actually know what the u.s. policy in the region will be about. not so long ago this was about not forcing anybody to choose between the u.s. and china. this was at the same time a demand for europeans to be part of the whole process and this event seems to have managed to have scrubbed. for the australians, we don't know where they fell on all this. there was the rationale in the buildup of the relationship with the french in which the deal was essentially an outcome, not the end itself. it now aears i is for the australians to decide wha they want to do next. now, we all see that the next deal is going to give -- is going to have a country which

doesn't even have a civil nuclear industry to run a nuclear powered fleet of submarines which is unknown so let's see how it is going. or do we see the u.s. and eventually the u.k. will run this for them from the australian territory and wha does that mean for the entire economy of the region? we're just at the beginning of the development. don't expect me to give you the end game of all thi julia: we're just at the beginning, and be keeping tabs on this ongoing situation. thank you so much for that, frederic, speaking to us from the european council of foreign relations. the united states has apologized for a drone strike in afghanistan last month that killed 10 people. it was revealed only civilians

were killed in the attack in kabul,ot an islamic state extremist as it was first believed. the attack took place in the final stages of the u.s.' chaotic withdrawal of the country. general mckenzie spoke earlier. >> in thorough review of the findings of the investigation, i'm convinced that as many as 10 civilians including up to seven children were were tragicalld in that strike and it is unlikely that those who died were associated with isis or a threat. i offer my profound condonss to the family and friends of those killed. julia: our correspondent is standing by in washington. tell us more about this announcement from the general today.

reporter: general mckinsey s confirm what we have been seeing in u.s. media, talking about the fact that this mightot have been a righteous strike, as initially presented by the u.s. military. and general mckenzie called it a he said the u.s. was taking responsibility for what they did, that this was really simply mistake and he went to great lengthto show how much that was a mistake and that this was not, as he called it, a rushed strike. the mistake did not come from not taking enough time and not doing their work but simply that this is what happens with intelligence. he presented to the press basically the whole day's worth of following that car through the streets of kabul, showing how they had followed every single stop of that c, who got

in, who got out of the car, until that final strike which killed 10 civilians and he said that there was reasonable certainty that this could be at least one person who was working with isis k but he said that reasonable certainty in the military does not mean 100% certainty and in this case the intelligence was simply wrong and they made a mistake. he also answered a fewoncrete questions as to what happened. therwas initily in the reporting and the explanation from the u.s. military, that the secoary explion that was seen was due to explosive devices in that car which would have confirmed that it was actually aerror thrt. he says, now, that this was most likely caused by the ignitio of

gas from a propane tank located near the car. there was no explosive in the car. he was adamant that all the intelligence they gathered was intelligence gathered by the united states and its allies a no intelligence coming from the taliban. he simply said that the situation, the context, was one of an urgent and iinent threat to u.s. forces and that is why they decided to take action even though this was eventually a mistake. this is not the end of this investigation, though there was a statement by the secretary of defense, lloyd austin, saying there was going to be a review of the investigation and of all the decisions that led to that strike. basically the americans are saying that we admitted there was a mistake but now we need to makeure why it happened and make sure it doesn't happen again so going through all the procedures and the decision

making that led to that strike. julia: thank you so much for that update from washington, d.c. as russians cast ballots in three days of parliamentary polls, the opposition has been dealt another blow. apple and google have caved in to pressure from the russian government, removing a smartphone app that tells voters how to vote out pro-kremlin candidates. the parliamentary polls are seen as an important part of president putin's efforts to cement his grip on power ahead of the election. reporter: there's already not much opposition left to vote for in russia. now supporters of jailed opposition leader navalny say google and apple are helping vladir putin's united russia party stay in power. on friday, a smart voting app created by navalny's allies was removed from apple and google

stores. it advised users on which candidates could potentially unseat the ruling party. russian authorities threatened to fine the two companies, saying the app is illegal. reporter: navalny remains in prison and off the ballot. without him, the opposition movement has suffered. other opposition figures have been arrested or removed from electoral lists. reporter: 14 parties are participating in the election but many anti-putin candidates were blocked, including all of navalny's allies. this will also be the first time

since 1993 that european election observers would not be on the ground due to covid limitations imposed by russia. julia: let's speak to a professor at columbia university who teaches post-so soviet politics. why are the elections important and what should we look for? guest: the elections are important not so much because parliament makes big decisions in russia, by and large they do not. but the elections serve as an opportunity for russians to register their views of the government in a way that is more meaningful than a public opinion poll and the kremlin has had to go to such eorts to tilt the playing field in favor of united russian indicates a diminished

standing for president putin. if in past elections, the kremlin could generate support for united russia by pointing to high economic growth or the annexation of crimea, and those achievements are far in the past so the kremlin is going to the polls with a weaker hand than it's had in the past. anchor: we know president putin has sidelined many of his opponents and his party is essentially running unopposed. what is his strategy going forward? he is expected to cruise to victory this weekend. guest: yes, there not a dou that united russia will cruise to victory. the question is whether or not the kremlin has to rely on tactics such as removing these smartphone apps that encourage voters to concentrate the votes on opposition candidates,

a strategic voting that's common in elections that was fairly successful in municipal elections in moscow in 2019 and st. petersburg that same year. we have to ask ourselves, if the kremlin is so popular and putin's position so strong, why do they havto go to such extreme measures in ordero drag united russia to a majority or perhaps two-thirds majority? anchor: let's talk about russia's opposition. most of navalny's allies are in jail or out of the race altogether. their position seems to be increasingly untenable in russia. what do they have to look forward to? guest: that's true. in the last year, the kremlin has turned to political coercion d restriction of political activity on a scale we haven't seen in the past. so the outlook for the so-called

non-systemic opposition in russia looks very bleak at the moment. in part that we have to recognize that the increased use of repression often begets more repression but that repression doesn't resolve the fundamental problems that generate opposition to the government in the first place. it doesn't increase economic growth. it doesn't increase trust in government. it doesn't reduce high levels of perceived corruption so it's hard to see that just uprooting the opposition really solves russia's problems and putin's problems, even, for the longer term. anchor: and president putin, of course, will be up for re-election in 2024. if you had to make some predictions on how russia, what russia will look like between now and then, do you think he has a strong chance of winning and staying i power for the foreseeable future? guest: we don't know whether president putin will run. putin himself may not know whether he will run. much will depend on the

conditions under which the elections take place but given the incredible political control that putin has achieved, it's hard to see any opposition candidate having a serious chance against him in 2024, if current trends continue. julia: thank you so much for your time on "france 24". it's time now for a look at the top business news and joining me now is brian quinn. as the latest defense pact between the u.s., u.k. and australia raises tensions between the u.s., the west and china, beijing is responding with a move to strengthen its trade position. brian: china has submitted its application to join the comprehensive and aggressive agreement for trans-pacific partnership, a free trade agreement that covers 11 nations including australia,

13% of g.d.p. it was intended as a bulwark against beijing's growing economic power but china is looking to turn the tables. reporter: china hopes that by joining this key trade pact, it will ramp up its influence in global trade. beijing officially applied to join the agreement by writing a letter to new zealand's trade minister, the country that acts as the pact's administrative headquarters. >> china joining the ctppp will accelerate the asia pacific's regions economic integration and help with trade and investment after the coronavirus pandemic. reporter: the original trans-pacific partnership was supposed to challenge china's power in the region but in 2017 donald trump pulled the u.s. out of the deal.

mr. trump: great thing for the american worker. reporter: japan began the comprehensive and progressive agreement but to join the chinese government will need tone act domestic reforms to qualify for membership. it will have to scale back the subsidies given to state-owned businesses. 11 countries will have to condescend, including australia, canada, japan and new zealand. tensions with australia could be a stumbling block from the outset. china's application to join comes a day after australia signed a historic defense pact with the u.s. and u.k., countering beijing's growing military strength, a move some analysts say could risk drawing australia and china into deepening conflict. brian: checking on trading action. the european ind is losing ground friday as soft u.s. inflation data and lackluster

retail sales lead to fears of global slowdown. u.k. retail sales fell unexpectedly in august and cac in paris falling as renault preparing to cut jobs. wall street ending the day and the week in the red. with friday a big day for futures and options contract expirations. investors looking ahead to next week's federal reserve meeting for signs of tapering in the bond buying program. the dow down around .5% and s&p and nasdaq both down at the close. labor unions prepared to challenge official pns to reform employment benefits. the government released a decree to trim jobless payouts. reforms would see benefits for over 1.1 million people reduced by around 17%. the country's labor minister

says hiring difficulties faced by french employers prove more needs to be done to nudge french workers into full-time jobs. unions say they're not going to let the government strong-arm them. >> the gernment has lost twice in the courts andeeps on going. it's clear ty're in the wrong. this reform is unpopular. no one wants it besides bosses and they're pushing it through. brian: finally for business by now, we know bitcoin is an energy hog, counting for more energy consumption than many small countries. a new study shows each bitcoin transaction likely generates as much electronic waste as throwing two iphones into the trash, because bitcoin mining churn through massive equations,

demanding software that must be constantly upgraded. researchers say the network generates around 31,000 metric tons of e-waste annually. if i had known that, i could have made money from throwing iphones into the trash. julia: it's worth having a think about before investing. thank you very much. we'll take a short break.

>> armenians are working to protect their borders. don't miss this edition of "reporters" on armachinian's borders on "france 24" and france24.com. ■@ñ@ñ@ñ

09/17/21 09/17/21 [captioning made possible by democracy now!] amy: from new york, this is democracy now! >> i don't one another young gymnast, olympic athlete, or any individual t experience the horror that i and hundreds of others have endured before, during, and continuing to this day. amy: simone biles another top gymnast blast the fbi for failing to stop the biggest sexual abuse scandal in sports hist