Foreign Experts Comment On AUKUS Trilateral Partnership – Analysis

Australian submarine HMAS Rankin. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman James R. Evans

 October 11, 2021 

By Penza News

The creation of AUKUS – a new security partnership between Australia, Great Britain and the United States, which led to the breakdown of the defense contract between Canberra and Paris for the supply of 12 Barracuda-class attack submarines totaling more than 50 billion euros, received mixed assessments.

As part of the agreement, Australia plans to build at least 8 nuclear submarines using American technology, as well as re-equip its armed forces with American cruise missiles. In Paris, Australia’s decision was called a “stab in the back” and betraying.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian noted that the start of trilateral cooperation on nuclear submarines “gravely undermines regional peace and stability, aggravates arms race and impairs international nuclear non-proliferation efforts.”

According to Christoph Heusgen, a former German ambassador to the UN, the emergence of the new alliance has led to a “big loss of trust” in the Biden administration.

Meanwhile, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida expressed his approval for AUKUS, while Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said that Russia has raised a number of questions with the United States in connection with the creation of the alliance and will also present them to colleagues from Australia and Great Britain.

Earlier, Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne stated that the AUKUS partnership was created for the exchange of technology and is not a military or security alliance.

Analyzing the creation of AUKUS and its prospects, independent researcher Murray Hunter pointed out that the factual information provided on the new partnership is not yet sufficient to draw clear conclusions.

“At this stage there is very little detail about the actualities of AUKUS. The Australian subs will take a decade to go online into service. […] Australia today has little ability to militarily project itself, except for some naval ships more in Aux roles. […] I see AUKUS more as a regeneration of the ANZUS agreement with the UK taking New Zealand’s place,” the expert said.

According to him, on paper today, the AUKUS alliance makes no strategic difference in the Indo-Pacific – the only tangible issue so far is the intention of Washington and London to transfer nuclear submarines to Australia on a long-term lease and to give to Australia technology for their construction.

At the same time, the prospects for the development of cooperation, in his opinion, remain unpredictable.

“It will completely depend upon the next US presidency. Nothing can happen much in the next few years, except for some exercises. […] However, AUKUS will not replace any defense policy. It’s not a policy, just some undefined intentions,” the analyst said.

He added that there are some adverse effects – other than France – coming out.

“Singapore is not enthusiastic to the idea, but accepting it, Malaysia is critical that it may promote an arms race in the region. Indonesia is the most critical – it reminded Australia to observe treaties,” Murray Hunter said, stressing that the South East Asian response hasn’t been positive for Canberra.

In turn, Clive Williams, Visiting Fellow at the ANU’s Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, expressed the opinion that AUKUS is intended to contain China’s growing military capability.

“The AUKUS agreement covers cooperation on artificial intelligence, cyber warfare, underwater capabilities, and long-range strike capabilities. It will also include assistance with establishing nuclear support facilities, probably to be located near Adelaide in South Australia. AUKUS will focus on military capabilities, differentiating it from the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing alliance that includes New Zealand and Canada,” the expert said.

“Under the AUKUS agreement, the US and UK agree to help Australia to develop and deploy nuclear-powered submarines as Australia’s major contribution to the AUKUS military presence in the Indo-Pacific region. Australian submarines will not be equipped with nuclear weapons but will probably instead carry Tomahawk Cruise Missiles with conventional warheads,” Clive Williams added.

According to him, the deal represents a long-term security arrangement between the three countries.

“Australia is expected to acquire at least eight nuclear-powered submarines. Over the next 18 months, Australia, the UK, and the US will be planning the way forward, with expected delivery of the first submarine in the 2040s. In the meantime, Australia is looking at a leasing arrangement to familiarise the Royal Australian Navy with operating nuclear-powered submarines,” the analyst said.

From his point of view, the development prospects of AUKUS will depend largely on China’s actions.

“The AUKUS security partnership should ensure that the US, UK, and Australia are the dominant military actors in the Indo-Pacific during this century,” Clive Williams stressed.

Meanwhile, Grant Newsham, retired US Marine Colonel, said that the AUKUS deal is good from both a military operational and a political standpoint.

“The sharing of nuclear submarine technology with Australia is a big deal and a clear sign of commitment. But now the Americans and the British and the Australians need to make something happen – and fast. Get a sub or two to Australia quickly – the Americans have some spares available — and get the training and infrastructure going. Don’t wait ten years. It is needed now,” the expert said.

He also stressed that AUKUS is not just a submarine deal.

“It calls for cooperation in a range of areas including AI, advance technologies, and even missile systems. So there are plenty of other areas for cooperation beyond AUKUS’s ‘nuclear submarine’ part that gets most of the attention,” Grant Newsham explained.

“As for the French, they had to know the sub deal was on thin ice. The deal had become the equivalent of a mafia gang squeezing huge amounts of money out of somebody unwise enough to sign a legitimate seeming ‘deal’ with them. […] That said, this should have been handled better diplomatically,” the expert said stressing that the Biden administration showed its unprofessionalism in this situation.

In his opinion, the US will need extra effort to convince its partners of its own serious intentions for cooperation, since “AUKUS will not be enough by itself.”

“How serious is the US when Wall Street, Boeing, Apple, et al are pouring billions into the PRC and begging the administration not to anger the Chinese Communists? Letting that Huawei lady Meng Wanzhou go scot-free [her release was the result of a deal struck after lengthy negotiations between Chinese and American diplomats] will undercut AUKUS more than one imagines. All the Chinese have to do is scream, threaten, and pound the table, and the Americans will often back down, it seems,” the ex-diplomat said.

Meanwhile, Anthony Glees, The University of Buckingham, said that, according to British Prime Minister, nuclear powered submarines will allow Australia to “keep silent watch,” “observe,” undetected, Chinese movements in the Indo-Pacific region.

“It will have been negotiated with the US and Australia over many months, perhaps since Dec 2019, even before and, of course, this was done in secret and behind the backs of France, even though France had a contract to build diesel submarines with Australia, and unlike the UK, France is, genuinely in territorial terms, an Asia-Pacific power and has always been a close strategic partner of the UK, perhaps closer at times even than the US,” the expert said.

From his point of view, the exclusion of France was a major strategic error by the UK and by the US president Joseph Biden who seems not to have focused on the implications of deceiving France.

At the same time, Anthony Glees reminded that the UK’s national security adviser, Sir Stephen Lovegrove said AUKUS was “the most significant capability collaboration anywhere in the world in the past decade,” which means it is really a big deal that might be much more than just an 18 month collaboration.

“It seems to me [British Prime Minister Boris] Johnson really does intend this to be a big project, to begin to re-establish the UK as a global, rather than a European power,” the expert added.

He also did not rule out that the agreement may contain clauses that have not yet been announced publicly.

“It is possible that Australia will agree to build a harbour for the UK’s nuclear submarine fleet, or even that Australia might have some kind of access to UK nuclear weapons, which is hard to achieve without breaking the Nuclear Arms Limitations Treaties,” Anthony Glees said.

Source: https://penzanews.ru/en/analysis/67275-2021

AUKUS adds ambiguity to the Australia–New Zealand alliance
11 Oct 2021|

Soli Middleby, Anna Powles and Joanne Wallis

The Australian government often describes Australia and New Zealand as ‘natural allies’. But Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s announcement of the AUKUS security partnership with the United States and the United Kingdom on 16 September—which he described as ‘a forever partnership for a new time between the oldest and most trusted of friends’—raises questions about the changing dynamics of Australia’s natural alliance.

Morrison called AUKUS ‘the single greatest initiative … since the ANZUS alliance itself’ for achieving the ‘stability and security of our region’. It is perhaps no coincidence that the announcement was made only weeks after the 70th anniversary of the 1951 ANZUS Treaty. On that occasion, Morrison said ANZUS was ‘the foundation stone of Australia’s national security and a key pillar for peace and stability in our Indo-Pacific region’.

But AUKUS doesn’t include New Zealand, which remains a treaty ally of Australia under ANZUS (the US having rescinded its security guarantee to New Zealand in 1986 after a dispute about nuclear vessels visiting New Zealand).

The new trilateral agreement will deepen defence and security integration between Australia, the US and the UK, strategically aligning Australia even more closely with the US. This will have consequences for Australia’s relationship with its only other formal treaty ally, New Zealand.

Much attention has focused on the fact that nuclear-powered vessels are banned from New Zealand waters. And Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has confirmed that any nuclear-powered submarines Australia acquires under AUKUS will not be allowed into New Zealand’s territorial waters. When discussing the partnership, the head of Australia’s Defence Department, Greg Moriarty, said that Canberra is ‘conscious of and respectful towards New Zealand’s approach to nuclear-armed vessels’. Even so, for Australia’s natural ally not to permit the submarines, which (if or when they eventuate) will form a major part of Australia’s defence capability, into its territorial waters may create later tensions.

Ardern has clarified that, while New Zealand wasn’t invited to join the partnership, she wouldn’t have expected to be asked. Notably, she was the first world leader Morrison informed before the announcement, although not before the decision. The lack of communication has generated frustration in New Zealand, with opposition leader Judith Collins expressing her disappointment that New Zealand wasn’t involved in the discussions.

Ardern has taken a more neutral approach, making clear that New Zealand ‘welcomes the increased engagement of the UK and US in the region’ and reiterating that ‘our collective objective needs to be the delivery of peace and stability and the preservation of the international rules based system’. She also insisted that AUKUS ‘in no way changes our security and intelligence ties’ with Australia, the US and the UK.

But AUKUS does underscore two emerging dynamics in the trans-Tasman alliance. The first is that, after several decades trying to articulate its role in Asia and the Pacific, Australia has made explicit its identification with the ‘Anglosphere’. In contrast, while an ‘original’ Anglosphere member, New Zealand now presents itself as ‘first and foremost a nation of the Pacific’ that ‘views foreign policy developments through the lens of what is in the best interest of the region’.

This divergence reflects a growing degree of ambiguity between the two allies about whether they’re part of the Pacific islands region. Although Canberra likely hopes that Wellington will help smooth over concerns about AUKUS with Pacific island nations, it’s unclear how long New Zealand will be willing to act as Australia’s ‘good cop’ in the region.

The second issue is that the defence alliance between Australia and New Zealand, considered the closest in our region, is already changing in practical ways. New Zealand already struggles to maintain interoperability with Australia’s defence capabilities. AUKUS, which seeks to deepen interoperability across many areas of defence and security technology, including artificial intelligence, cyber, quantum, underwater systems and long-range strike capabilities, may widen the gap with New Zealand even further.

Wellington may also find that Canberra’s expectations of what burdens its junior alliance partner will share, in a material as well as a soft-power sense, may actually increase if New Zealand is to demonstrate its contribution to the alliance. As concerns about China’s rise and influence in the Indo-Pacific rise and Washington prioritises renewing and strengthening its alliances, the demands that AUKUS places on Australia could also shrink the bureaucratic bandwidth that Canberra can grant to Wellington.

These dynamics raise questions about the future of the Australia–New Zealand alliance, including the sustainability of New Zealand’s perceived free-riding on Australian defence spending and the two states’ roles in their immediate region, the Pacific islands. The allies have overcome major shocks before—such as the collapse of ANZUS between the US and New Zealand—but as strategic competition gains pace in the Indo-Pacific the presumed naturalness of their alliance is likely to be tested.

AUTHORS
Soli Middleby is a PhD candidate in the Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of Adelaide and a former Australian diplomat to the Pacific. 

Anna Powles is a senior lecturer in security studies at the Centre for Defence and Security Studies at Massey University. 

Joanne Wallis is a professor of international security in the Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of Adelaide. 

Image: Phil Walter/Getty Images.

How Much Will AUKUS Change Australia?

October 10, 2021
Zack Cooper
Senior Fellow at American Enterprise Institute

Royal Australian Navy submarine HMAS Sheean arrives for a logistics port visit in Hobart, Australia. The United States, the United Kingdom and Australia have announced a new strategic defense partnership to build a class of nuclear-propelled submarines and work together in the Indo-Pacific region.
Photo: LSIS Leo Baumgartner/Australian Defence Force, Getty Images

The recent submarine deal between Australia, the U.K. and the United States, known as AUKUS, is likely to initiate a profound shift in Australia’s defense posture. To better understand the commercial implications and how it might change Australia’s relationship with China, BRINK spoke to Zack Cooper, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, who has been following it closely.

COOPER: The United States is shifting its strategic attention to Asia. And that means that it’s shifting attention to Australia at the same time. Australia has always been a critical ally of the United States, so I think of this deal more as using a strong existing alliance more closely, rather than necessarily making Australia more important.
A Critical Ally

BRINK: Could Australia become a major base for U.S. forces and operations?

COOPER: Yes, this is something that some of us have talked about for a long time, but it has been very slow in coming together.

The strategic logic of U.S. forces being able to deploy more frequently to Australia is very clear. Australia is largely outside the threat ring from China, and yet, it’s still in the region and has access to parts of the Indian Ocean and the Pacific Ocean, which is otherwise hard for the United States to get to quickly.

This is not the end of U.S./Australia cooperation on defense technology. This is more like the beginning.

So there is clear logic for the United States to have a robust air and naval presence in Australia. The part of this deal that has received less attention than it should have is the U.S. being able to base aircraft in Northern Australia, and potentially for U.S. ships and submarines to be either based or rotate through places like Perth. That, in my mind, is even more important than the submarine aspects of this deal, particularly in the short term.

Some people think that this deal is really about Australia getting dragged into a conflict with China over Taiwan. That has never been my view. My view has been that this is a deal about Australia defending itself and making sure that it can watch the maritime chokepoints that lead to Australia.
The Australian Defense Industry Will Expand

BRINK: What will it mean for the Australian defense industry?

COOPER: I’m sure there will be some significant changes. It’s hard to know exactly what those will be right now because we don’t know all of the details of this deal. We don’t even know whether these are going to be American submarines, or British submarines or some combination. And we don’t know which parts of those submarines will be made in Australia and which parts will not.

It’s pretty clear that there is a desire on part of the Australian government to ensure that as much of this revenue as possible comes back to Australian shipbuilders. And so I think Australian companies will have a large portion of this work. But it does mean the Australians would be working much more closely with American contractors, especially as it comes to technologically challenging elements of the submarines.

We don’t know who’s going to be building the nuclear reactors, but I think it’s likely that a lot of that work will be done outside of Australia, and the other parts of the submarine are probably going to be developed and produced in Australia. So the bottom line is this opens up a lot of opportunities for Australian companies, and we’ll see at the end of this 18 month review period exactly what those look like.

This is not the end of U.S./Australia cooperation on defense technology. This is more like the beginning. I would expect cooperation on defense technology will go well beyond submarines as a result of this deal.
Australia/China Relations

BRINK: China has already imposed sanctions of varying kinds on Australia. Do you foresee that these will stiffen as a result of this?

COOPER: I think the Chinese pressure is going to continue and maybe even increase a little bit on the margins. But this is part of the problem that the government in Beijing has had — the more pressure they put on Australia, the less incentive Australia has to avoid the kinds of actions that China doesn’t want.

There are blowbacks in both countries. We don’t talk about this a lot. We focus a lot on the downsides in Australia to Chinese economic pressure. But if you read the headlines coming out of China, there’s an energy shortage, right? And part of the reason that there’s an energy shortage is that Australia is trying to decrease its exports of coal, for example, which is making it harder for China to come up with alternatives.

So yes, I think there will be an economic response. I don’t think we know exactly which sector it will come in yet, but I think this is something that Australia just has to assume is going to be continuing regardless.

But the Chinese have taken away one of their best levers to disincentivize this deal because they’ve been using economic coercion so actively for the last couple of years.

To put it more pointedly, I don’t think there would’ve been a deal if China hadn’t pushed this hard. Back in 2013, I proposed in a report that Australia would be wise to acquire nuclear-powered submarines. At the time, most of my friends in Australia sort of laughed at this idea — they thought it was ridiculous because they felt like it was politically untenable in Australia.

But the Chinese pressure over the last couple of years has made things that were politically impossible then political realities now, and frankly, Beijing has no one to blame other than themselves for that.


Zack Cooper is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and co-director of the Alliance for Securing Democracy. He previously served on staff at the Pentagon and White House, as well as at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. He is writing a book on the rise and fall of great militaries.

The US and UK’s Submarine Deal Crosses Nuclear Red Lines With Australia – OpEd

President Joe Biden, British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese at the AUKUS meeting in San Diego, March 13, 2023. Photo Credit: Chad J. McNeeley, DOD

 March 17, 2023  Eurasia Review  

By Prabir Purkayastha

The recent Australia, U.S., and UK $368 billion deal on buying nuclear submarines has been termed by Paul Keating, a former Australian prime minister, as the “worst deal in all history.” It commits Australia to buy conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarines that will be delivered in the early 2040s.

These will be based on new nuclear reactor designs yet to be developed by the UK. Meanwhile, starting from the 2030s, “pending approval from the U.S. Congress, the United States intends to sell Australia three Virginia class submarines, with the potential to sell up to two more if needed” (Trilateral Australia-UK-U.S. Partnership on Nuclear-Powered Submarines, March 13, 2023; emphasis mine). According to the details, it appears that this agreement commits Australia to buy from the U.S. eight new nuclear submarines, to be delivered from the 2040s through the end of the 2050s. If nuclear submarines were so crucial for Australia’s security, for which it broke its existing diesel-powered submarine deal with France, this agreement provides no credible answers.

For those who have been following the nuclear proliferation issues, the deal raises a different red flag. If submarine nuclear reactor technology and weapons-grade (highly enriched) uranium are shared with Australia, it is a breach of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to which Australia is a signatory as a non-nuclear power. Even the supplying of such nuclear reactors by the U.S. and the UK would constitute a breach of the NPT. This is even if such submarines do not carry nuclear but conventional weapons as stated in this agreement.

So why did Australia renege on its contract with France, which was to buy 12 diesel submarines from France at a cost of $67 billion, a small fraction of its gargantuan $368 billion deal with the U.S.? What does it gain, and what does the U.S. gain by annoying France, one of its close NATO allies?

To understand, we have to see how the U.S. looks at the geostrategy, and how the Five Eyes—the U.S., the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand—fit into this larger picture. Clearly, the U.S. believes that the core of the NATO alliance is the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada for the Atlantic and the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia for the Indo-Pacific. The rest of its allies, NATO allies in Europe and Japan and South Korea in East and South Asia, are around this Five Eyes core. That is why the United States was willing to offend France to broker a deal with Australia.

What does the U.S. get out of this deal? On the promise of eight nuclear submarines that will be given to Australia two to four decades down the line, the U.S. gets access to Australia to be used as a base for supporting its naval fleet, air force, and even U.S. soldiers. The words used by the White House are, “As early as 2027, the United Kingdom and the United States plan to establish a rotational presence of one UK Astute class submarine and up to four U.S. Virginia class submarines at HMAS Stirling near Perth, Western Australia.” The use of the phrase “rotational presence” is to provide Australia the fig leaf that it is not offering the U.S. a naval base, as that would violate Australia’s long-standing position of no foreign bases on its soil. Clearly, all the support structures required for such rotations are what a foreign military base has, therefore they will function as U.S. bases.

Who is the target of the AUKUS alliance? This is explicit in all the writing on the subject and what all the leaders of AUKUS have said: it is China. In other words, this is a containment of China policy with the South China Sea and the Taiwanese Strait as the key contested oceanic regions. Positioning U.S. naval ships including its nuclear submarines armed with nuclear weapons makes Australia a front-line state in the current U.S. plans for the containment of China. Additionally, it creates pressure on most Southeast Asian countries who would like to stay out of such a U.S. versus China contest being carried out in the South China Sea.

While the U.S. motivation to draft Australia as a front-line state against China is understandable, what is difficult to understand is Australia’s gain from such an alignment. China is not only the biggest importer of Australian goods, but also its biggest supplier. In other words, if Australia is worried about the safety of its trade through the South China Sea from Chinese attacks, the bulk of this trade is with China. So why would China be mad enough to attack its own trade with Australia? For the U.S. it makes eminent sense to get a whole continent, Australia, to host its forces much closer to China than 8,000-9,000 miles away in the U.S. Though it already has bases in Hawaii and Guam in the Pacific Ocean, Australia and Japan provide two anchor points, one to the north and one to the south in the eastern Pacific Ocean region. The game is an old-fashioned game of containment, the one that the U.S. played with its NATO, Central Treaty Organization (CENTO), and Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) military alliances after World War II.

The problem that the U.S. has today is that even countries like India, who have their issues with China, are not signing up with the U.S. in a military alliance. Particularly, as the U.S. is now in an economic war with a number of countries, not just Russia and China, such as Cuba, Iran, Venezuela, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and Somalia. While India was willing to join the Quad—the U.S., Australia, Japan, and India—and participate in military exercises, it backed off from the Quad becoming a military alliance. This explains the pressure on Australia to partner with the U.S. militarily, particularly in Southeast Asia.

It still fails to explain what is in it for Australia. Even the five Virginia class nuclear submarines that Australia may get second hand are subject to U.S. congressional approval. Those who follow U.S. politics know that the U.S. is currently treaty incapable; it has not ratified a single treaty on issues from global warming to the law of the seas in recent years. The other eight are a good 20-40 years away; who knows what the world would look like that far down the line.

Why, if naval security was its objective, did Australia choose an iffy nuclear submarine agreement with the U.S. over a sure-shot supply of French submarines? This is a question that Malcolm Turnbull and Paul Keating, the Australian Labor Party’s former PMs, asked. It makes sense only if we understand that Australia now sees itself as a cog in the U.S. wheel for this region. And it is a vision of U.S. naval power projection in the region that today Australia shares. The vision is that settler colonial and ex-colonial powers—the G7-AUKUS—should be the ones making the rules of the current international order. And behind the talk of international order is the mailed fist of the U.S., NATO, and AUKUS. This is what Australia’s nuclear submarine deal really means.

Prabir Purkayastha is the founding editor of Newsclick.in, a digital media platform. He is an activist for science and the free software movement.

This article was produced in partnership by Newsclick and Globetrotter.

Australian nuclear subs will be banned from New Zealand waters: Ardern


Issued on: 16/09/2021 - 

New Zealand's Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says Australian nuclear subs will be banned from New Zealand waters Mark Mitchell POOL/AFP/File

Wellington (AFP)

New Zealand will not lift a decades-long ban on nuclear-powered vessels entering its waters in the wake of key ally Australia's decision to develop a nuclear submarine fleet, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said Thursday.

Ardern said her Australian counterpart Scott Morrison had briefed her on Canberra's plan to develop nuclear-powered submarines with the help of the United States and Britain.

She described the deal as "primarily around technology and defence hardware", playing down implications for the so-called "Five Eyes" partnership of the United States, Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand.

"This arrangement in no way changes our security and intelligence ties with these three countries, as well as Canada," the New Zealand leader said in a statement.

But she also said New Zealand would maintain a ban on nuclear-powered vessels that dates back to 1985, meaning Wellington will not allow the prized naval asset being developed by Australia into its waters.

"New Zealand's position in relation to the prohibition of nuclear-powered vessels in our waters remains unchanged," Ardern said.

The ban was introduced in the wake of French nuclear testing in the Pacific and led to the US navy banning its warships from entering New Zealand ports for more than 30 years.

The destroyer USS Sampson visited in late 2016 but only after the then-prime minister John Key gave a special exemption, saying he was "100 percent confident" the vessel was not nuclear powered or carrying nuclear weapons.

Official US policy is to neither confirm nor deny whether its vessels are nuclear-capable.

© 2021 AFP

Australia enters uncharted waters with nuclear sub plan

Issued on: 16/09/2021 - 

Speaking at a virtual press conference with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson (left) and US President Jow Biden, (right) Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison (centre) announced his country was going nuclear 

Brendan SMIALOWSKI AFP


Sydney (AFP)

Australia's shock decision to acquire US nuclear-powered submarines and cruise missiles helps bind a faltering alliance with Washington, but risks severely worsening an already fractious relationship with China.

With no public debate and little warning, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison on Thursday announced Australia was going nuclear.

Not developing nuclear weapons, but building a fleet of at least eight state-of-the-art nuclear-powered submarines with American and British help.

In one swoop Morrison ripped up several local political taboos -- chiefly a long-standing ban on nuclear power and ingrained caution about stoking military tensions with China.

"Until very recently -- perhaps until 12 hours ago" the idea would have been "fringe" according to Sam Roggeveen of Sydney's Lowy Institute, describing the ground shift felt Down Under.

The deal -- jointly announced with President Joe Biden and British Prime Minister Boris Johnson -- gives Australia access to potent US military firepower refused even to close allies such as Israel.

It would allow Australia's military to travel, and strike targets, far from its coast.

Nuclear subs "are quieter, faster and have longer endurance, which will allow Australia to deploy its future submarines to Indo-Pacific locations for much longer periods of time", Ashley Townshend of the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney told AFP.

Australia had sketched plans to dramatically tool up its military in 2020 as threats from China mounted and trust in the United States alliance waned after Donald Trump's mercurial presidency.

The deal gives Australia access to potent US military firepower refused even to close allies 

Jonathan Sunderman

 US NAVY/AFP/File

This agreement would seem to bind Australia to the US and Britain for decades to come.

It "may be the first of many, including the deployment of US long-range strategic strike weapons, including missiles and stealth bombers, to Australia", said Michael Sullivan, an international relations expert at Flinders University.

"Eventually," he said, that could also mean "the redeployment of some US forces to Northern Australia from US bases on Okinawa and Guam, which are increasingly vulnerable to Chinese military attack".

- Playing with the big kids -

But that close embrace and Australia's new capability put a middleweight power at the centre of growing tensions between heavyweights Washington and Beijing.

Not everyone believes that is a wise move.

Former Australian prime minister Paul Keating was scathing, saying the decision would lock Australia into "any military engagement by the United States against China" and reverse decades of engagement with Asian neighbours.

Some "240 years after we departed from Britain, we are back there with Boris Johnson, trying to find our security in Asia through London", he said.

In a series of secret phone calls ahead of the public announcement, Morrison tried to reassure regional allies from Singapore to Wellington that the decision was based on ensuring "security and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific".

But it will have come as a shock to many Pacific capitals, who will have to work through the implications for weeks and years to come -- not least Beijing.

"This is a significant escalation," said Roggeveen. "It introduces a significant new military capability into the region."

"It's unlikely to be viewed as anything but a move against China," he said. "I won't be surprised if they don't take it well."

The new project also raises questions about Australia's long-standing ban on nuclear energy and is sure to fuel fierce debate at home and among nuclear-sceptic Pacific neighbours.

New Zealand quickly made clear the subs would not be permitted in its territorial waters.

Morrison said the next 18 months would include "an intense examination of what we need to do to exercise our nuclear stewardship responsibilities here in Australia".

Nuclear power has been highly controversial in Australia and Canberra formally banned the use of nuclear energy in 1998, though the country has rich deposits of uranium.

Morrison insisted Australia was "not seeking to establish nuclear weapons or establish a civil nuclear capability".

"And we will continue to meet all of our nuclear non-proliferation obligations," he added.

Adam Bandt, leader of the Greens party, described the nuclear-powered subs as "floating Chernobyls", telling AFP the decision risked a backlash from Australians.

"Australia is a middle power with a lot to lose if conflict escalates in our region," he said.

"Our prime minister is turning up the temperature and putting Australia right in the firing line."

© 2021 AFP

Australia to get nuclear subs in new US, British partnership

Issued on: 15/09/2021 - 

US President Joe Biden is set to announce a new alliance with Australia and Britain Brendan Smialowski AFP/File

Washington (AFP)

The United States will help Australia acquire nuclear powered submarines as part of a new Indo-Pacific strategic alliance also including Britain, a US official said Wednesday.

The announcement -- due to be made shortly in a video meeting by President Joe Biden, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison and his British counterpart Boris Johnson -- could infuriate France, which has been negotiating a multi-billion-dollar sale of conventional submarines to Australia.

That deal will probably now be scrapped, The Sydney Morning Herald reported.

The US official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the three-way partnership, dubbed AUKUS, is a "historic" new piece in Washington's growing focus on the region, where China is challenging decades of US leadership and naval dominance.

What the Biden administration official called an alliance of "maritime democracies" will combine the three countries' forces on "cyber, AI -- particularly applied AI, quantum technologies and some undersea capabilities as well."

AUKUS' first initiative, however, will be "to support Australia's desire to acquire nuclear powered submarines," the official said, stressing this does not mean nuclear weapons.

"Australia does not seek and will not seek nuclear weapons. This is about nuclear powered submarines."

Technical and naval representatives from the three countries will spend the next 18 months deciding how to carry out Australia's upgrade.

The Biden administration official underlined repeatedly how "unique" the decision is, with Britain being the only other country the United States has ever helped to build a nuclear fleet.

"This technology is extremely sensitive," the official said. "We view this as a one-off."

- Stealth and interoperability -

Although the official would not directly name a rising China as the reason for the US move, the intentions of AUKUS are clear.

French President Emmanuel Macron (2nd L) and former Australian prime minister Malcolm Turnbull (3rd L) stand on the deck of a Collins-class submarine in Sydney in May 2018 -- reports say that an expected security deal with the United States and Britain could derail Australia's plans to purchase French submarines 

Ludovico MARIN POOL/AFP/File

"It's meant to send a message of reassurance and a determination to maintain a strong deterrent stance into the 21st century," the official said.

Even if not carrying nuclear weapons, the new submarines will allow Australia to "play at a much higher level," the official said.

"Nuclear powered submarines really maintain superior characteristics of stealth, speed, maneuverability, survivability and really substantial endurance," the official said.

"You will see much deeper interoperability along our navies and our nuclear infrastructure," the official said. "This is a fundamental decision, fundamental. It binds Australia... and the United States and Great Britain for generations. This is the biggest strategic step that Australia's taken in generations."

- French deal in peril -

It was not immediately clear where the development leaves the AUS$90 billion (roughly $66 billion) French deal, which was personally backed by President Emmanuel Macron.

France's Naval Group agreed to build 12 conventional Attack Class subs, but the order is already years behind schedule, well over budget and has become tangled in Australian domestic politics.

As recently as June, Macron promised "full and complete" commitment to the deal. A top Australian defense official said around the same time, however, that Australia was actively considering alternatives.

Australian officials said then that the potential plan B was classified but indicated the issue had been taken more seriously in recent months and included submarines and other vessels.

The AUKUS announcement comes as Australia has been boosting defense spending in response to China's more assertive posture.

Morrison will join Biden again on September 24, this time in person, at a first White House gathering of the "Quad" diplomatic group -- Australia, India, Japan and the United States.

© 2021 AFP

Australia to get nuclear-powered submarines under new security pact with US, UK

Issued on: 15/09/2021 -


The United States, Britain and Australia said on Wednesday they would establish a security partnership for the Indo-Pacific that will involve helping Australia acquire nuclear-powered submarines, as Chinese influence over the region grows.

Under the partnership, announced by President Joe Biden, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison, the United States and Britain will provide Australia with the technology and capability to deploy nuclear-powered submarines.

In a three-way virtual announcement from each of their capitals, the leaders stressed Australia will not be fielding nuclear weapons but using nuclear propulsion systems for the vessels, to guard against future threats.

“We all recognize the imperative of ensuring peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific over the long term,” said Biden.

“We need to be able to address both the current strategic environment in the region, and how it may evolve because the future of each of our nations and indeed the world depends on a free and open Indo-Pacific enduring and flourishing in the decades ahead,” he said.it

Morrison said the submarines would be built in Adelaide in close cooperation with the United States and Britain.

“We will continue to meet all our nuclear non-proliferation obligations,” he said.

Johnson called it a momentous decision for Australia to acquire the technology. He said it would make the world safer.

Eyes on China

Washington and its allies are looking for ways to push back against China’s growing power and influence, particularly its military buildup, pressure on Taiwan and deployments in the contested South China Sea.

The three leaders did not mention China and senior Biden administration officials who briefed reporters ahead of the announcement said the move was not aimed at countering Beijing.

China’s Washington embassy reacted, however, by saying that countries “should not build exclusionary blocs targeting or harming the interests of third parties.”

“In particular, they should shake off their Cold-War mentality and ideological prejudice,” it said.

James Clapper a former director of U.S. national intelligence, told CNN it was a bold step by Australia given its economy’s dependence on China, adding: “Clearly the Chinese will view this as provocative.”

Republican Senator Ben Sasse said the agreement “sends a clear message of strength to Chairman Xi.”

“I’ll always applaud concrete steps to counter Beijing and this is one of them,” he said.

A U.S. official briefing before the announcement said Biden had not mentioned the plans “in any specific terms” to Chinese leader Xi Jinping in a call last Thursday, but did “underscore our determination to play a strong role in the Indo-Pacific.”it

U.S. officials said nuclear propulsion would allow the Australian navy to operate more quietly, for longer periods, and provide deterrence across the Indo-Pacific.

The officials said the partnership, dubbed AUKUS, would also involve cooperation in areas including artificial intelligence and quantum technology.

The partnership looks likely to end Australia’s negotiations with French shipbuilder Naval Group to build it a new submarine fleet worth $40 billion to replace its more than two-decades-old Collins submarines, Australian media reported.

Biden said the governments would now launch an 18-month consultation period, “to determine every element of this program, from workforce, to training requirements, to production timelines” and to ensure full compliance with non-proliferation commitments.

The pact should be a boon for the U.S. defense industry and among the firms that could benefit are General Dynamics Corp and Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc.

General Dynamics’ Electric Boat business does much of the design work for U.S. submarines, but critical subsystems such as electronics and nuclear power plants are made by BWX Technologies Inc.

Britain said the 18-month program would work out details as to what countries and companies would do what, with the aim for the first submarine to be delivered as quickly as possible.

U.S. officials did not give a time frame for when Australia would deploy a nuclear-powered submarine, or how many would be built. They said that since Australia does not have any nuclear infrastructure, it would require a sustained effort over years.

One-off techonology swap

One U.S. official said the announcement was the result of several months of engagements among respective military commands and political leaderships, during which Britain – which recently sent an aircraft carrier to Asia – had indicated it wanted to do more in the region.

“What we’ve heard in all those conversations is a desire for Great Britain to substantially step up its game in the Indo-Pacific,” the official said, noting its historical ties to Asia.

The U.S. official said Washington had shared nuclear propulsion technology only once before – with Britain in 1958 – and added: “This technology is extremely sensitive. This is frankly an exception to our policy in many respects, I do not anticipate that this will be undertaken in other circumstances going forward. We view this as a one-off.”

The move was being taken as part of “a larger constellation of steps” in the region, he said, including stronger bilateral partnerships with long-term allies Japan, South Korea, Thailand and the Philippines, and stronger engagements with new partners like India and Vietnam.

The announcement comes just over a week before Biden is to host a first in-person meeting of leaders of the “Quad” group of countries – Australia, India, Japan and the United States – that Washington sees as a key means to stand up to China.

(REUTERS)

AUKUS: UK, US and Australia launch pact to counter China

US President Joe Biden, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Australia’s Prime Minister Scott Morrison launched the AUKUS security partnership in a joint virtual appearance. It will supplement Quad and Asean

By Yashwant Raj I Edited by Amit Chanda
UPDATED ON SEP 16, 2021 

In a development termed historic and a game-changer, the US, the UK and Australia on Wednesday announced a trilateral security partnership called AUKUS that will enable Canberra to deploy nuclear-powered submarines in the Indo-Pacific in a major challenge to China and its claims in the region.

US President Joe Biden, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison launched the alliance in a joint virtual appearance.

The AUKUS pact will strive over the next 18 months to equip Australia with nuclear propulsion technology, which the United States has shared only with the United Kingdom under a decades-old arrangement put together in the face of the threat from the then Soviet Union.

Australia’s nuclear-powered submarines, when they deploy, will be armed with conventional weapons only and not nuclear weapons, the leaders said.

The leaders also made it clear that the new alliance does not and will not supersede or outrank existing arrangements in the Indo-Pacific region such as the Quad, which the US and Australia form with India and Japan, and Asean, and that it will compliment these groups and others.

China sees 'Cold War mentality' in U.S., British, Australia pact

“This is about investing in our greatest source of strength, our alliances and updating them to better meet the threats of today and tomorrow,” Joe Biden said. “It’s about connecting America’s existing allies and partners in new ways.”

He added: “The United States will also continue to work with Asean and the Quad … our five treaty allies and other close partners in the Indo-Pacific.”

TRILATERAL SECURITY PARTNERSHIP

Prime Minister Scott Morrison of Australia, a member of the Quad and other multilateral groups in the region, also sought to convey continued salience of these formations for Australia. “The AUKUS will also enhance our contribution to our growing network of partnerships in the Indo-Pacific region: ANZUS (Australia, New Zealand and the US); our Asean friends; our bilateral strategic partners, the Quad; Five Eyes (US, UK, Australia, Canada and New Zealand) countries; and, of course, our dear Pacific family.”

 

AUKUS details unveiled: Australian nuclear submarine programme to cost up to $394.5 billion

Share on Linked In

US President Joe Biden (centre) speaks alongside British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak (right) and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese (left) at a press conference during the AUKUS summit on 13 March, 2023 (US time), at Naval Base Point Loma in San Diego California. Photo: AFP / Jim Watson

Australia has confirmed it will buy at least three American-manufactured nuclear submarines and contribute "significant additional resources" to US shipyards.

The Australian government will take three, potentially second-hand Virginia-class submarines early next decade, pending the approval of the US Congress.

The nuclear submarine programme will cost up to A$368 billion (NZ$394.5b) over the next three decades.

There will also be an option to purchase another two under the landmark AUKUS defence and security pact, announced in San Diego on Tuesday morning.

In the meantime, design and development work will continue on a brand new submarine, known as the SSN-AUKUS, "leveraging" work the British have already been doing to replace their Astute-class submarines.

That submarine - which will form the AUKUS class - would eventually be operated by both the UK and Australia, using American combat systems.

One submarine will be built every two years from the early 2040s through to the late 2050s, with five SSN-AUKUS boats delivered to the Royal Australian Navy by the middle of the 2050s.

Eventually, the fleet would include eight Australian submarines built in Adelaide into the 2060s, but the federal government is leaving open the option of taking some from British shipyards if strategic circumstances change.

Meanwhile, the federal government estimates the cost of the submarine programme will be between A$268b and A$368b over the next 30 years.

As part of that figure, A$8b will be spent on upgrading the naval base HMAS Stirling in Western Australia.

From as early as 2027, four US and one UK submarine will start rotating through Western Australia, to be known as the Submarine Rotational Forces West.

No decision has been made on a future east coast base for submarines, although Port Kembla has firmed as the most likely location.

Standing alongside Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, US President Joe Biden spoke of the strength of the alliance already.

"Today, as we stand at the inflection point in history, where the hard work of announcing deterrence and enhancing stability is going to reflect peace and stability for decades to come, the United States can ask for no better partners in the Indo-Pacific where so much of our shared future will be written," Biden said.

US subs to rotate off Australian coast

US President Joe Biden (centre) participates in a trilateral meeting with British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak (right) and Australia's Prime Minister Anthony Albanese (left) during the AUKUS summit on 13 March, 2023 (US time), at Naval Base Point Loma in San Diego California. Photo: AFP / Jim Watson

During the announcement, Biden flagged that, from this year, Australian navy personnel would embed with US and UK crew on submarines and at their shipyards.

"In fact, as we speak, the nuclear-powered sub, is making a port call in Perth and later this year, there will be a rotational presence of nuclear-powered subs to Australia to help develop the workforce it will need to build," he said.

"AUKUS has one overriding objective: to enhance the stability of the Indo-Pacific amid rapidly shifting global dynamics."

Albanese confirmed Australian submariners were already undergoing nuclear power training in the US.

"I am proud to confirm that they are all in the top 30 percent of their class," he said.

"This will be an Australian sovereign capability, commanded by the Royal Australian Navy and sustained by Australians in Australian shipyards, with construction to begin within this decade."

Albanese reiterated that Australia purchasing nuclear submarines would not breach non-proliferation treaties ratified by the country.

Sunak described the alliance as a "powerful partnership" that would see "truly interoperable" submarines.

"The Royal Navy will operate the same submarines as the Australian Navy and we'll both share components and parts with the US Navy," he said.

"Our submarine crews will train together, patrol together and maintain their boats together.

"They will communicate using the same terminology, and the same equipment."

Money for US shipyards

Australia will also contribute A$3b over the next four years to US and UK production lines, with the bulk of that money heading stateside.

White House officials insisted Australia was preparing to make a "substantial contribution" to US submarine production facilities.

The US government will also request an extra US$4.6b from Congress to upgrade the nation's submarine infrastructure, with a concession that the readiness of American production lines are "not where it should be".

"More will be needed, and the Australians will also contribute there, so this is a generational opportunity," a senior official said.

Included in its overall project budget, Australia will spend A$2b over the next four years upgrading the Osborne shipyards in South Australia.

The purchase of Virginia-class submarines from the United States was described by American officials as "a potent nuclear-powered submarine force in the 2030s, much earlier than many had expected".

US officials tried to allay concerns about restrictions on sharing its nuclear technology with Australia.

"Australia is one of our very closest allies. They have stood next to us in no shortage of events and we feel very confident that they will take this this unique capability in a responsible fashion," one official said.

The three AUKUS leaders made the announcement at Naval Base Point Loma, in front of the Virginia-class submarine USS Missouri, which arrived in San Diego Harbour late last week.

- ABC

The eye-watering cost to taxpayers of nuclear-powered subs

A new class of nuclear-powered submarines will be in Australia by the early 2040s as Canberra plans to acquire eight vessels at a cost of up to $368 billion.

Australia will command a fleet of eight nuclear-powered submarines within the next three decades under a fast-tracked plan that will cost up to $368 billion.

In a bid to deter Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific, Canberra will acquire three US Virginia-class nuclear submarines as a stop-gap from approximately 2033 before a new SSN AUKUS-class hybrid vessel arrives in Australian waters a decade later.

The cost to taxpayers of the trilateral deal with the US and UK will come in at an eye-watering $268-$368 billion over the coming three decades.

The plan will take $9 billion from the budget’s bottom line across the next four years and $50-58 billion within a decade.

The annual cost will then be around 0.15 per cent of GDP until the mid-2050s, but there are warnings about the accuracy of the forecasts due to the unpredictability of inflation in three decades’ time.

An American submarine for Australia will roll off the production line every three years before the new AUKUS class will be built at a similar rate from 2042. The sale will need approval from Congress.

Australia’s current Collins-class submarines are due to come out of service in the late 2030s.

The plan ensures Australia will always have a baseline fleet of six submarines and have the option to buy an additional two Virginia-class submarines should there be any delays.

The nuclear-powered submarines can stay at sea for as long as the crew have food, extending Australia’s capability from the weeks the Collins class can remain underwater.

The UK will construct and use the first AUKUS submarine from the late 2030s and acquire an estimated eight to 12 of the same type.

The British design was favoured over the American one, with the Virginia class set to stop production in the mid-2040s and Australia requiring a continuing solution.

It’ll take an estimated 100 to 110 people to crew the new AUKUS class, significantly higher than the 60 it takes to command Australia’s Collins submarines.

Four American nuclear-powered submarines and one UK vessel will begin rotating through Western Australian naval bases from as early as 2027 to boost Australia’s ability to operate its own vessels in the 2030s and 2040s.

Increased visits from US and UK nuclear submarines will also begin from next year.

Shipbuilders in Adelaide and Western Australia will join those in America and Britain in helping construct the new submarines, with shipyard upgrades to begin this year.

Radioactive waste will be managed in Australia, which has drawn protests from environmental campaigners.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the partnership was about strengthening national security and stability in the region as he announced the plan alongside US President Joe Biden and UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak in San Diego.

“For more than a century, brave citizens from our three countries have been part of a shared tradition of service in the cause of peace and sacrifice in the name of freedom,” he said.

“While we respect and honour the past, through AUKUS, we turn ourselves to face the future.”

Mr Biden said the agreement was a testament to the strong ties between the three nations.

“As we stand at the inflection point in history … the United States can ask for no better partners in the Indo-Pacific, where so much of our shared future will be written,” he said.

— AAP

UK, US and Australia strike multi-billion-pound deal to develop nuclear-powered submarines - which could potentially DOUBLE Britain's fleet

Rishi Sunak has confirmed a multi-billion pound deal with US and Australia

This is to help develop and build the vessels and could double Britain's fleet

By JASON GROVES

PUBLISHED: 13 March 2023 |

Britain's fleet of nuclear-powered hunter-killer submarines could be doubled as part of a landmark deal with the US and Australia.

Rishi Sunak has confirmed a multi-billion-pound deal with the two allies to help develop and build the vessels after meeting US President Joe Biden and Australian PM Anthony Albanese at a naval base in California.

The initiative represents some of the first concrete steps taken by the three nations to strengthen the Aukus strategic partnership they announced 18 months ago.

It will see Britain and the US supply Australia with nuclear-powered submarines for the first time, enhancing its ability to counter the threat posed by China’s growing military ambitions.

As part of the deal, British military chiefs are pushing to increase the size of the UK’s hunter-killer submarine fleet from seven to as many as 20.


Rishi Sunak has confirmed a multi-billion-pound deal with the the US and Australia to help develop and build the vessels after meeting US President Joe Biden (centre) and Australian PM Anthony Albanese (left) at a naval base in California


Britain's fleet of nuclear-powered hunter-killer submarines could be doubled as part of a landmark deal with the US and Australia


Rishi Sunak and Colonel Jaimie Norman, the Prime Minister's Military Attache (left), First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Ben Key KCB CBE (second right) and Royal Navy Captain Gus Carnie (right)


China describes AUKUS nuclear submarines deal as 'expensive mistake'

Joe Biden and Rishi Sunak mispronounce Anthony Albanese's name

Biden lands in San Diego with daughter Ashley, granddaughter Natalie
2.8k viewing now

The move came as Mr Sunak warned the UK faces a ‘difficult and dangerous decade’ as authoritarian states such as Russia, China and Iran flex their muscles.

A government source acknowledged the assessment in the new Integrated Review of foreign and security policy was ‘gloomy’ but said it was right to ‘level with people’ about the fact the world has become a more dangerous place.

The Aukus deal is a major coup for British engineering and is expected to create thousands of jobs over the coming years at Barrow, Cumbria, where the UK’s submarines are built, and at Derby, where Rolls-Royce designs and manufactures nuclear submarine reactors.

Speaking at the Point Loma naval base in San Diego last night, the Prime Minister said the deal made reality John F Kennedy’s dream of a West united in ‘a higher purpose – the maintenance of freedom, peace and… security’.


The initiative represents some of the first concrete steps taken by the three nations to strengthen the Aukus strategic partnership they announced 18 months ago


Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said: ‘This is a significant step forward for our three nations as we work together to contribute to security in the Indo-Pacific and across the world'

President Biden said the UK, US and Australia had ‘for more than a century stood together to protect freedom and democracy’

He said the three allies ‘who have shed blood together in defence of our shared values’ had come together again to agree ‘the most significant multilateral defence partnership in generations’. He added: ‘The Aukus partnership, and the submarines we are building in British shipyards, are a tangible demonstration of our commitment to global security.’

The Aukus pact was created in 2021 to strengthen defence ties and bolster the West’s presence in the Indo-Pacific, where China is a growing threat.

The Australian navy is expected to buy five Virginia-class submarines from the US in the short term. But from the early 2030s Britain and Australia will build an updated version of the British Astute class submarine.

Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said: ‘This is a significant step forward for our three nations as we work together to contribute to security in the Indo-Pacific and across the world.’ President Biden said the UK, US and Australia had ‘for more than a century stood together to protect freedom and democracy’.

Opinion
How the submarine deal fits into the complex

U.S. strategy for the Pacific

By DAVID IGNATIUS

March 13, 2023

Monday’s announcement of the AUKUS partnership is a “present at the creation” moment for U.S. strategy in the Indo-Pacific. But despite China’s fears, the agreement isn’t a NATO-style containment pact. It’s the hub of something more flexible and adaptive.

President Biden didn’t discuss China’s growing military power, the obvious motivation for AUKUS, in announcing the pact Monday in San Diego. He was flanked by British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, with an immense submarine, the USS Missouri, in the background. “This first project is only beginning. More partnerships. More potential. More peace and security in the region lies ahead,” Biden said.

“We’re not looking to create a NATO in the Indo-Pacific,” national security adviser Jake Sullivan told reporters in describing the submarine-building agreement announced Monday by the three leaders. AUKUS is about sharing defense technology, but it’s also part of a series of overlapping security partnerships in the region.

NATO is a formal treaty alliance with a large number of countries whose actual interdependence has often been less than advertised. Think of a headstrong Turkey or France. America’s emerging strategy for the Indo-Pacific is something different, with a range of coalitions to address various needs. AUKUS is a hard defense alliance, for example, while the Quad partnership of India, Japan, Australia and the United States seeks the soft coalescence of technology and politics.

Follow

A way to describe the new U.S. Asia policy is as a kind of “zone defense” — a web that links different groups of countries that all worry about China. At the center of many of these nodes is Japan, which is becoming America’s most important ally in the region as it embraces rearmament.

Several triangles of power are emerging: The United States is helping Japan mend fences with South Korea and form a strong tripartite security relationship. Japan is helping the United States improve relations with the Philippines, a country that had been leaning toward China but got tired of being muscled by Beijing. Similar relationships are evolving to connect the United States and Japan with such swing states as Vietnam and Indonesia

The strategy, to be sure, focuses on China. But it’s not a wall of containment so much as an interdependent net. As a second senior administration official who asked not to be named to speak freely explains: “Previous Asian security policy was a series of bilateral interactions between Washington and its allies, the proverbial hub and spoke. Now we are encouraging more connections along the hub and more wheels.

To use another metaphor, Cold War containment of the Soviet Union was like a chess game with a static board and a stress on offensive capabilities, this official argues. The Indo-Pacific paradigm is more like the classic Asian game of “Go,” with waves of advancing and retreating action, rather than stress on an overpowering thrust.

AUKUS matters partly because it brings Britain, a European power, into America’s long-term defense plans for Asia. The United States will share sensitive nuclear technology to provide attack submarines for Australia and augment Britain’s fleet. Britain will receive its first AUKUS subs in the late 2030s, and Australia will get them in the 2040s, Sullivan said. In the meantime, America will provide Australia with up to five U.S. nuclear-powered attack subs starting in 2032.

A second “pillar” of AUKUS will involve sharing other advanced defense technologies among the three countries and perhaps other partners, such as Japan. Those technologies will include hypersonic flight, artificial intelligence, undersea warfare, cyberweapons, autonomous systems and electronic warfare, the senior administration official said.

The missing link in this grand strategy, unfortunately, is economic policy. The Biden administration has scorned the trade alliance known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, but it hasn’t come up with anything powerful to replace it. The Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity launched by Biden last year bolstered supply chains. But it hasn’t delivered on broader goals, such as a digital agreement that would shape technology investment and development.

Biden needs to recognize that America’s partners in Asia depend on trade. Until he demonstrates that he’s willing to defy political resistance to trade in the Democratic Party — and show Asian partners that U.S. markets will remain open to their exports — some of the benefits of the new strategy for the region will be blunted.

The Biden administration is understandably celebrating its strategic initiative for Asia. But before popping the champagne corks, it should recall Dean Acheson’s description in his memoir of the launch of the North Atlantic Treaty in 1949. As the signatories were gathering, the Marine Band “added an unexpected note of realism” by playing two songs from “Porgy and Bess,” the Broadway musical: “I Got Plenty of Nothin’” and “It Ain’t Necessarily So.”

Australia may 'pay expensive price' as AUKUS nuke sub deal only serves US hegemony: experts
By Wang Qi

GLOBAL TIJMES

Published: Mar 13, 2023 

Members of the Sydney Anti-AUKUS Coalition (SAAC) participate in a protest in Sydney, Australia, on December 11, 2021 against the nuclear submarines deal among AUKUS members. Photo: AFP

Australia is "planting a time bomb" for its own peace and that of the region, and it would bear the cost of the "expensive mistake" of following the US, Chinese experts warned, as the AUKUS leaders of the US, UK and Australia are expected to meet in San Diego, California and announce a mega nuclear submarine deal to arm Australia.

The three-way pact is back in focus after the US picked up the clique confrontation approach against China. AUKUS, launched in September 2021 after Australia scrapped a deal with France, was aimed at strengthening defense cooperation among the Anglo-Saxon brothers and counter China, including offering Australia US nuclear powered submarine technology.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, US President Joe Biden and British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak are expected to further enrich AUKUS with a new nuclear submarine agreement during their meeting in California on Monday (US time), according to media reports.

Citing US officials, Reuters said that Australia is expected to buy at most five US Virginia class nuclear-powered submarines in the early 2030s as part of the defense agreement.

Under AUKUS, there will be at least one US submarine visiting Australian ports in the coming years. The US would forward deploy some submarines in Western Australia by about 2027, media reported.

According to Australian media, all the nuclear-powered submarines will be built in Adelaide, South Australia, with UK and US providing consultation on technology. It's also possible that Australia would acquire vessels from the UK, The Times of London said.

The pact is committed to information and technology exchanges among the three nations in areas ranging from intelligence and quantum technology to the acquisition of cruise missiles.

Chinese military expert Song Zhongping told the Global Times on Monday that if the nuclear submarine ecosystem is set up in Adelaide, it is equivalent to Australia using its own money to build a nuclear submarine production and maintenance base for US.

It means that US nuclear-powered submarines could be built not only in US but also in Australia. However, Australia, as the investor, has no access to US intellectual property, Song said. "Australia's nuclear submarines will also be a de facto offshoot of the US nuclear submarine fleet, serving US' global strategic interests."

"In general, the US wants to make Australia its frontline military base in the Indo-Pacific region and let its allies foot the bill, which is a disservice to Australia's sovereignty and independence," Song noted.

Chen Hong, director of the Australian Studies Centre at East China Normal University, told the Global Times that the possible purpose of the US providing nuclear-powered submarines to Australia is to equip the latter with long-range strike capability.

"It would be a time bomb for peace and stability in the region. Australia should not fall into the category of a saboteur of regional security just because of US pressure," Chen said.

Australia is very likely to become the seventh nation with nuclear submarines, and Albanese has defended the project, which could create 20,000 jobs over the next three decades.

But Chen said Australia's nuclear submarine ambition violates the international non-proliferation regime and puts Australia on the path of an arms race, which is not in its interest.

According to Australian media, the deal, which could cost A$170 billion ($183 billion), would push Australia's defense spending to 2.5 percent of GDP.

"Such a huge investment would leave Australia with a heavy burden," Song said. "It cannot protect the security of Australia, but will protect the global hegemony of the US. It's an expensive mistake."

Blindly following the US "Indo-Pacific strategy" and developing a nuclear-powered submarine base would pose a threat to other countries' security, said Song, noting that the greatest security for Australia is "not taking sides between China and the US".

Mao Ning, spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said at a press conference on March 9 that China believes that AUKUS poses serious nuclear proliferation risks, affects international nuclear non-proliferation regime, stimulates an arms race and undermines peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific, which is broadly questioned and opposed by countries in the region and the international community.

RELATED ARTICLES

Fraught AUKUS impedes momentum of better China-Australia ties
 ...

AUKUS represents outdated political ideology, won’t have extensive appeal

Eyeing China, Biden and allies unveil nuclear-powered submarine plan for Australia

US President Joe Biden (centre) speaks alongside British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak (right) and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese (left) at a press conference during the AUKUS summit on Mar 13, 2023, at Naval Base Point Loma

14 Mar 2023 

SAN DIEGO: The leaders of the United States, Australia and Britain on Monday (Mar 13) unveiled details of a plan to provide Australia with nuclear-powered attack submarines, a major step involving an investment of hundreds of billions of dollars aimed at countering China's ambitions in the Indo-Pacific.

Addressing a ceremony at the US naval base in San Diego, accompanied by Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, US President Joe Biden called the agreement under the 2021 AUKUS partnership part of a shared commitment to a free-and-open Indo-Pacific region with two of America's "most stalwart and capable allies".

Sunak called it "a powerful partnership", adding: "For the first time ever it will mean three fleets of submarines working together across the Atlantic and Pacific keeping our oceans free ... for decades to come."

Under the deal, the United States intends to sell Australia three US Virginia class nuclear-powered submarines, which are built by General Dynamics, in the early 2030s, with an option to buy two more if needed, the joint statement said.

The statement from the leaders said the multi-stage project would culminate with British and Australian production and operation of a new class of submarine - SSN-AUKUS - a "trilaterally developed" vessel based on Britain's next-generation design that would be built in Britain and Australia and include "cutting edge" US technologies.

An Australian defense official said the project would cost A$368 billion (US$245 billion) by 2055.

Biden stressed that the submarines would be nuclear-powered, not nuclear-armed: "These boats will not have nuclear weapons of any kind on them," he said.

Britain will take delivery of its first SSN-AUKUS submarine in the late 2030s, and Australia would receive its first in the early 2040s, Albanese and the British statement said.

The vessels will be built by BAE Systems and Rolls-Royce, the British statement said.

The agreement will also see US and British submarines deployed in Western Australia to help train Australian crews and bolster deterrence. The United States and Britain would begin these rotational deployments as soon as 2027, the joint statement said. The US official said this would increase to four US submarines and one British in a few years.

This first phase of the plan is already under way with the US Virginia-class nuclear-powered attack submarine Asheville visiting Perth in Western Australia, officials said.

SHARING NUCLEAR PROPULSION TECH

AUKUS will be the first time Washington has shared nuclear-propulsion technology since it did so with Britain in the 1950s.

China has condemned AUKUS as an illegal act of nuclear proliferation. In launching the partnership Australia also upset France by abruptly cancelling a deal to buy French conventional submarines.

Briefing a small group of reporters on Friday, Sullivan dismissed China's concerns and pointed to Beijing's own military buildup, including nuclear-powered submarines.

"We have communicated with them about AUKUS and sought more information from them about their intentions," he said.

Big questions remain about the plan, not least over strict US curbs on the extensive technology sharing needed for the project and about how long it will take to deliver the submarines, even as the perceived threat posed by China mounts.

In a reflection of stretched US production capacity, the senior US official told Reuters it was "very likely" one or two of the Virginia-class submarines sold to Australia would be vessels that had been in US service, something that would require congressional approval.

"DOUBLE DIGIT BILLION" INVESTMENT

Australia had agreed to contribute funds to boost US and British submarine production and maintenance capacity, the official said.

He said Washington was looking at s "double-digit billion" investment in its submarine industrial base on top of US$4.6 billion already committed for 2023-29 and that the Australian contribution would be less than 15 per cent of the total.

Albanese said he expected the AUKUS deal would result in A$6 billion invested in Australia’s industrial capability over the next four years and create about 20,000 direct jobs over the next 30 years. He said the commitment from the Australian government would require funding amounting to about 0.15 per cent of GDP per year.

Australia's nuclear-powered submarine program with the United States and Britain will cost Australia up to A$368 billion (US$245 billion) by 2055, a defence official said.

One senior US official said AUKUS reflected mounting threats in the Indo-Pacific, not just from China towards self-ruled Taiwan and in the contested South China Sea, but also from Russia, which has conducted joint exercises with China, and North Korea as well.

ECONOMIC BOOST

Albanese said on Saturday that South Australia and Western Australia would be big beneficiaries of AUKUS. "This is about jobs, including jobs in manufacturing," he said.

Britain, which left the European Union in 2020, says AUKUS will help boost its economy's low growth rate.

Sunak said AUKUS was "binding ties to our closest allies and delivering security, new technology and economic advantage at home".

Australia's Defense Minister Richard Marles said last week the submarines would ensure peace and stability across the Indo-Pacific, Southeast Asia and the Indian Ocean.

"It is difficult to overstate the step that as a nation we are about to take," he said.

Political analysts said that given China's growing power and its threats to reunify with Taiwan by force if necessary, it was also vital to advance the second stage of AUKUS, which involves hypersonics and other weaponry that can be deployed more quickly. US officials said Monday's announcements will not cover this second stage.

Source: Reuters/ec/zl

EXPLAINER

Why Australia wants nuclear-powered submarines

Acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines has been described as ‘the single biggest leap’ ever in Australia’s defence capabilities.

The Virginia-class USS North Dakota submarine is seen in the Atlantic Ocean in 2013. The new deal will see Australia initially acquire three nuclear-powered submarines from the US in what is seen as Australia's largest-ever defence plan under the AUKUS pact [US Navy via Reuters]

Published On 14 Mar 2023

United States President Joe Biden, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and United Kingdom Prime Minister Rishi Sunak have unveiled a plan that will see Australia acquire nuclear-powered submarines, allowing the country to become only the seventh in the world with such military technology.

Under the deal, Australia will buy three US Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines from the US by the early 2030s and has an option to buy two additional vessels if required.

KEEP READING

list of 4 items

list 1 of 4

Australia to buy as many as five nuclear subs from United States

list 2 of 4

What are the hypersonic missiles Russia is using in Ukraine?

list 3 of 4

AUKUS: In sign of easing tensions, Macron holds call with Johnson

list 4 of 4

Russia says AUKUS pact threatens nuclear non-proliferation regime

end of list

The submarine agreement is part of what is known as the AUKUS pact — an acronym for Australia, the UK and the US — a security agreement that was announced in 2021 by the three countries and seen as a counterweight to China’s growing military presence in the Asia Pacific.

Acquiring nuclear-powered submarines under the AUKUS pact is expected to be Australia’s biggest-ever defence project and the acquisition has been described by the Australian prime minister as “the single biggest leap” in the history of his country’s defence capabilities.

Beijing has made no secret of its opposition to AUKUS and said this month that it “firmly objects” to the pact, accusing the three countries of harbouring a “Cold War mentality” that risks greater escalation in the region.

Australia has stressed that though their new submarines will be nuclear-powered, that does not mean they will be carrying nuclear warheads.

So why does Australia want nuclear-powered submarines, and what is involved in the deal?

A US Virginia-class attack submarine in dry dock in Virginia, the US, in 2014 [US Navy/John Whalen/Huntington Ingalls Industries via Reuters]

Why nuclear-powered submarines?

• Submarines can either be diesel-electric or nuclear-powered and either type can be used to launch nuclear warheads, though Biden also stressed on Monday while announcing the deal that the Australian submarines will not have nuclear weapons on board.
• Diesel-electric submarines involve diesel engines that power electric motors to propel the vessels through the water. But those engines require fuel to operate, which necessitates that the submarines resurface regularly for refuelling.

(Al Jazeera)

• When a submarine emerges from the deep and surfaces, it is easier to detect, diminishing its effectiveness as a weapon of stealth.

• Nuclear-powered submarines generate their own energy source — nuclear propulsion technology — and are not as constrained by the need to refuel as diesel-electric subs. They generate steam using an onboard nuclear reactor which is used to turn the vessel’s turbines.
• Nuclear-powered submarines can remain hidden at sea without detection — potentially for years — and are limited primarily by their supplies of food and water for crews.

• “Australia’s submarines face long transits between ports, let alone to potential distant hot spots,” John Blaxland, professor at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University, wrote of the country’s current conventional submarines. “Advances in artificial intelligence and persistent surveillance make detection easier to the point where a short ‘snort’ to recharge batteries is detectable. To lose stealth is to lose the key advantage of submarines, so something had to give. Nuclear-powered subs can stay underwater for far longer than diesel-electric models,” Blaxland wrote in The Conversation earlier this month.

First transfer of nuclear propulsion technology in six decades

• Compared with conventional submarines, nuclear-powered subs are usually larger and need more expensive infrastructure and maintenance.
• The majority of submarines in operation currently are conventional diesel-electric models, which are smaller and generally cheaper to maintain.
• Australia does not have the expertise to build its own nuclear submarines so it had to buy or acquire the ability to build its fleet from either the US or the UK.
• Australia had originally planned to buy diesel-powered submarines in a 90 billion Australian dollar ($60bn) deal agreed with France in 2016, but it abruptly scrapped that agreement in 2021 in favour of joining AUKUS. The decision set off a diplomatic firestorm with Paris, which has just recently abated with the election of Albanese.
• The submarines deal marks the first time US-derived nuclear submarine technologies have been shared in more than 60 years. The previous and only other time was when Washington helped London design its undersea fleet.
• Under the plan announced on Monday, the UK and Australia will eventually produce and operate a new class of nuclear-powered submarines — SSN AUKUS — which will be jointly built in both countries and will include the latest US technologies.
• Australia’s acquisition of nuclear submarines will place it in a group of just seven countries that have such vessels, joining the US, Russia, China, the UK, France, and India.

AUKUS and fears of a regional arms race

• The Australian submarine deal is part of the AUKUS security agreement Washington, Canberra and London, first announced in September 2021.
• The leaders of the tripartite pact have insisted that AUKUS is not intended to be adversarial towards any other nation. But few doubt that the alliance’s greatest concern is China.
• But the deal has also worried some of Australia’s largest regional allies, with Indonesia and Malaysia questioning whether it could prompt a nuclear arms race in Southeast Asia and the wider Indo-Pacific.
• All three countries have insisted the deal is defensive in nature although having nuclear-powered submarines would give Australia the capability to launch attacks or counterattacks in the event of a conflict.
• Beijing sees the submarine acquisition as a “dangerous” provocation designed to hem China in, but analysts say it should perhaps be more concerned about future collaborative initiatives involving AUKUS, which foresees the allies working together on hypersonic missiles, artificial intelligence and cyber warfare.
• In a joint statement announcing the deal, the three leaders said that their nations had “stood shoulder to shoulder” for more than a century to protect “peace, stability, and prosperity around the world” and also in the Indo-Pacific region. “We believe in a world that protects freedom and respects human rights, the rule of law, the independence of sovereign states, and the rules-based international order. The steps we are announcing today will help us to advance these mutually beneficial objectives in the decades to come,” they said.
• The deal has also faced criticism in the US where the chair of the influential US Senate armed services committee, Democrat Jack Reed, warned Biden in December that selling nuclear-powered submarines to Australia could undermine US naval prowess.

• Referencing the current “darkening clouds in international affairs”, Blaxland of the Australian National University notes that the AUKUS plan is “ambitious, costly” and not without risks. “But these are challenging times. It’s an important plank for bolstering resilience and deterrence and, in turn, reducing the likelihood of adventurism,” he says. “It’s often said that weakness invites adventurism, even aggression.”

Boost for Australian jobs and nuclear industry

• An Australian defence official told the Reuters news agency that the project would cost 368 billion Australian dollars ($245bn) by 2055.
• Though the deal is worth tens of billions of dollars, experts say its significance goes beyond defence.
• AUKUS is expected to be Australia’s largest-ever defence project and offers the prospect of creating jobs not only in Australia but in the UK and the US too.
• Albanese said on Monday that AUKUS would create “20,000 direct jobs for Australians in every state and territory” in the country. “Already, Australian personnel are upskilling on nuclear propulsion technology and stewardship alongside British and American counterparts,” he said in a series of tweets.
• Those jobs are expected to develop over the next 30 years, but Australia would see a 6 billion Australian dollar ($4bn) investment in industrial capacity over the next four years, Albanese said.

SOURCE: AL JAZEERA AND NEWS AGENCIES

The Warring Peace: The AUKUS Submarine Announcement – OpEd

Australia's Prime Minister Anthony Albanese with US President Joe Biden and British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak announce Australia will purchase nuclear-powered attack submarines from the US. Photo Credit: White House

 March 14, 2023  

By Binoy Kampmark

History is filled with failed planners and plans, threats thought of that did not eventuate, and threats unthought of that found their way into the books.  The AUKUS agreement is an attempt to inflate a threat by developing a number of fictional capabilities in an effort to combat an inflated adversary. 

The checklist of imminent failure for this security pact between the United States, the UK and Australia is impressive and comically grotesque.  In terms of the nuclear-powered submarine component, there are issues of expertise, infrastructure, hurdles of technology transfer, the hobbling feature of domestic politics, and national considerations.  There are also matters of irresponsible costs, of the exhaustion of public money best spent elsewhere.

To put it bluntly, Australia and all its resources spanning across a number of industries will be co-opted in this enterprise against a phantom enemy, subjugating an already subordinate state to the US war-making enterprise.  

All of this was laid bare at San Diego’s Point Loma Naval Base on March 13, where the US imperium, backed up by a number of lickspittles from Australia and the United Kingdom, betrayed the cause of peace and announced to the world that war with China was not only a possibility but distinctly probable.  

Central to the project is a staggering outlay of A$368 billion for up to thirteen vessels over three decades.  Canberra will purchase at least three US-manufactured nuclear submarines while contributing “significant additional resources” to US shipyards.  (Bully for the US builders.)  Given that the United States is unable to make up its own inventory of Virginia class nuclear submarines at this stage, the purchase will be second hand, a point which is bound to niggle members of Congress.  Two more vessels are also being thrown in as a possibility, should the “need” arise.

During this time, design and construction will take place on a new submarine dubbed the SSN-AUKUS, exploiting the work already undertaken by the UK on replacing the Astute-class submarines.  It will be, according to the White House, “based upon the United Kingdom’s next generation SSN design while incorporating cutting edge US submarine technologies, and will be built and deployed by both Australia and the United Kingdom.”  

This point was also reiterated by the UK Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak. “The Royal Navy will operate the same submarines as the Australian Navy and we’ll share components and parts with the US Navy.”  Five of these are intended for the Royal Australian Navy by the middle of the 2050s, with one submarine being produced every two years from the early 2040s.

The speech by the Australian Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, was more than a touch embarrassing.  It certainly did its bit to bury conventional understandings of sovereignty.  “This will be an Australian sovereign capability, commanded by the Royal Australian Navy and sustained by Australians in Australian shipyards, with construction to begin within the decade.”  The lexically challenged are truly in charge.

And what about the submarine personnel themselves?  Australian submariners as yet unacquainted with nuclear technology would be trained in the US.  “I am proud to confirm that they are in the top 30 per cent of their class.”  Can the Australians do a bit better than that?

The US President could only express satisfaction at such displays of unflagging, wobbly free obedience.  “Today, as we stand at the inflection point of history, where the hard work of announcing deterrence and enhancing stability is going to reflect peace and stability for decades to come, the United States can ask for no better partners in the Indo-Pacific where so much of our shared future will be written.”

As the White House statement promises, visits by US nuclear submarines to Australia will begin this year, with Australian personnel joining US crews for “training and development”.  The UK will take its turn at the start of 2026.

Australia promises to become even busier on that front, with a US-UK rotational presence commencing in 2027 which will be named the “Submarine Rotational Force-West” (SRF-West).  One UK Astute class submarine, and as many as four Virginia class submarines will find themselves at HMAS Stirling near Perth.

The effusive punditry on the Australian morning proved indigestible.  For those inclined towards peace, this must have seemed like a chance to initiate a few citizen arrests.  Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles, who also holds the defence portfolio, was a quivering sight.  He remarked about the scale of the enterprise, justifying it against “the biggest conventional military build-up” in the region – those sneaky authoritarians in Beijing again – in an environment hostile to the “international rules-based order”.  Failure to do so would see Australia “condemned”.  (No mention here that the US military budget remains the largest on the planet.)  

As for the issue of budgetary costs, Marles bizarrely and brazenly suggested that these would be “neutral” in the context of defence, despite the likelihood that cuts will have to be made, and various policy priorities jettisoned.  

For morning viewers already fearing for their lives, there was a beaming South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas thrilled that his state would eventually be producing the SSN-AUKUS at the as yet non-existent Submarine Construction Yard in Adelaide.  The fact that his state has neither the resources, infrastructure nor the personnel for such a task, was hardly reason to spoil the flag fluttering show.  “There are smiles all around,” he beamed to the hosts of the ABC Breakfast show. 

US commentators, notably Charles Edel of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, emphasised that Australian defence was being vastly improved, or “augmented”, along with its military industrial base.  Blame China, suggested Edel, for exploiting a “permissive security environment” and exciting such urges on the part of the three countries.  The US Ambassador to Australia, Caroline Kennedy, even thought that this colossal waste of resources would add to the quotient of regional prosperity.  

The opposite is very much the case: a profligate exercise that serves to turn Australia into a multi-generational garrison state at the beckon call of Washington’s war machine that will host, at stages, nuclear weapons.  The latter aspect is bound to fly in the face of the Treaty of Rarotonga, otherwise known as the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty.  But the Alice in Wonderland quality to the AUKUS agreement is bound to paper over that inconvenience.  For a warring peace is exactly what awaits.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.
He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com