AUKUS Beyond Nuclear Submarines

Last week I attended "AUKUS: Assumptions & Implications": a two day conference organized by the Academy of the Social Sciences. AUKUS is a partnership between Australia, USA & UK, announced in 2021. Originally it aimed to provide Australia with conventionally-armed, nuclear-powered submarines, but has more recently broadened with other defence cooperation. The conference was held at the Australian Centre on China in the World (CIW), which was apposite, given some of the discussion was about China's reaction to AUKUS. his conference showed the value of academics and researchers in giving an independent perspective on contentious issues, and offering a platform for discussion of important public issues. 

Coffee before formalities was a meeting of the old guard. I was asked by someone if I recalled them from Defence Capabilities Branch in 1997, when I worked on technology policy at the Department of Defence. I can't even remember the branch. ;-)

Normally I would include a photo of the event, but this was a strictly :"no photographs" conference. This was odd as there were numerous journalists in attendance and the event has been reported in the media.

Some of the high profile speakers

Professor Ross Garnaut

Professor Ross Garnaut's keynote took us back to the power politics and economics of WWI. He traced Australia's transition from the UK to the USA as our major ally. He talked about the "golden age" of the 1980s, with Australian economic prosperity based on exports. He warned that AUKUS was returning to the old and familiar, rather than the difficulty of a relationship with Asia. Also he warned "We are becoming a cranky and divided community". Professor Garnaut argued Australia should be exporting "immense" amount of energy and green refined metals, using equipment supplied by China, with US protectionist policies assisting this.

Professor Garnaut described AUKUS as an economic opportunity for UK submarine exports and questions how long US commitment to the Pacific west of Hawaii will last. He then told an anecdote about discussions with the Bush administration on Australia standing by US to defend Taiwan (and saying Australia would not).

Getting back to economic,s Professor Garnaut showed a chart of the rapid Chinese exports from 2000, and it becoming a larger trading partner for most countries than USA by 2011. He suggested going to war without a consensus was undemocratic. He suggested India and Indonesia could balance China's dominance, but without drawing them into a close military alliance.

Professor Garnaut suggested China military occupation of Taiwan would be prohibitively expensive. In closing Professor Garnaut argued Australia could remain a US ally without joining a war over Taiwan. He suggested joining such a war would result in isolation of Australia from Asia.

An interesting question, from a banker, was about Australia deepening ties with Korea and Japan. Professor Garnaut said he would leave it to other speakers, but suggested military purchases were not the best way for Australia to secure relations with Korea and Japan. That may be the case, but I suggest the combination of their expertise with manufacturing, plus Australia's AI skills, could produce weapons systems to match the best in the world.

Professor Gareth Evans

Professor Gareth Evans view on AUKUS is detailed in an article published concurrent with the conference: "AUKUS is terrible for Australian national interests – but we’re probably stuck with it". In his address, Professor Evans argued that missiles and drones would be more important to defence than submarines, but Australia was already committed to AUKUS by both major political parties. I agree with the first part of this, but not the second. 

Ghost Shark prototype built in Sydney.
Photo from DoD 2024

Australian Government funded development of the Ghost Shark autonomous extra-large unmanned undersea vehicle (XLUUV) is reported to be proceeding well and ahead of US government sponsored technology. It would be possible to redefine the AUKUS agreement by placing more emphasis on Pillar 2, with Australia's contribution being autonomous technology, rather than crewed submarines. 

Rear Admiral Peter Clarke (RAN Retired)

In the introduction to his presentation, it was pointed out that Rear Admiral Peter Clarke was the only one in the room who had commanded a nuclear submarine (before joining the RAN). The former Admiral gave an expert assessment of the advantages of nuclear submarines over conventionally powered ones. However, other speakers had pointed out there were alternatives to both. 

UUVs will be superior to crewed submarines for their primary mission of  surveillance. In addition an Australian fleet of 500 XLUUVs would be able to place the 10,000 smart sea mines Australia is acquiring, around harbour entrances and sea lanes, denying an enemy the ability to operate their warships (without hindering civilian trade). UUVs would be less useful for maritime strike, and not at all suited to land strike, but the strategic value of those missions is questionable. Conventional weapons would have limited effect, and if they did have a significant effect this might prompt a nuclear response.