Former Labor Prime Minister Paul Keating described the AUKUS submarine plan as "the worst international decision by an Australian government since the former Labor leader, Billy Hughes, sought to introduce conscription to augment Australian forces in World War One."ĪUKUS nuclear submarines will lock Australia into US plans to contain and potentially militarily confront China, and (together with missile defense, to which Australia also contributes via the Pine Gap base in central Australia) put at risk China's second-strike nuclear capability. In the context of escalating enmeshment with US military forces and plans, which Australia's Deputy Prime Minister and Defense Minister Richard Marles has characterized as no longer about "interoperability" but "interchangeability," the plan is the flagship for a profound loss of sovereignty and independence by Australia. The strategic implications of the plan are profound. The submarines are to be deployed with conventionally armed Tomahawk cruise missiles and will be technologically dependent on the US. Forward defense justified Australia's past involvement in wars in the Korean Peninsula, Malaysia and especially Vietnam. The AUKUS plan takes Australia back to the old racist, colonial and sub-imperial approach of "forward defense" - long-range power projection far beyond Australia's surroundings, as "deputy sheriff" in concert with a white great ally and protector, previously the UK, now the US. That Labor has embraced and aggressively prosecuted such a fraught, costly and long-term plan hatched by the previous government, rather than let it die a natural death at the end of the 18-month review period, is incomprehensible for many Australians who had hoped for much better from their new government. This was, apparently, essentially for the mundane political imperative not to be wedged and portrayed as weak on national security and the US alliance in the lead-up to a federal election. Albanese in opposition agreed in less than 24 hours to sign up to the plan hatched by Morrison, his predecessor as prime minister. There has been no detailed parliamentary examination, no White Paper, and no ministerial statements explaining a rigorous assessment of the comparative risks, benefits and costs of the plan and alternatives, in the context of a long-term comprehensive security plan for the country. The plan was hatched and developed in secret with a complete absence of democratic process and accountability. It is, in fact, a greater cost than any other national project in Australia's history. The eye-watering projected A$368 billion ($244.06 billion) cost is 10 times greater than Australia's largest previous military acquisition, even without the seemingly inevitable cost blowout. The third is the design and construction of a new AUKUS-SSN, to be built in the UK and Australia using US weapons systems and a US/UK-built nuclear reactor, to be available in the 2040s and 50s. The second is the Australian purchase of between three and five US Virginia-class SSNs, commencing in the early 2030s. The first will involve increased rotational deployment, effectively basing, of US (from this year) and UK (from 2027) SSNs in Australia. Their dismay was shared by many of Australia's neighbors in Asia and the Pacific. They were as dumbstruck as they were when the initial announcement was made 18 months earlier by Biden and past prime ministers Boris Johnson and Scott Morrison in the dying stages of a discredited Australian government. When US President Joe Biden, UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese stood together in San Diego on March 14, 2023, to announce arrangements for the Australian acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines (SSNs), many Australians were dumbstruck. Two years ago this week, the AUKUS pact was announced.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |