Wow! If anybody doubts American commitment to Australia's defenses, providing nuclear submarine technology to Australia should erase that. And it speaks of Australia's commitment to do more than defend their continent.
In a White House briefing, two unnamed senior administration officials have provided detail behind the creation of a new trilateral security partnership—AUKUS—involving the U.S., United Kingdom and Australia as maritime nations focused on the Indo-Pacific region.
The first initiative of AUKUS would be to ‘support Australia’s desire to acquire nuclear-powered submarines’, they said. That would start with an 18-month effort by technical, strategic and navy teams from all three countries to work out how this can be done.
The decision followed months of high-level negotiations carried out in secrecy, the officials said, and would mark the biggest strategic step that Australia had taken in generations.
Having conventional submarines has always made sense for Australia to hold off superior Chinese naval forces until distant help can arrive. America, Britain, and Japan fill those roles. And perhaps India and South Korea depending on how things go.
But there have been problems manning the older Collins boats and delays in putting new French boats in service. Let's hope proven American nuclear reactor designs accelerate Australia's submarine capabilities.
A few years ago I was confused about a new debate in Australian defense circles given that their strategic needs seemed pretty straightforward. Is this nuclear propulsion partnership between America, Britain, and Australia a result of that Australian debate?
Nuclear subs indicate more than continental defense. They allow Australia to go on the offense with submarines, F-35s, and amphibious forces in support of the American Marines rotated through northern Australia and long-range American air power flying out of Australian bases.
Such a capacity will make it harder for China to hold the South China Sea. And will encourage countries such as Singapore and Vietnam to resist the Chinese.
Nuclear submarines give Australia the power to assist distant India or Japan--and so earn reciprocal help.
Does this future nuclear-powered attack submarine force follow the French sub buy or replace it?
Australia has decided to spend over $4 billion to refurbish all six, instead of just three, of its current Collins class diesel-electric submarines to deal with delays in the construction of the twelve new Attack class boats. The Attack class are actually the new French Barracuda class SSNs (nuclear attack submarines) built without the nuclear reactor. These SSNs took longer than expected to enter service and that delayed equipping the Australian shipyard selected to use French SSN tech to build the non-nuclear “Shortfin Barracuda” design. As a result of the delays in France and Australia the cost of developing and building the Shortfin Barracudas in Australia has risen by over fifty percent.
Or will American and British technology and industrial help go into nuclear versions of the French design? That seems unlikely given the smaller size of French SSNs, but I don't know.
To be clear, this does not involve nuclear weapons. It involves nuclear propulsion. And it is more than just subs:
Britain has entered into a security pact with the US and Australia to counter China that will involve building a nuclear powered submarine fleet and wide-ranging projects on cyber warfare, artificial intelligence and quantum computing.
Although it does pave the way for Australia to build a sea-based nuclear weapons deterrent in the future should the Chinese threat grow.
This is a big effing deal. Kudos to the Biden administration. I'm stunned. Pleasantly stunned, but stunned.
UPDATE: Australia already canceled the French deal because of the delays.
UPDATE: Grant me that this is funny:
France accused U.S. President Joe Biden on Thursday of stabbing it in the back and acting like his predecessor Donald Trump after Paris was pushed aside from a historic defence export contract to supply Australia with submarines.
France and the nuanced crowd in Europe welcomed Biden. Enjoy.
But perhaps if France had actually begun fulfilling that submarine contract the Australians wouldn't have had the option. Oops.
UPDATE: The Taipei Times likes the initiative.
As does The Sydney Morning Herald.
Views on expanding America-Australian defense ties.
More thoughts on opportunities and reactions. Yes, the deal gives Global Britain some focus. And it is going to be 20 years before Australia has those submarines. That is a long time.
With a bonus stiff-arming of the European Union.
“They would have had every reason to know that we have deep and grave concerns that the capability being delivered by the Attack class submarine was not going to meet our strategic interests and we have made very clear that we would be making a decision based on our strategic national interest,” he added, referring to the French government.
Is France really going to treat America and Australia worse than it treats China over this?
