AUKUS deal involves long diplomatic road for subs

The long timelines involved in the AUKUS defence pact between Australia, Britain and the US ensure there will be lots of twists and turns before the first nuclear-powered submarines are put into service under an Australian Navy flag. Prudence is needed to not get caught up in every development in what is sure to be a lively US presidential election year. This is not to suggest that warnings by senior and well-connected US defence analysts must not be taken seriously. Ex-Pentagon official Elbridge Colby and former Republican Senate security adviser Alex Velez-Green have warned that the superpower’s own navy has too few spare boats to sell to Australia unless production greatly speeds up. The suggestion is this will raise questions for Anthony Albanese and Labor over how a Republican victory in this year’s election would affect the AUKUS security pact.

The comments can be read two ways. One is that there is a danger the US may pull back on its AUKUS commitments. Another is that the US must urgently ramp up its production and maintenance schedule for nuclear-powered subs to satisfy the demands of itself and its closest allies. The bottom line is, within the constraints of sovereign autonomy, having nuclear-powered submarines sailing in the Indo-Pacific under Australian command is unambiguously of benefit to US strategic interests. It is also true, however, that the US military is being called to action across numerous fronts. Current events in the Middle East demonstrate clearly the dominant role the US plays in maintaining some semblance of order.

Things would look vastly different had the US not sent an aircraft carrier battle group to take up position in the Red Sea immediately following the October 7 terrorist attack on Israel by Hamas. The first deployment was followed by a second battle group and the latest developments show how vital those assets have been. On Sunday the US Navy destroyed three boats carrying Iran-backed Houthi militants from Yemen after they attacked a container ship in the Red Sea. Helicopters from US Navy vessels responded to distress calls from the Maersk Hangzhou, a Singapore-flagged container vessel that operates between Europe and Asia, after it came under missile attack and was approached by four boats from which the Houthis tried to board it. There have been more than 20 attacks on commercial vessels by the Houthis since they started striking at commercial ships in November to show their support for Hamas. The US Navy has successfully intercepted missiles and shot down drones aimed at escalating the conflict, including at least 113 attacks on US forces in Iraq and Syria since October 17.

The Albanese government has been hesitant in contributing to a global coalition to protect commercial shipping through what is one of the world’s most important waterways. Rather than a naval ship, we have sent diplomatic staff to assist with co-ordination efforts for the maritime coalition in Bahrain. The decision is unfortunate but unlikely to have a meaningful impact on the bigger AUKUS considerations.

Last month US President Joe Biden signed the $US886bn ($1.3 trillion) National Defence Authorisation Act, which gives the green light for the sale of at least three Virginia-class submarines to Australia in the early 2030s. The sale is contingent on the US president certifying the sale will not “degrade United States undersea capabilities”. This is a big escape clause should the US take a more isolationist turn under a future administration of whatever stripe. Speculating about what a future Trump presidency may mean for the AUKUS agreement is unhelpful and premature. But Australia must remain fully engaged diplomatically across the long haul to shepherd through what is without doubt the nation’s most significant and important defence agreement. This includes working closely with allies outside the Indo-Pacific region to demonstrate our clear commitment to the global order that the AUKUS pact is calculated to defend.