AUKUS: Rev-up for submarine decision process

PM plans to shorten consideration period to determine Australia’s requirements for nuclears subs.

The Virginia-class submarine USS California.

The Morrison government plans to shorten the 18-month consideration period for the taskforce led by Admiral Jonathan Meade to determine Australia’s needs and requirements for a nuclear-powered submarine under the AUKUS alliance.

The government is ambitious that it could reduce the time frame for the consideration period to 12 months.

Once the committee has decided in broad terms what sort of submarine Australia wants, it can move forward to establishing a production road map and broad schedule.

Senior naval officers have told Senate estimates committees that Canberra will seek a “mature design” rather than trying to create a whole new submarine just for Australia.

Well-informed sources believe that means there are basically three options: the US Virginia-class, the British Astute or its successor, or a British boat with a US combat system.

Given the chastening experience of the French hyper-reaction to losing the Attack-class contract, and before that the annoyance of the Japanese after they were invited to provide a submarine for Australia and then the French were chosen instead, it is likely that whichever boat is chosen, both the US and Britain will be involved in the project and make money from it.

Canberra and Washington are also likely within the next couple of weeks to roll out a series of joint announcements concerning projects and co-operation under AUKUS.

There is concern in both capitals that the intensity of the French reaction to the scrubbing of their contract, and the extensive efforts US President Joe Biden to mollify France’s Emmanuel Macron, may have cast some public cloud over AUKUS.

Reliable sources have told The Weekend Australian the Biden administration, and the bipartisan national security establishment within congress and across major US institutions, remain committed to AUKUS.

Canberra has assembled dozens of senior officials already to work directly on the project and the Pentagon is doing likewise. Similarly, the British are fully invested in AUKUS.

Both Canberra and Washington are aware of the damage that has been done to the credibility of AUKUS by the idea that the first nuclear-propelled sub would not be delivered to Australia before 2040. The Americans in particular want a larger number of capable allied submarines working in the Pacific as soon as possible. Therefore the defence establishments of both nations are looking at possibilities for accelerating the Australian acquisition of nuclear submarines.

However, there are several dangers to AUKUS beyond the slow time frame of projected new submarines for Australia. A well-informed view is that the intense French hostility to AUKUS is likely to find expression in continuing French efforts to undermine AUKUS, perhaps by casting it as a threat to nuclear non-proliferation.

This would be on the basis that both US and British nuclear submarines use highly enriched uranium. Submarine reactors fall beyond the purview of the International Atomic Energy Agency. It is therefore sometimes argued, theoretically, that nations seeking highly enriched uranium could build nuclear submarines as a loophole in order to acquire weapons-grade uranium.

This is an unlikely scenario and the Americans are known to be working on uranium that is highly enriched but not weapons grade.

It is also believed that Beijing, which is also strongly hostile to AUKUS, has been active in fostering questions in Jakarta and Kuala Lumpur around the potential for Australia to acquire nuclear weapons.

Scott Morrison has repeatedly ruled out nuclear weapons for Australia.