In the first of a two-part series, AUKUS is examined as a strategic choice, not simply a procurement program. The planned submarines are designed for US-led coalition warfare rather than a self-reliant defence of Australia.

Despite increasing risks to delivery of US and British nuclear-powered attack submarines (SSNs) under AUKUS Pillar One, the Australian government continues to express optimism that everything is ‘on track’.

As well as the delivery risks, however, there is mounting evidence that the US Virginia-class submarines and the British SSN AUKUS represent the wrong strategic and operational solution for Australia’s future undersea force posture. They will neither provide a capability that is fully under Australia’s strategic control nor one that is optimised for the self-reliant defence of Australia.

The AUKUS agreement signalled a major change in Australia’s strategic posture, reflected in Kurt Campbell’s comment about “getting Australia off the fence” in support of the US in its geopolitical contest with China. This was based on Scott Morrison’s judgement that Australia and the US have “an almost complete alignment of interests” in the Indo-Pacific and that China’s annexation of Taiwan would expose Australia to a threat comparable to the fall of Singapore in 1942.

By aligning Australia with US policy on Taiwan, Morrison was committing to sustaining US primacy to the extent of going to war. This was revealed following the AUSMIN meeting in........

© Pearls and Irritations