New AUUKUS Cold War Distraction and US Profiteering Deal Announced

Ryan

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
More news from clown world:


It seems like the main point is to turn Australia into a base for US nuclear submarines, while generating more profits for the US military-industrial complex. The stuff about AI and cyber capabilities is probably to make it seem like Australia is contributing something - a lot of that would be covered under existing intelligence sharing arrangements already ('Five Eyes' etc).

Most interesting thing about this seems to be that it was announced while the Australian Defence and Foreign Affairs Ministers are overseas. So we can probably assume that the Indonesian, Indian and South Korean governments have been getting a 'China containment' sales pitch regarding this by Dutton and Payne, who will then 'report in' to the US afterwards how things went.

Here's the article text:

News.com.au said:
Scott Morrison is set to announce Australia’s submarine program will “go nuclear” under a new defence pact with the US and the UK that has been described as “China’s worst nightmare.”

The new grouping to be known as AUUKUS will advise Australia on how to identify the best way to acquire nuclear-powered submarine capability and share advanced technologies involving artificial intelligence.

The US-based Politico website reports that President Joe Biden will announce a new working group with Britain and Australia to share advanced technologies to counter China at 7am AEST.

“The trio, which will be known by the acronym AUUKUS, will make it easier for the nations to share information and know-how in key technological areas like artificial intelligence, cyber, underwater systems and long-range strike capabilities,’’ the report states.

There would be a “nuclear element to the pact in which the US and UK share their knowledge of how to maintain nuclear-defense infrastructure.”

Senior ministers were rushing back to Canberra on Wednesday night for national security meetings ahead of the major announcement.

Labor leader Anthony Albanese and several Labor frontbenchers were also briefed with Defence Minister Peter Dutton and Foreign Affairs Minister Marise Payne, who are overseas, dialling in for the meetings.

Diplomatic and defence sources suggest it could involve operating US submarines out of Perth’s HMAS Stirling.

But there was also speculation that the British Government could be involved to support Australia secure the technology required to service nuclear submarines.

The proposal for Australia to tear up existing contracts for French subs and purchase US nuclear technology has previously been described as “China’s Worst Nightmare” in the region – which could “tip the military balance in Asia.”

In June, the Prime Minister held discussions with French President Emmanuel Macron over growing concerns regarding the $90 billion project that will not deliver submarines until 2030

The Australian Naval Institute has recently been promoting the option as the best ‘Plan B’ for Australia’s troubled submarine program.

“With regional tensions increasing, then building our own one-off type submarines which will arrive in the early 2030s is not good enough. We have no guarantee they will work,’’ the article stated.

“When we built the Collins class submarines (at exorbitant expense) they did not work properly for several years. It is only now – after decades of operation – that they are reasonably functional.

“Submarines are the ultimate deterrent and attack weapon: their location is hopefully unknown, and they can strike at targets without warning. But we need to expand beyond the capabilities of the Collins, and also the French Attack boats which we should abandon.

Instead we should buy 12 of a proven design which is already in the water. We want long-range hunter-killer vessels. We also want them to be able to stay submerged for long periods to avoid detection. Nuclear does this in spades.”

The Prime Minister is scheduled to fly to Washington next week for talks with the US President. He has recently been jetting between Sydney and Canberra for national security meetings that his office said could not be conducted remotely.
 
According to David Martin Australia is basically owed by the Chinese. If so, then this looks a bit like the one world government playing it farms/nations against one another for profit and control. And “could” lead to a hot war of attrition.

David Martin, short video about Australia and China.

 
France not happy at all about this:


RT.com said:

‘Stabbed in the back’: France ‘regrets’ AUKUS nuclear submarine deal that scuttled its multi-billion contract with Australia​

A new plan to equip Australia with nuclear-powered submarines using US and UK technology may be aimed to counter China, but steps on the toes of NATO ally France, which lost a massive shipbuilding contract with Canberra.

US President Joe Biden, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison and his British counterpart Boris Johnson announced the ‘AUKUS’ initiative in a three-way virtual event on Wednesday. It is supposed to start 18-month consultations to eventually provide Australia with nuclear-powered but conventionally armed submarines – making it the first non-atomic nation with such weapons.

French shipbuilder Naval Group reportedly expressed “disappointment” at the announcement, as it meant Canberra was abandoning their contract for a dozen diesel-electric submarines. The Australian press has reported the value of that contract at AU$90 billion (US$66 billion).

The Naval Group contract was personally backed by French President Emmanuel Macron, who promised “full and complete” commitment to it as recently as June, according to AFP – even as Australia was already in talks with London and Washington, apparently.

Canberra’s “regrettable” decision was “contrary to the letter and the spirit of the cooperation which prevailed between France and Australia,” French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian and Armed Forces Minister Florence Parly said in a joint response to the AUKUS announcement.
France’s former ambassador to the US also weighed in on the matter, saying his country had been “stabbed in the back.”

Part of the problem with the Naval Group deal was that the Australian government was insisting on doing the manufacturing and sourcing the components locally, according to Reuters. At least one Australian MP has already wondered whether Canberra will make the same demands in the AUKUS deal, or simply buy off-the-shelf designs from Washington and London.

Australian Defense Minister Peter Dutton and Foreign Minister Marise Payne are already in Washington, while PM Scott Morrison is expected to arrive later this month.

The Royal Australian Navy currently operates six Collins-class submarines, based on a Swedish design and built between 1990 and 2003 in Port River, near Adelaide. Canberra had made a deal with Naval Group in 2016 for a dozen new vessels, but the contract has since “broken down over a series of disagreements over spiralling costs, design changes, schedule slippage and local industry involvement,” according to the Australian outlet Financial Review.

After one European think-tank fellow called the cancellation “a knife in the back to Paris on a very important deal for France as it looked to solidify [its] own complementary role in the Indo-Pacific,” an Australian journalist in Berlin disagreed.
Australia was “long unhappy with the cost blowouts and missed deadlines of [the] French programme,” argued Trent Murray. “In the eyes of Canberra, Naval Group simply didn’t deliver what was being paid for.”

The AUKUS arrangement has both financial and political implications for France, numerous observers have pointed out. The French government has a 62% stake in Naval Group, with the remaining third held by Thales, itself partly state-owned. Losing the contract to the US and UK would also be a “major blow for Macron” and “could prompt a rethinking in France about strategic alliances with the Anglosphere,” said a Reuters correspondent in Paris.
The statement by Le Drian and Parly appears to bear this out, as they pointed out the “regrettable” decision by Australia “reinforces the need to raise the issue of European strategic autonomy” as the only “credible way to defend our interests and our values in the world.”
 
16 Sep, 2021
[...]
The first project to be undertaken under the treaty is delivering nuclear-powered submarines to Australia, Blinken announced, clarifying that it would be the three nations in the new alliance that would be responsible for sourcing the subs. In addition to helping to source nuclear-powered subs, the US will provide “rotational deployments of all types of US military aircraft” to Australia, shoring up its air defenses, Defense Minister Peter Dutton said during the news conference.
'This will make Australia more vulnerable than ever.'

(Highly recommend to everyone)

By Tom Fowdy - 16 Sep, 2021
 
'Speaking of politics, it would be 'a total chaos'.'

21 Sep, 2021

21 Sep, 2021
 
'A fairytale as good bargain: Will Macron be Biden's bitch?'

22 Sep, 2021


2 hours ago

18 Sep, 2021
 
'A fairytale as good bargain: Will Macron be Biden's bitch?'

22 Sep, 2021


2 hours ago

18 Sep, 2021
'Voila, Macron is Biden's bitch!'

By Rachel Marsden - 11 Nov, 2021
 
'AUKUS is preparing for war with China.'

Western military alliance to work on hypersonic weapons

6 Apr, 2022
The move could provoke conflicts in other parts of the world, similar to the one in Ukraine, China has warned

Australia, UK and the US are going to expand their cooperation under the AUKUS trilateral pact to also include hypersonic technologies, the British government said in a statement on Tuesday.

China was quick to condemn the announcement, with Beijing’s UN envoy Zhang Jun warning that it could “lead the other parts of the world into a crisis” like the one currently underway in Ukraine.

Referring to the Western rejection of Russia’s military operation, Zhang had some advice for the US and its allies, quoting an old Chinese saying: “If you do not like it, do not impose it against the others.”

The leaders of Australia, the UK and the US have assessed the progress made under the AUKUS deal so far, saying that they were “pleased” with it, the UK government said.

It didn’t reveal any specific details, only stressing that Britain and America were “fully committed to establishing a robust approach to sharing naval propulsion technology with Australia that strengthens the global non-proliferation regime.”

But it turns out that the partnership won’t be limited to submarines only, as AUKUS members “committed today to commence new trilateral cooperation on hypersonics and counter-hypersonics... and to deepen cooperation on defense innovation,” according to the statement.

This will add to the already existing bilateral hypersonic program between the US and Australia called SCIFiRE (Southern Cross Integrated Flight Research Experiment).

Australian deputy prime minister Barnaby Joyce claimed that China’s hypersonic developments created an “existential threat” for Australia, insisting that “we have to make sure that we are right at the top of our game.”

Federal Treasurer Josh Frydenberg also welcomed the expansion of AUKUS cooperation but couldn’t say when exactly Canberra would be getting its hypersonic missiles. They would arrive “as soon as is practical,” he said.

The AUKUS pact, which is largely seen as a strategy to counter China’s growing influence in the Pacific, was announced by Canberra, London and Washington in September last year with the aim of arming Australia with a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines. Back then, Beijing denounced the deal, claiming that it was derailing peace in the region.

The US and its NATO allies are behind Russia and China when it comes to hypersonic weapons, which are believed to be beyond the reach of any air defense systems due to their extreme speed and high maneuverability.

Washington is only testing those technologies, with the latest launch as part of Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept (HAWC) program reportedly taking place mid-March.

Meanwhile, Russia has already used its air-launched Kinzhal hypersonic missiles to destroy targets during its ongoing military operation in Ukraine. US President Joe Biden reacted to the news by saying that hypersonic tech “doesn’t make… much of a difference except it’s nearly impossible to intercept.”

Kinzhal is just one of several hypersonic systems developed for the Russian military in recent years, together with the Avangard glider, which is fitted on silo-based ICBMs, and Zircon (Tsirkon) missiles, developed for the navy.

The Americans were also concerned by the Chinese hypersonic test in July 2021, with the head of the US Strategic Command, Admiral Charles Richard, saying in a testimony to Congress earlier this week that Beijing’s missile had traveled some 40,000 kilometers in just over 100 minutes, which became “the greatest distance and longest flight time of any land attack weapon system of any nation to date.”

Australia makes major move on missiles

6 Apr, 2022
Major military upgrade comes amid war in Ukraine and fears of growing Chinese influence in the South Pacific

Australia has kick started a program to modernize its air and sea power with new missiles, with a $2.6 billion investment. The push for rearmament comes amid worries over the situation in Ukraine and fears of growing Chinese influence in the South Pacific.

“When you see what’s happening in the Ukraine, when you see what potential there is for conflict in the Indo-Pacific, this is very real for us now and we need to be realistic [to] deter any act of aggression and to help keep peace in our own region,” Defense Minister Peter Dutton told reporters on Tuesday.

Part of it will be spent to arm Australia’s fleet of FA-18F Super Hornet fighter jets with JASSM-ER missiles. Manufactured in the US by weapons industry giant Lockheed Martin, the extended-range missiles will allow the warplanes to engage enemy targets at a range of 900 kilometers (560 miles). Australia had already intended to upgrade its air power with improved air-to-surface missiles, but a revised timetable now sets 2024 as the target year. This is three years ahead of the previous schedule.

The country also aims to complete upgrades to its navy by 2024, arming its ANZAC Class frigates and Hobart Class destroyers with NSMs (Naval Strike Missiles). These are manufactured in Norway by Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace and promise to more than double the striking range of Australia’s warships. Canberra had previously allowed an additional five years’ time to finish the upgrade, expecting to be finished by 2029.

The revised timetable comes on the heels of a new security pact between China and the Solomon Islands, which has invited speculation over the possibility of a new Chinese naval base soon appearing in Australia’s back yard. Speaking to reporters on Monday, the US Pacific Fleet Commander Samuel Paparo called the pact "very concerning" despite the fact that both nations have denied plans for any such naval base.

It also comes amid deepening collaboration with AUKUS, a tripartite military alliance wherein it partners with the US and UK on weapons development. AUKUS announced plans to work together on hypersonic weapons this week, a move Beijing has denounced as the “Cold war mentality” of an “Anglo-Saxon clique.” Russia and China have both successfully tested hypersonic missiles, a weapon for which no effective defense currently exists. In a Tuesday interview with Sky News, Australian Deputy PM Barnaby Joyce deemed China’s hypersonic weapons development to be an “existential threat.” He justified Australia’s weapons upgrades and deepening ties with AUKUS as a means to keep Australians “right at the top of our game.”

Back in July, China successfully tested a hypersonic missile capable of traveling 40,000 kilometers (24,855 miles) in just over 100 minutes, a feat leading US Admiral Charles Richard, head of the US Strategic Command, to assess the missile as “the greatest distance and longest flight time of any land attack weapon system of any nation to date.”
 

ABC News Australia said:
The United States is preparing to deploy up to six nuclear-capable B-52 bombers to northern Australia, a provocative move experts say is aimed squarely at China.

An investigation by Four Corners can reveal Washington is planning to build dedicated facilities for the giant aircraft at Tindal air base, south of Darwin.

The US has drawn up detailed plans for what it calls a "squadron operations facility" for use during the Northern Territory dry season, an adjoining maintenance centre and a parking area for "six B-52s".

Becca Wasser from the Centre for New American Security says putting B-52s in northern Australia is a warning to China, as fears grow Beijing is preparing for an assault on Taiwan.

"Having bombers that could range and potentially attack mainland China could be very important in sending a signal to China that any of its actions over Taiwan could also expand further," she says.

The bombers are part of a much larger upgrade of defence assets across northern Australia, including a major expansion of the Pine Gap intelligence base, which would play a vital role in any conflict with Beijing.

The B-52s have been the backbone of the US Air Force for more than 60 years, with the capability to deliver long-range strikes of both nuclear and conventional weapons. The US documents say the facilities will be used for "deployed B-52 squadrons".

"The ability to deploy US Air Force bombers to Australia sends a strong message to adversaries about our ability to project lethal air power," the US Air Force told Four Corners.

Asked when the B-52s would begin their deployment at Tindal, Australia's Department of Defence declined to comment.

'The tip of the spear'​

Some worry having B-52s rotating through Tindal each year locks Australia into joining the US in any conflict against China.

"It's a great expansion of Australian commitment to the United States' war plan with China," says Richard Tanter, a senior research associate at the Nautilus Institute and a long-time, anti-nuclear activist.

"It's a sign to the Chinese that we are willing to be the tip of the spear."

Mr Tanter sees the planned deployment of the bombers as more significant than the rotation of US Marines through Darwin each year.

"It's very hard to think of a more open commitment that we could make. A more open signal to the Chinese that we are going along with American planning for a war with China," Mr Tanter says.

Ms Wasser says the growing importance of northern Australia to the US makes Darwin and Tindal targets in any war with China.

Her work includes running war game exercises to examine how a potential conflict might unfold.

Military analyst Becca Wasser and her team explore the risks Australia could face by joining the US in a fight over Taiwan.
She says in the war game scenarios where Australia either joined the fight or allowed Washington to use bases in the Top End, "it did very much put a bullseye on Australia".

“Ultimately these attacks were not successful because of the long range required and because China had already expended its most capable long-range missiles earlier in the game, … but who's to say that in the future, China might have more advanced missile capability that would be better suited to potentially attacking Australia.”

China's growing confidence about Taiwan invasion​

In recent months, US war planners and analysts have brought forward estimates of when Beijing may look to take Taiwan.

"The time frame for an assault on Taiwan, I would put it at 2025 to 2027," says defence academic Oriana Skylar Mastro from Stanford University.

"This is largely dependent on when I think the Chinese leadership and in particular [President] Xi Jinping can be confident that his military can do this."

She says there is a growing confidence within the People's Liberation Army that it could successfully invade Taiwan.

"For 15 years I would ask the Chinese military if they could do this [invade Taiwan], and the answer was 'no'. So the fact that for the first time at the end of 2020 they're starting to say 'yes', I think that's a significant message we should pay attention to," she says.

US has big plans for Australia​

These growing tensions with China have made northern Australia a crucial defence hub for the US, which has committed to spending more than $1 billion upgrading its military assets across the Top End.

The Tindal air base expansion includes a parking area that can accommodate six B-52 bombers and is forecast to cost up to $US100 million. The US Air Force says the parking area will be finished in late 2026.

"The RAAF's ability to host USAF bombers, as well as train alongside them, demonstrates how integrated our two air forces are," it says.

In April, the US Department of Defence budgeted $US14.4 million ($22.5 million) for the squadron operations and maintenance facilities at Tindal.

"The [squadron operations] facility is required to support strategic operations and to run multiple 15-day training exercises during the Northern Territory dry season for deployed B-52 squadrons," the US documents say.

The US also plans to build its own jet fuel storage tanks and an ammunition bunker at the site.

"The north of Australia in the new geopolitical environment, has suddenly become strategically much more important, if not crucial to the US," says Paul Dibb, a former senior official at the Department of Defence in Canberra.

A greater presence of US forces in Australia was hinted at during last year's annual ministerial meetings, known as AUSMIN.

Under so-called "enhanced air co-operation" it was agreed there would be "rotational deployment of US aircraft of all types in Australia".

"Today we endorse major force posture initiatives that will expand our access and presence in Australia," US Secretary of Defence Lloyd Austin said.


There was no mention of rotating B-52s through Tindal, although there have been hints in recent years.

Equally important to the growing US presence in northern Australia is the construction of 11-giant jet fuel storage tanks in Darwin.

Some of this fuel reserve was previously located at Pearl Harbour in Hawaii, but is now being dispersed across the region.

"Without that kind of assurance of jet fuel in this country, the US simply wouldn't be able to treat Australia as a location from which it can stage military exercises and operations with confidence," says Ashley Townshend from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Mr Townshend says the B-52s at Tindal are just the start.

"We will see much greater numbers of US military personnel forward located in Australia. That will include personnel from all three services, navy, air force and army, as well as the marines in Darwin, which are likely to be expanded," he says.

In the AUSMIN communique, this was flagged as part of efforts to "advance … force posture co-operation" to "deter our adversaries".


Spy base expands​

While both governments have signalled the growing US military presence in Australia, the expansion of one site is veiled in secrecy. There has been very little said about Pine Gap.

The joint US and Australian spy base near Alice Springs is undergoing a major upgrade, according to Richard Tanter.

Large golf ball-like domes and low set buildings are surrounded by trees and bush. Behind them are hills.

Powerful antennas eavesdropping on foreign satellites and detecting missile launches sit under Pine Gap's domes.(Four Corners)

He's spent months poring over satellite images of Pine Gap and estimates the number of giant antennas has grown by more than a third over the past seven years.

"This is at a time when the Australian Parliament has been informed of none of this, no statements by ministers no questions by politicians," he says.


Mr Tanter says Pine Gap's powerful "ears and eyes" are now heavily focused on China.

"The searching for Chinese missile sites, the searching for Chinese command sites, in a preparatory way, is absolutely on high priority at Pine Gap now," he says.

"This indicates the extraordinary importance and the increasing importance to the US at a time of potential war with China."

A satellite image shows a number of buildings and domes on a site surrounded by red dirt.

Mr Tanter has observed the expansion of the spy base over a number of years.(Google/Maxar Technologies)

If a conflict broke out between the US and China, Mr Tanter says Pine Gap would play a hugely significant role, particularly around missile defence systems.

"Pine Gap would be detecting the launch of the missile … it would be queuing US missile defence systems to find that missile in mid-flight and attack it with their own missiles," he says.

Pine Gap's geo-location technology would then be used to find and destroy the missile launch site.

Paul Dibb, who held a high-level security clearance at Pine Gap for 30 years, says "it is the most potent intelligence collection facility that America has" outside of the US.

Mr Dibb says this put Pine Gap on targeting lists for the former Soviet Union during the Cold War, and it would be on those same lists for China in any conflict with the US.


"If it looked as though that crisis was going nuclear, China may want to take out Pine Gap as being the ears and eyes of America's capability," he says.

Regarding this announcement, here are some anecdotal viewpoints of members of the Australian Russian community (automatically translated into English):

They wrote above that this is rather the disposal of old junk, which is probably the only explanation for this movement. These craft are very old, they were released back in the 60s. Initially, they were designed for gravity tactical bombs in 28, In 41, In 43 and In 53, later in 61 and In 83. The first two types were disposed of back in 1991, the next two 6 years later. Once I read that the B-52 will no longer be used for throwing gravitational nuclear bombs, I just checked, and it is. In addition, by 2026 and B61 with B83 will probably become obsolete and they will be removed from service 😁

Moreover, this scrap metal can be shot down not only with the S-400 that China buys from Russia, and not with the S-300, but even with "Buks". Therefore, using them against China is either idiocy or despair 😁

1. Back in September last year, Australia abandoned the French "Barracudas", and then announced the creation of AUKUS. This alliance also involves replacing French submarines with American submarines and they are expected to be SLBM carriers. Therefore, the country drew a target on their own back.
2. B-52 is garbage. Of course, it's armageddon against Timor or Vanuatu, but for China and Russia it's a toy.
3. The US has enough bases around China. These planes do not solve anything at all either in the Taiwan issue or in the geopolitical games in the region.

I read about these planes. They were produced from 1954 to 1962. They develop a speed of up to 1050 km / h, i.e. they fly to Taiwan for at least 4 hours during which they can be shot down a hundred times. Plus, the reliability of an aircraft that is at least 60 years old to load nuclear weapons on it is questionable. Americans have nowhere to put outdated equipment, so they are being brought here?

They (H variant) have been extended until 2050. So another 30 years of obsolete equipment. 😁

To understand what kind of bird it is, only in Vietnam and only according to official data, the United States lost 31 B-52s. Then the Vietnamese used Soviet C-75 Dvina [air defense system]. Since then, air defenses have progressed roughly like mobile phones in time. If the S-75 is about like the Nokia 7650 with 4 megabytes of memory, then the S-500 that has been in serial production in Russia since the end of last year is the iPhone 14. And the B-52s, they are the same B-52s of 60 years ago, have remained so 😁
It appears that this move is not so much about sending a message to China, as it is about strengthening the US' political grip on Canberra at a time when the empire's power is waning at an accelerated rate.
 

China and AUKUS: Growing Tensions Ahead​

17 NOV 2022
By Associate Professor Jian Zhang

Beijing has expressed grave concerns and strong actions against AUKUS thus far. One can expect significant tensions between China and the AUKUS countries ahead.

Much of the debate on AUKUS in Australia has focused on the strategic rationale for the Royal Australian Navy acquiring eight nuclear-powered submarines (SSNs) and the likely timeframe for the vessels to be delivered. Relatively little attention has been paid to China’s thinking of and responses to AUKUS, even though the security pact has been generally perceived as a strategic move to check growing Chinese military power in the Indo-Pacific. Nevertheless, recent actions undertaken by Beijing against AUKUS foreshadow growing tensions ahead.

On 2 October 2022, the China Daily, China’s state-run English newspaper, featured a report claiming a diplomatic victory for Beijing at the 66th International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) General Conference held in Vienna on 26-30 September. According to the report, the Chinese delegation to the conference successfully “thwarted” an effort by the three AUKUS countries – Australia, the United States, and the United Kingdom – to propose an amendment to an IAEA safeguards resolution in order to “whitewash” the SSNs deal in the context of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Due to China’s opposition, as the report claimed, the three AUKUS nations eventually had to withdraw the proposed amendment. In a subsequent media interview after the IAEA conference, Ambassador Wang Qun, China’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations in Vienna, described the exchanges over the nuclear submarine issues at the conference as “unprecedentedly fierce” and “unprecedentedly substantial.” Indeed, it was reported elsewhere that a Chinese-sponsored anti-AUKUS resolution was also blocked at the conference.

The diplomatic battle at the IAEA conference was just one of a series of diplomatic and legal challenges staged by China against AUKUS in the context of the NPT. Ever since the announcement of AUKUS in September 2021, Beijing has mounted stringent criticisms of the trilateral partnership, condemning it for posing risks to nuclear proliferation, triggering an arms race and undermining regional peace and stability. In July 2022, two Chinese state-affiliated institutes, the China Arms Control and Disarmament Association and the China Institute of Nuclear Industry Strategy, jointly released a report on AUKUS. Entitled “A dangerous conspiracy: the nuclear proliferation risk of the nuclear-powered submarines collaboration in the context of AUKUS,” the some 12,000 word report claimed, among other things, that the submarine agreement was “a blatant act of nuclear proliferation” and “a serious violation” of the objective and purpose of the NPT by setting “a dangerous precedent” of transferring weapons-grade nuclear materials from nuclear-weapon states (US and UK) to a non-nuclear-weapon state (Australia).

Beijing’s responses have gone beyond merely voicing condemnations, however. Since November 2021, under China’s requests, the SSNs issue has been made an agenda item at the meetings of the IAEA Board of Governors for debate. What is particularly noteworthy is that at the IAEA Board meeting on 12-16 September 2022, China made a harsh criticism of Mr. Rafael Grossi, Director General of IAEA, over his report on the Agency’s hitherto engagement with the AUKUS parties on the safeguards in relation to the submarine collaboration. In a working paper submitted to the meeting, China accused Mr. Grossi of overstepping his duties as IAEA director general, producing a misleading report, and warned him of being used as a political tool by the AUKUS parties and of being involved in proliferation activities. Such an unprecedented public criticism of the IAEA director general, an act even described by Ambassador Wang Qun himself as an “non-typical measure” (fei changgui shouduan), demonstrates the unusual length China has gone in its attempts to block the submarine deal. At the meeting, China also insisted that the submarine matter should be resolved by an agreed formula to be worked out by all IAEA member states through an “intergovernmental consultation process.”

The strong actions taken by Beijing at the IAEA reflect its deep anxiety about the implications of AUKUS for China’s national security interests. Chinese security analysts overwhelmingly see AUKUS as fundamentally an anti-China military clique, formed as a vital part of US grand strategy in its intensified rivalry with China, and of representing a “critical step” by the US to construct an Asia-Pacific NATO. A researcher from the Pangoal Institute, a reputed think-tank in Beijing, recognises that AUKUS “fills a gap” in the area of military cooperation innovations in the US Indo-Pacific Strategy, making up a key weakness of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue. The latter, according to him, while being formed by the US to compete with China in a range of areas such as supply chain, infrastructure development, and space and cyber security, among others, has only limited potential for cooperation in military competition with China. In contrast, AUKUS reflects an innovation in military collaboration in the US-led alliance system in the region. It can rapidly increase the military capabilities of US allies, accelerate the integration of military operation systems between the US and its alliance partners, and maintain and enhance the military superiority of the US-led alliance in the region.

Notably, in addition to concerns on the direct military threats posed by the nuclear submarine agreement and other critical military technology collaborations, such as artificial intelligence and quantum technology, Chinese analysts also worry about the wider implications of the AUKUS partnership on China’s external security environment. For example, Professor Li Haidong from China Foreign Affairs University, noted that recent developments such as AUKUS are almost a “replica” of the US post-Cold War strategy towards Russia through NATO expansion, a strategy which eventually resulted in the marginalization of Russia’s influences in European security affairs and which forced Moscow resort to the use of force to protect its security interests. He warned that China should avoid being “made as another Russia” (bei eluosihua), noting the increasingly grim external challenges faced by China.

Australia’s role in the AUKUS grouping and the impact on Australia-China relations has also been a focus for Chinese analysts. For example, Wang Fan, the Vice-President of China Foreign Affairs University, observed that the AUKUS agreement “deprives Australia of its already extremely limited strategic autonomy, and subordinates it completely to US strategy. Australia has thus become an out-and-out US pawn.” Another Chinese analyst noted that the potential for Australia becoming a vanguard unit of the US in the West Pacific was increasing as Canberra has in recent years gradually chosen to side with Washington in its relations with China. Such a role requires Australia be further integrated into the operational systems of the US military, distancing itself further away from China on all aspects of the bilateral relationship, carrying further the risk of military conflict.

Jian Zhang is an Associate Professor in International and Political Studies at the School of Humanities & Social Sciences, UNSW Canberra at the Australian Defence Force Academy, the University of New South Wales, Australia.

This article is published under a Creative Commons Licence and may be republished with attribution.
 
Back
Top Bottom