Demands for a full civilian inquiry into the dangerous AUKUS pact are increasing. In fact, Australian Senator David Shoebridge goes so far as to say that “every rational observer” would agree the agreement is “sunk.” The AUKUS agreement is a trilateral security partnership between Australia, the United Kingdom and United States. Just recently, influential voices in Australia and the US have begun calling into question its feasibility and its expected cost and effect on defense spending.
The conversations recently have turned to U.S. submarine production rates. Both countries are now reconsidering how they can satisfy their defense requirements. It is this latter feeling that Mr. Shoebridge’s comments serve to underscore — a very bad omen indeed. Concerned environmentalists and pacifists are demanding urgent action to address the challenges facing the AUKUS deal.
Diverging Views on AUKUS
The sentiment surrounding AUKUS is not uniform. U.S. Pentagon Undersecretary for Policy, Mr. Colby, declared himself an AUKUS “agnostic” during House Appropriations Committee hearings last September. Although he applauded the President’s initiative “in principle” he communicated a lack of faith in the practical implementation. Such ambivalence leads to legitimate questions about how committed U.S. officials are and how confident they are in the agreement’s success.
Mr. Colby’s view would find resonance as well with a like-minded U.S. Defense Secretary, Pete Hegseth. Hegseth just called on Australia to increase its military budget by tens of billions of dollars. Sadly, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese ruled out such measures, revealing his government’s commitment to fiscal conservatism in the face of mounting international pressure.
These divergent views might presage trouble in future trilateral cooperation under AUKUS. The mood of unpredictability has generated alarm even from some past administrations’ heads. We certainly agree that the more consequential phase deserves more scrutiny.
Political Tensions and Review Implications
As the AUKUS review continues, concerns around political motivations have come to light, notably from the then Trump administration. One U.S. government interlocutor was explicit that the administration wants to tie the review directly to its campaign urging Australia to spend more on its own defense. The message is clear. Joe Hockey, a former Australian ambassador to the U.S., speculated that Mr. Colby had leveraged existing disagreements over defense budgets to initiate the review process.
Mr. Hockey further cautioned that a shortfall in submarine production capacity would pose the biggest risk of all for the United States. Most importantly, he underscored how difficult it would be to accommodate the needs of America and Australia. This national security concern sheds light on the importance of the review to our national security. It further illustrates its importance for strategic partnership between the two allies.
Former U.S. Navy secretary, Richard Spencer, is hopeful for the review’s results. He still thinks it will provide confirmation, even if indirectly, on the merits of AUKUS itself. This confidence is a marked departure from the views of some former Australian officials. They have been campaigning for an independent review to re-evaluate Australia’s place in the agreement on more reasonable and evidence-based terms.
Ongoing Confidence Amidst Doubts
Australian Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles In no uncertain terms, AUKUS has a bright future. He stands by his decision even as questions swirl around him and calls for investigation. After the meetings, in response to conversations with Mr. Hegseth, I recommended that their discussions gave you cause to remain hopeful about the future of the partnership. Marles was careful to stress that this American review should not be seen as undermining Australia’s own upcoming, second defense strategic review.
Former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has urged for an independent assessment of AUKUS. He criticized the two major parties for failing to face reality on the future of the submarine deal. Former prime minister Paul Keating expressed alarm at the Trump administration’s upset at AUKUS. He cautioned that ending the deal would have dire repercussions.
Former prime minister Scott Morrison just gave that warning, too. He cautions against reading too much into the current review. After all, AUKUS is critical to Australia’s national security. Angus Taylor, now the Coalition’s spokesperson on defense issues, called the review “deeply alarming.” He drew attention to the increasingly urgent list of challenges that are eroding Australia’s standing and influence in Washington.
