Australia’s First AUKUS Payment: A Potential Last Stand?
Australia’s recent $500 million payment towards the AUKUS nuclear submarine deal should be its last. While the 2021 agreement promises US nuclear-powered submarines, significant budgetary, organizational, and personnel challenges threaten its viability. Rather than committing to this expensive and potentially unsustainable undertaking, Australia should explore a more cost-effective and rapid alternative.
The High Cost and Challenges of the AUKUS Submarine Deal
The financial burden of the AUKUS submarine plan is immense. Australia’s defense budget, while growing, faces strain from the projected cost of the submarines, estimated at over $3 billion each. This represents a substantial portion of the annual defense budget, even with planned increases. Experts warn that the submarine acquisition will necessitate significant cuts to other defense programs, potentially impacting surface warships or ground units.
Beyond finances, the organizational and personnel aspects pose substantial obstacles. Australia lacks the infrastructure and personnel necessary to manage a nuclear propulsion program effectively. The vast difference in workforce size between the US Naval Nuclear Propulsion program and the Australian Submarine Agency highlights this gap. Similarly, the Royal Australian Navy’s (RAN) current size struggles to meet the personnel demands of a nuclear submarine fleet, considering the need for training, shore duty, and maintenance crews.
AUKUS Plan B: Prioritizing Emerging Technologies
A more effective strategy for Australia involves a modified AUKUS approach—a Plan B. This revised plan leverages the strengths of both Pillar One (nuclear submarines) and Pillar Two (emerging defense technologies). Instead of committing to purchasing US Virginia-class submarines, Australia could rely on a rotational presence of US and UK submarines operating from Australian bases, supplemented by RAN personnel and maintenance crews. This approach would offer sufficient deterrence without the exorbitant costs and logistical complexities of a full acquisition.
Investing in Uncrewed Systems and Emerging Technologies
The funds saved by foregoing the purchase of Virginia-class submarines could be reinvested in developing and fielding cutting-edge technologies under AUKUS Pillar Two. These include uncrewed systems, AI, quantum computing, and hypersonic weapons. Such technologies could provide a significant portion of the capabilities offered by nuclear submarines at a fraction of the cost. Long-range drones and autonomous underwater vehicles could perform crucial surveillance and offensive missions, deterring potential adversaries.
Industrial Benefits and Expanded Partnerships
Investing in these advanced technologies would also stimulate US and Australian industries, nurturing numerous emerging companies. This would not only benefit the AUKUS allies but could also create export opportunities to other countries, such as Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, and Canada, potentially driving down costs.
A Balanced Approach: AUKUS Plan B for the Near Term
While uncrewed systems cannot entirely replace the capabilities of crewed nuclear submarines, a Plan B offers a more realistic and cost-effective approach for the near to mid-term. This strategy delivers necessary offensive capabilities, strengthens alliance interoperability, and fosters industrial growth, maintaining the significance of AUKUS. The Australian government should prioritize this pragmatic alternative during upcoming discussions with the new Trump administration.
