plantagenet,

Thanks for the info.- so the technical problems are not insurmountable for a country our size, eg Israel and South Africa. However, I'd judge the political difficulties as rather huge given Australia's treaty obligations and if our intentions to develop nuclear weapons became public it would scare the beejeezus out of our neighbours in SE Asia, one in particular. I presume you're advocating a discrete marshalling of resources to prepare for a crash program.

I'm rather cynical in regard to the protection offered by our "great and powerful friends",after our experience with the UK.

Mac

As my first comment in the thread implied the timeframe to start evolving into a nuclear capability may be from 2020.

I think politically, strategically, technically and financially it would be too early in the next ten years to develop nuclear weapons.

By 2020 nuclear weapons will probably have proliferated to Iran and in de facto terms to Saudi Arabia (which largely financed Pakistan's nuclear effort).

Pakistan, India and North Korea will have developed missiles with the range to hit Australia. India will have nuclear powered, nuclear armed missile subs (3 under construction) as well as three good aircraft carriers (2 being built already).

Perhaps the olds plans of Japan, Taiwan and South Korea to develop nuclear weapons will have been dusted off and progressed as a threat to us.

So all this suggests 2020 is the time to start build (if not designing earlier).

The ideal delivery system is not only Harpoon, then Tomahawk, then supersonic cruise then sub launched ballistic missiles.

Australia should consider what Brazil is moving into now ie nuclear propelled submarines (SSNs). SSNs are two or three times more effective than the conventional subs Australia is proposing against every parametre including cost.

In terms of the construction of 12 subs to be built between 2020 and 2030 I suggest the first six will be conventional the next 3 nuclear powered attack (SSN) then the last 3 nuclear powered ballistic missile (SSBN). If Australia doesn't go that way we will fall behind many countries cruising in our region and coveting our underprotected resources.

As countries around the world steadly go nuclear they disregard the treaties drafted by countries that are ALREADY nuclear.

In terms of alarming our neighbours 100 aircraft and 12 large conventional subs are already alarming and signal an arms race. Countries say they're not bothered but still they are building and buying new vessels and aircraft very rapidly in our region

Why not give our necessary defence systems nuclear teeth after 2020? This will make the northern giants with vastly larger conventional forces AND nuclear forces think twice about incorporating us.

Pete

Online_east

I agree with your claim that we helped create the China miracle but wonder just how much capacity we have to neuter it.

I do admit that in the Australian-China trade relationship we in Australia have the upper hand but are too stupid to acknowledge it. And too feeble to exercise it.

Plantagenet

Thanks for the positive comments.

I looked at your web site. Most interesting!

I fully agree with your comments regarding the urgency for a transition towards a nuclear capability, and with your Brazilian solution to our situation.

Arjay

With respect to your comments where you use the banking system to illustrate the folly of the West, I would go further. In many many spheres we in the West can learn from the East, but as the West through the Romans, Vandals, Byzentines etc have shown: we think we know best. Until our civilization decomposes.

More fool us.

Whilst a semi-secret nuclear program (like Israel) *may* provide a deterrent, more likely it would start a regional arms race and make us a target. I also doubt that it would be politically viable without an operation Northwoods type scenario. There are other ways to make us an expensive military target. A good missile/space program would help.
Also nuclear is *very* expensive and our GDP is not really large enough to support it at the moment. Whilst the engineering and research would be good for the country, we have some very serious basic issues of water and food security that also need the scientists and engineers. (Which we are importing: this should be a more serious security concern!)
Our military is also suffering a management crisis. These guys cannot even manage shipping pallets! (tip of the iceberg when it comes to logistical incompetence).
At the moment China is our best chance of a speedy economic recovery, or possibly any economic recovery since we exported most of our manufacturing there. Diplomatically it would be better to play friendly whilst keeping to the "minimum nuclear" line.

As an increasingly prosperous country, China is quite reasonably increasing its armed forces, inlcuding its navy. Australia should not assume that there is any aggressive intent.

Jonathan Ariel's comment about a Chinese submarine popping up in a US Navy exercise is not that surprising. Warships in a large ocean can be surprisingly hard to find. Flying out in a helicopter to the USS Blue Ridge during exercise with the US Navy, I was surprised at how difficult this very large warship was to see until we were quite close: http://www.tomw.net.au/nt/tt97.html

Submarines are even harder to find. Australia's fleet of proposed enhanced conventional submarines will be a very effective deterrent, if they are ever built. They will be particularly effective if accompanied by miniature robot submarines: http://www.tomw.net.au/blog/2009/03/smaller-crews-for-collins-class.html

Jonathan Ariel comments that the RAN doesn't plan to have any aircraft carriers, while China is likely to have three. This is not quite correct, as Australia has ordered two Landing Helicopter Dock ships from Spain. These are designed for operating V/STOL fighter/attack aircraft. Australian is planning to order the F-35 stealth aircraft which has a V/STOL variant, although the RAN do not admit to any ambitions to have them: http://www.tomw.net.au/blog/2006/05/mini-aircraft-carriers-for-australian.html

Australia has also ordered the Aegis equipped Spanish Álvaro de Bazán class frigates. Along with the LHS and submarines, these could form an "Influence Squadron", to project naval power: http://www.tomw.net.au/blog/2009/05/influence-squadrons-for-australian-navy.html

Unfortunately, some Australian technology, such as Australian multi hull ship design, is not used by the RAN, but by the US Navy and by the Chinese. The USA uses Australian designed fast transport ships: http://www.tomw.net.au/blog/2009/02/australian-design-selected-for-us.html

The Chinese Type 022 Houbei Class Missile Fast Attack catamaran is said to be based on an Australian multi hull ferry design: http://www.tomw.net.au/blog/2008/02/australian-designed-missile-ships-for.html

Thanks tomw

For your trust in the Middle Empire to be.

Some Google counters advise how many million hits each word on the Web receives on any subject, as proof, of something.

You present a treasure trove of strings highlighting a Blog in place of useful arguments regarding the matters in hand.

Regards

Pete