Greg Sheridan thinks that the new submarine deal gives us "absolutely nothing"; we will end up with no submarines at all after the Collins can no longer be kept going. As with past talks on submarines, doubts will creep in, critics will rev up, and the whole thing will come to a halt until the next time someone comes up with another submarine myth.

All the government has actually done is cancel the French deal, and received a lot of good will without producing anything.

It takes the US 7 years to build a Virginia; 10 years for the UK to build an Astute - and they both know what they are doing.

Sheridan claims that it would take 15 years to train a workforce to be capable of building a nuclear submarine, and we might be able to get one on the water in 20 to 30 years if it is built in Adelaide. He reckons no government will have the guts to say that the things cannot be built in Adelaide, and talk-talk will drift along, the idea not abandoned outwardly, but put off as another thing to happen "by 2050" - which is as good as abandonment.

We could build some more Collins?

Like Manuel from Barcelona, I know nothing. But, can things get much more depressing in Australia?

can things get much more depressing in Australia?
ttbn,
Oh yes, if Labor gets in again !

Another example of the folly of war. Economic conservatism goes out the window whenever the warmongering politicians of the right (including Labor) get the chance to waste billions on such a nonsenses as nuclear powered submarines. This waste may allow Morrison to shove his head a little further up the American Presidents arse, something Australian Prime Ministers (except Gough Whitlam) have been doing for over 70 years for no advantage. Will it make Australia safer, NO, will it make us a greater target, YES.

individual

Yes. But the really depressing thing is that the government still looks like handing the election to Labor.

I like the idea of decommissioned reappointed US subs.

Another example of why the pinhead greens should never be in power.

CM,

Something along those lines would be good. America does have laid up subs, but their condition is unknown. I would prefer to get something from the Brits so that we could have proper English spelling on everything. Whatever happens, we should not try building ourselves. The Collins were a make work scheme, not a lot to do with defence.

SM.

Heads the size of a pin? That big?

Another example of the folly of war.
Paul1405,
Yet deep down you're cursing that "your" people didn't manage to fight a war to keep those dreaded invaders from Europe out !

shonkymister,

What war did you volunteer for? Most likely a conservative coward like the rest of them, including Menzies and Howard. Menzies refused to volunteer for WWI, although almost all young men of his age did so at the time, and Menzies was a vocal supporter of that war. Howard like Menzies dodged military service, in Howard's case Vietnam, a war he was a vocal supporter of. COALITION COWARDS, talk big about war, but never fight one themselves, China being today case, they always find others to be the cannon fodder.

ttbn,
If you want English spelling then go American English, American English is a repository of English spellings,
Example: Centre as used in Australia is a French spelling, ‘center’ as used in the US is one of Webster’s reforms and is more logical, however a good example of the US retention of an English spelling is ‘programme’(Fr.) used in English and ‘program’ as used by the US.
Thankfully we don’t use ‘doctour’ anymore but have reverted to the English spelling.
however we still use ‘labour’ instead of ‘Labor’ (except in the name of that party).

tt's Question: "Are Australian Nuclear Submarines A Myth?"

Answer: We'll only know in 2040 or later when/if such a sub is launched.
___________

But looking at the bright/dark side.

Come the next Federal Election (in about early April 2022) if Labor wins and the anti-nuclear Greens have the balance of power - the whole Aus Nuk Sub plan may be scuttled early.

Pete,

I was going to say, 'will China wait until 2040' , or something like that; then I read the second bit and thought, 'if that happens, we will have Chinese submarines here'. No Coalition, no Labor. The Greens would simply amalgamate with the CCP.

Many of the systems on the Collins Class are part of integration projects between US weapons systems manufacturers and Oz. I come from the position that companies perhaps shouldn't outsource critical features of their business. But yes we need to have these pieces of equipment now- this may require expeditious processes for the time being. We should try to keep the ASC infrastructure chugging along and developing it's capabilities over time.

host a US naval base here, and have their submarines patrol from here.

might be cheaper

And what are the odds that only tourist submarines will be manned by 2040/50.?

Chris Lewis,

Why not. Apparently we are going to have more US troops and aircraft here. However, there is probably a limit to how much they stretch themselves.

With the collapse of the Soviet Union, was not the Russian mafia going to sell a sub to the South American drug cartel? The ideal vessel to transport drugs to the US. We should have a couple of old tubs to sell.

Fortunately US nuclear subs have been visiting Australia's submarine base, just south of Perth, for years.

See my article on that http://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2015/05/us-nuclear-subs-that-temporarily-docked.html

An increase in US and UK nuclear submarine visits is very possible.

.

Dear ttbn,

.

You ask :

« Are Australian Nuclear Submarines A Myth? »
.

Rather a long-term project, I would suggest, ttbn. Scomo’s presentation of UKUS as the starting point of a “forever partnership” is particularly significant from my point of view.

The notion of eternity is, undoubtedly, deeply entrenched in Scomo’s Pentecostal Christian religious beliefs.

However, apart from creating the buzz, I don’t think the announcement of the UKUS pact will have much practical effect on our foreseeable current, short, or even medium-term vulnerabilities.

It certainly does nothing to counter the crippling bullying tactics of our leading trading partner. China has got us by the short and curlies and apparently there’s not much we can do about it.

That’s no pact or promise. It’s harsh reality.

Of course, there’s nothing wrong with preparing for the long term. That’s fine, but our betrayal of France was a stupid move and totally unwarranted. Our existing partner and important ally in the Indo-Pacific should have been part of the deal. We’ll probably pay dearly for that forever too – “beware of the Aussies, they can’t be trusted” !

We upturned the tables like a bull in a china shop in a desperate lunge for a promise of future security that will remain well beyond our reach for many years to come.

Australian diplomacy, I guess.

"She’ll be right mate" (with the proverbial slap on the back) !

I hope we manage to bungle through the next half-century or so.

.

When it comes to international diplomacy, Morrison is still wet behind the ears, he has no idea of the Chinese/American relationship and the
intricacies involved. America would drop Australia as easily as it dropped Afghanistan if it believed American interests were being served. As for Morrison, he naively tries to "sabre-rattle" without actually having a sabre to rattle. Our minor allies in South East Asia are greatly concerned with Australia's foolhardy provocations of China. Where we should be following a carefully plotted nonaligned diplomatic course in the region to bring about stability and peace, we seem to be hell-bent on creating belligerency in a hostile environment. Maybe Morrison wants to be remembered as the Australian Prime Minister who "defeated" China in the Great War of 22!

Sorry I didn't mention the Poms....they're irrelevant, with that fool Johnson still living in the sad old days of empire and gunboat diplomacy!

BJ,

UKUS? You left Australia out of AUKUS, and the Pentecostals are not part of the deal as far as I know.

But no. I don't see futuristic submarines or any other preparations being of much use when China seems to be ready to hop into us next week. On the other hand, China has never fought a proper war, merely helping out fellow Commos in Korea; a tiff with India, and some interference in Vietnam, whose Ho Chi Min loathed them.

It has been said by one China-watcher that the one child policy has produced spoiled little "emperors" who would piss themselves if they had to actually fight instead of goose stepping.

Let's hope for our sake, as well as theirs, that we never have to find out.

According to the Lowy Institute's take on this deal - there
is a real long-term significance for Australia. We're told
that "it signals that Australia is betting on the United
States as a long-term partner in the region as China's
rise continues. Australia is gambling that over the decades
long lifespan of these submarines the United States will
remain committed to its defence and to maintaining a regional
presence."

We're also told that the fact that Australia has cancelled
the submarine program with France's Naval Group is not a
bad thing because the project was going to deliver the
submarines too late and at an eye watering cost.

Does Australia need nuclear powered submarines?
It depends on what we want to achieve. They would be
important assets in any allied effort to deter war with
China or to defeat China if deterrence failed.

However, in summing up the Lowy Institute tells us that
- "It's also worth noting that these
subs will be largely dependent on US and UK nuclear know
how. We had better hope that our defence and foreign policy
priorities remain closely aligned with these two partners.

Foxy,
>They would be important assets in any allied effort to deter war with
> China or to defeat China if deterrence failed.

I think it's more accurate to say they would be impotent assets in any allied effort to deter war with China or to defeat China if deterrence failed!

A few submarines won't be much use against China, but nor will any vessels or weapons. A much more effective strategy would be to ensure the Chinese people don't blindly follow militaristic leaders. A good start would be to concentrate our efforts on making Xi lose face.

Just looked up the figures again, China has 4,016,000 in their Armed forceps, we have 88,700, so buy some epoxy glue and coat your Sabre blades liberally, then sheath; this will not only stop the onset of ‘sabre rattle’ it will also stop them being drawn.

“armed forces” above, not those medical pliers!

.

Dear ttbn,

.

You noted :

1. « UKUS? You left Australia out of AUKUS, … »
.

Yes, thanks for pointing it out, ttbn. That’s an interesting “lapsus calami” isn’t it ?

It reveals my profound, instinctive aversion to what is clearly a pact of voluntary servitude of Australia to the Us and its subordinate, the UK, in what Scomo soft-pedals as a “forever partnership” – but which, at least so far as Australia is concerned, no more than a pact of “forever servitude”.
.

2. « … and the Pentecostals are not part of the deal as far as I know »
.

That’s correct, ttbn. But Scomo is a Pentecostal Christian and he negotiated and signed the deal on behalf of the Australian government.
His presentation of the deal as a “forever partnership” intrigues me. Something that lasts forever is eternal. Nothing in this world is eternal. He seems to be projecting his religious beliefs onto Australia’s business dealings.

I also find it quite amazing that just 24 hours after having broken Australia’s monumental 20 year “contract of the century” with France, just five years after it began, he switched to a new supplier and “forever partner”.

It seems to me that Scomo’s track record as a “forever partner” leaves quite a lot to be desired.
.

Personally, I would like to see Australia assume its responsibilities as an independent nation in the Indo-Pacific. We seem to be heading in the opposite direction.

For many of us, our origins are in Europe, but we are not a European nation. It’s high time we realised it and changed our mindset.

.

BJ,

There is no "voluntary servitude": Australia and America are allies. We need the US more than they need us, and we would be toast without them as long as Communist China exists and continues to menace us.

Are Morrison’s personal beliefs any different from those of an atheist, like Bob Hawke, or a Catholic or a Presbyterian, doing deals on our behalf? You are aware of the separation of church and state in this country?

Given Communist China's aggression, we could simply not survive without allies these days. We are an "independent nation", just like Japan, India and the US, who don't feel joining 'The Quad' robs them of independence, but increases their security against a bully like China.

Australia is still principally European culturally. Geographically, Europe means little to us except in terms of trade. We will always be part of the Anglosphere, and part of the British Commonwealth, which includes a very wide variety of cultures, beliefs and styles of government.

We have lots of friends. China has few. It is our friendships, including the one with the United States of America, that will keep us safe from China. Going it alone is not an option

Hi Issy,

Nah! "forceps" is the correct word, we need 4 million armed forcep holders to pull Morrison out of Biden's arse, He's stuck that far up it!

.

Dear ttbn,

.

You wrote :

« Australia and America are allies … we could simply not survive without allies these days. We are an "independent nation", just like Japan, India and the US, who don't feel joining 'The Quad' robs them of independence … »
.

That’s correct, ttbn, we already benefit from five important National Security Treaties, none of which rob us of our independence :

1. The ANZUS Treaty (1951) formalises the Australia-New Zealand-US defence alliance

2. The Five Power Defence Arrangements (1971) facilitate bilateral and multilateral cooperation between the defence forces of Australia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Singapore and the United Kingdom

3. The Treaty of Rarotonga (1986) created a South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone, prohibiting the testing, production, acquisition, possession or stationing of nuclear weapons in the region

4. The Truce and Peace Monitoring on Bougainville, Papua New Guinea (1997 and 1998) agreements between Australia, Papua New Guinea, New Zealand, Fiji and Vanuatu concern the establishment and operations of the neutral Truce (and subsequently Peace) Monitoring Group on Bougainville

5. The QUAD (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue) 2007 re-established in 2017 between Australia, India, Japan, and the US for the Indo-Pacific

The new AUKUS partnership is an entirely different kettle of fish. It is not a mutual National Security Treaty per se. It is a contract to equip Australia with US nuclear submarines and the wherewithal to operate them, including state-of-the-art military technology and cyber-defence.

As Australia does not have a nuclear industry and is bound by its commitment to the Treaty of Rarotonga to remain nuclear-free, the new AUKUS partnership will inevitably result in the US exercising de facto control of the Australian navy and – icing on the cake – play a dominate role not only in determining but actually commanding our military strategy and operations.

Our “forever commitment” to the AUKUS partnership will render us totally dependent on the US in every sense of the word.

We will no longer be an “independent nation”. We will have forfeited our sovereignty.

Maybe we should see what the French have to offer as an alternative.

.

A Uyghur Muslim terrorist attacks a mosque in Afghanistan, killing 50 people, some no doubt Taliban members. The reason for the attack is the Taliban are sending Uyghur's back to China for "re-education". ISIS is at war with the Taliban, they view the Taliban as too moderate soft cocks, and sell outs. The Taliban are now "friendly" with the Chinese and the Americans, having meetings at the moment, what for I don't know, maybe they are planning a Billy Graham style Christian evangelical crusade throughout Afghanistan for a bit of quick Christian conversion. Australia is buying at a cost of billions, nuk subs on the never never plan from the Yanks, while relying heavily on trade with China, all this time our hospitals and schools etc are in a funding crises.

I don't care what people think of me, but I'm glad to be a NON-ALIGNED PACIFIST.

BP,

Whatever. You are obviously determined to see the worst in what the government does, even when it is very belatedly waking up to the problems we face. Just wait until next year, and you will probably have a different government to stuff things up the way you want.

With all respect to all OLO contributors, there is a clear difference between Australia's prospects when supported by the US than without US support.

Just ask the Asian neighbours of China if they would prefer the US to leave in these difficult times where China clearly displays its desire to rock the boat.

How do you think events would play out now if the US was not around?

Please explain rather than just saying things like we should be independent of be pacifist.

Paul1405 said- ISIS is at war with the Taliban, they view the Taliban as too moderate soft cocks, and sell outs. The Taliban are now "friendly" with the Chinese

Answer-

The ISIS (Muslim Brotherhood/ Mujahideen/ Al-Qaeda- The Cause) / Taliban (Students) relationship seems to be similar to the Nihilist/ Locke Liberal relationship of Dostoevsky's Demon's.

It's interesting that the Chinese might see the Taliban as their natural ally against the West- but perhaps it's just that the Taliban have brought the Chinese a "treasure chest".

At some level the Taliban vs ISIS is a friendly relationship just as between Dostoevsky's Demon's- Locke Liberal's vs Nihilist's (Communists).

But it's still fascinating to see a similar story in a different context

Yes Chris, lets ask the Vietnamese if they can trust the US and the other colonial powers, can they trust Australia? A nation that might have a different perspective on whose friendly and whose not. The countries of SE Asia in close proximity of China have always feared their larger neighbour, just as they can't trust America and its allies.

We can apply unreal "what ifs" , "if the US was not around", but the reality is they are around, and as usual stirring the pot, sorry protecting American interests. What if the Martians took over the world, well they haven't, so they are not a concern to me and don't effect my views. What business do the warmongering British have in sticking their noses in our region. Their track record doesn't read all that well, been in more modern wars than any other nation, except for the United States. They are not doing well, their report card makes for dismal reading.

Paul, what business does any power have in being in far away regions.

Well, all powers operate that way. That is how order is imposed in this competitive world.

What is your solution?

.

Dear ttbn,

.

You wrote :

1. « You are obviously determined to see the worst in what the government does, … »
.

Cancelling the “contract of the century” with France just 5 years after it began and choosing nuclear submarines from the US instead is a monumental political decision that interrogates every single thinking Australian – including you and me, ttbn.

My immediate reaction was why such a brutal about-turn ? What was the problem ? The official explanation was that it was due to a change in our national defence strategy and that the US had made an offer that was too good to refuse.

That seemed understandable given the recent aggressiveness of China and its bullying tactics in its dealings with Australia. But, on reflection, it gradually occurred to me that the decision had not just advantages but also inconveniences – which I explained in detail in my previous posts.

I do my best to see the full picture - not just part of it.
.

2. « Just wait until next year, and you will probably have a different government to stuff things up the way you want »
.

What I would like, ttbn, is what I wrote in my penultimate post :

« Personally, I would like to see Australia assume its responsibilities as an independent nation in the Indo-Pacific. We seem to be heading in the opposite direction »
.

I hope I am not the only one who wants that. Wasn’t that what our soldiers fought and died for in the Indo-Pacific during the Second World War ?

« Australia incurred losses of 45,841 not including deaths and illnesses from natural causes such as disease: 17,501 killed (including POW deaths in captivity), 13,997 wounded, and 14,345 living POWs. New Zealand lost 578 men killed, with an unknown number wounded or captured. 6 warships of the Royal Australian Navy totalling 29,391 tons were sunk: 3 cruisers (Canberra, Perth, and Sydney), 2 destroyers (Vampire and Voyager), and 3 corvettes (Armidale, Geelong, and Wallaroo, the latter two in accidents) » :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_War#Casualties

.

Hi Chris,

"Well, all powers operate that way. That is how order is imposed in this competitive world."

What order, whose order, more like order through subjugation. No war has led to "order" , just the opposite for the majority. Tell me how for the millions that perish in war, how they obtain "order". Australia is an aggressor nation, that is a fact, our blind adherence to American imperialism has made us so, but we chose to be belligerent in the world, we could have taken a different path. What "order" were we trying to impose in Korea, Vietnam, The Middle East and Afghanistan.

You ask for solutions, they are to be found in peace and not war. Being party to aggressive military alliances such as ANZAS and this new BS that ties us into purchasing aggressive nuclear attack submarines from America only goes to heighten tension and build suspicion of Australia, and our motives. If Indonesia was to do the same deal as Australia, but with China instead of America, how would you fell, threatened! I certainly would.

.

Dear Chris Lewis,

.

You wrote :

« … there is a clear difference between Australia's prospects when supported by the US than without US support … How do you think events would play out now if the US was not around? Please explain rather than just saying things like we should be independent … »
.

I consider it an immense privilege to have been born and bred in Australia by parents who were also born and bred in Australia. I place an extremely high value on our democracy and our sovereignty as a free, independent nation.

Apart from health and happiness, I place that above all else.

The US has a long history in the Indo-Pacific, dating back to the last battle of the War of Independence which occurred in India in 1783. Since that date, it has constantly maintained a presence in the Indo Pacific. It acquired Pearl Harbour in 1875 and entered the Second World War when the Japanese bombed it on 7 December 1941.

The first Americans arrived in Brisbane on 22 December 1941, and by 1943 their number had risen to 150,000 with the largest concentrations in Queensland. General Douglas MacArthur, who became the Supreme Commander of South-West Pacific Area in April 1942, initially established his headquarters in Melbourne.

For the past 80 years, the US has maintained an important presence in the Indo-Pacific.

There are currently 375,000 military and civilian personnel assigned to the United States Indo-Pacific Command including 1,714 based in Australia.

In addition, the joint Force Posture Working Group decided last May to expand the aviation and maritime co-operation of our two countries.

And let us not forget that the US proved to be Australia's best and only ally in WWII and I see no reason to believe that it will not continue to be so in the future – irrespective of AUKUS.

Unfortunately, I can’t say the same thing for the UK.

Churchill betrayed us at the Arcadia Conference in 1941 and resisted the return of our troops from the Middle East to defend Australia :

http://www.pacificwar.org.au/battaust/Britain_betrays_Australia.html

.

Thank You Banjo Paterson. I too consider it a
great privilege to have been born and raised
in Australia. And I agree that it is a good
thing to have the US presence and support.
Although I must admit that having lived and
worked in the United States for almost ten years
I would not want to live in that country.

Did anyone watch 60 Minutes on Channel 9 last night?

"All the President's venom." featured the horrifying
antics of former President Donald Trump and how close
we came to World War with China. More disturbing is
the fact that legendary Watergate reporter Bob
Woodward said that Donald Trump's antics as a bad
loser might make him a big winner at the next American
election and he would tear up any nuclear sub agreement
that the US had made with Australia. Scary stuff.

.

Dear Foxy,

.

You wrote :

« … I agree that it is a good thing to have the US presence and support »
.

Yes, we are two branches of the same genealogical tree.

Not only are we siblings, we are also “brothers in arms” :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjxNZH0qIe0&ab_channel=Lerche48al.WernerS.
.

Donald the dictator has never won the popular vote and I doubt that he ever will …

.

I consider Foxy's antics to be pretty horrifying too.