AUKUS Revamped: The Complete Militarisation of Australia
There is much to loathe about the AUKUS security agreement between Canberra, Washington and London. Of the three conspirators against stability in the Indo and Asia Pacific, one stands out as the shouldering platform, the sustaining force, the political and military stuffing. But Australian propagandists and proselytisers of the US credo of power prefer to see it differently, repeatedly telling the good citizens down under that they are onto something truly special in being a military extension, the gargantuan annexe of another’s interests. Give them nuclear powered submarines, let them feel special, and a false sense of security will follow.
The August 2024 AUSMIN talks in Annapolis, Maryland, held between US Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and their Australian counterparts, Richard Marles (Minister of Defence) and Penny Wong (Foreign Minister)provided yet another occasion for this grim pantomime. No one could be in doubt who the servitors were.
The factsheet from the US Department of Defense on the meeting is worth noting for Washington’s military capture – no other word describes it – and Australia’s sycophanticaccommodation. As part of the “Enhanced Force Posture Cooperation,” the US and Australia are to advance “key priorities across an ambitious range of force posture cooperation efforts.” This is merely a clumsy way of describing the deeper incorporation of Australia’s own military requirements into the US military complex “across land, maritime, air, and space domains, as well as the Combined Logistics, Sustainment, and Maintenance Enterprise.” US military forces, in short, are to occupy every domain of Australia’s defence.
The greedy and speedy US garrisoning of Australia is evident through ongoing “infrastructure investments at key Australian bases in the norther, including RAAF Bases Darwin and Tindal” and “site surveys for potential upgrades at RAAF Bases Curtin, Learmonth, and Scherger.” Rotational deployments of US forces to Australia, “including frequent rotations of bombers, fighter aircraft, and Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance Aircraft” are to increase in number. As any student of US-Australian relations knows, rotation is the disingenuous term used to mask the presence of a permanently stationed force – occupation by another name.
The public relations office has obviously been busy spiking the language with a sense of false equality: the finalising, for instance, by December 2024 of a Memorandum of Understanding on Co-Assembly for Guided Multiple Rocket Systems (GLMRS) – a “co-production”; finalising, by the same date, an MOU “on cooperative Production, Sustainment, and Follow-on Development of the Precision Strike Missile (PrSM)”; and institutionalising of “US cooperation with Australia’s Guided Weapons and Explosive Ordnance (GWEO) Enterprise.” Everywhere we look, a sense of artificial cooperation under the cover of Washington’s heavy-handed dominance, be it cooperative activities for Integrated Air and Missile Defence, or the hypersonic weapons program, can be found.
In this even more spectacular surrender of sovereignty and submission than previous undertakings, Canberra is promised second hand nuclear-powered toys in the form of Virginia Class submarines, something forever contingent on the wishes and whimsy of the US Congress. But even this contingent state of affairs is sufficient for Australia to bury itself deeper in what has been announced as a revised AUKUS agreement. More accurately, it constitutes a touch-up of the November 22, 2021 agreement between the three powers on the Exchange of Naval Nuclear Propulsion Information (ENNPIA).
The ENNPIA allows the AUKUS parties the means to communicate and exchange relevant Naval Nuclear Propulsion Information (NNPI), including officially Restricted Data (RD) as part of what is described as the “Optimal Pathway” for Australia’s needless acquisition of nuclear powered vessels.
In his letter to the US House Speaker and President of the Senate, President Joe Biden explains the nature of the revision. Less cumbersomely named than its predecessor, the new arrangements feature an Agreement between the three powers for Cooperation Related to Naval Nuclear Propulsion. In superseding the ENNPIA, it “would permit the continued communication and exchange of NNPI, including certain RD, and would also expand the cooperation between the governments by enabling the transfer of naval nuclear propulsion plants of conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarines, including component parts and spare parts thereof, and other related equipment.”
The Agreement further permits the sale of special nuclear material in the welded power units, and other relevant “material as needed for such naval propulsion plants.” Transferrable equipment would include that necessary for research, development, or design of naval propulsion plants. The logistics of manufacture, development, design, manufacture, operation, maintenance, regulation and disposal of the plants is also covered.
Tokenistic remarks about non-proliferation are then made in Biden’s letter. The powers, for instance, commit themselves to “setting the highest nonproliferation standard” while protecting US classified information and intellectual property. This standard is actually pitifully low: Australia has committed itself to proliferation not only by seeking to acquire submarine nuclear propulsion, but by subsidising the building of such submarines in US and UK shipyards.
Marles, the persistently reliable spokesman for Australia’s wholesale capitulation to the US war machine, calls the document “the legal underpinning of our commitment to our international obligations so it’s a very significant step down the AUKUS path and again it’s another demonstration that we are making this happen.”
Obligations is the operative word here, given that Australia is burdened by any number of undertakings, be it as a US military asset placed in harm’s way or becoming a radioactive storage dump for all the AUKUS submarine fleets. Marles insists that the only nuclear waste that will end up on Australian soil will be that generated by Australia. “That is the agreement that we reached with the UK and the US back in March of last year, and so all this is doing is providing for the legal underpinning of that.”
Given that Australia has no standalone, permanent site to store high-level nuclear waste, even that undertaking is spurious. Nor does the understanding prevent Australia from accepting the waste accruing from the fleets of all the navies. Given the cringing servitude of Canberra, and the admission by the Australian government that they have made undisclosed “political commitments”, such an outcome cannot be ruled out.
Always reliably waspish, former Australian Labor Prime Minister Paul Keating gave his assessment about the latest revelations of the AUSMIN talks. “There’ll be an American force posture now in Australia, involving every domain.” The Albanese government had “fallen for the dinner on the White House lawn.” That, and much more besides.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
14 comments
Login here Register here-
Phil Pryor -
Gregory Sclater -
Arnd -
Simon -
Baby Jewels -
Senna -
Harry Lime -
Fred -
Cool Pete -
David O'Neile -
Clakka -
-
Cenrelink customer -
Douglas Pritchard
Return to home pageThis stinker of a militarist concept is putridly aggressive towards China, to a future war, to misery and agony for us, for profiteering on the filthest scale by mostly USA interests. Blinken and Austin, possibly nice chaps at home, are hopelessly inadequate on a world stage in a situation requiring wisdom, calculated diplomacy, genuine ability to analyse and negotiate. As for us, poor silly US, Marles is a juvenile, Wong is in survival get the pension mode, Albo is troppo, non compo, near zero on this huge brainbumblast from the deficient odious and duncible maggot, Morrison. We cannot make a motor bike, a shitty old car, white goods, basic domestic electrics, build enough houses for our suffering people. We now have a general defective skills base. Could we do basic panel beating on a sub? Waste products are avoided by others, a permanent and irritating problem. Have the world’s grubbyleaders not heard of Peace? Of Diplomacy, negotiation, fellowship, unity? Surely a civilised attitude would be better for all of us little folk, the unheard?
The demise of Australia looms ever closer as the Divided States of Anarchy stakes it’s claim on more and more of our soil and assets while our (cough) ‘leaders’ pander and crawl to their puppet masters at every level, no matter which party is in power. Sickening in the extreme! Australia will never be great while it allows others to dictate our foreign affairs and defense policies.
Eerily reminiscent of the shenanigans of the German Social Democrats at the beginning of WWI 110 years ago: they just couldn’t help themselves but vote with reactionaries of the Kaiserreich in favour of war credits.
Marx was correct: History always repeats twice, first as tragedy, then as farce.
Also: No, you can’t trust the bastards!
Well, actually, you can: when given half a choice, they will chart a course of chicken-hearted acquiescence with the powers that be.
It’s called “The Third Way”.
The AUKUS agreement between Australia, the UK, and the US involves Australia acquiring 8 nuclear-powered submarines by 2050. The estimated cost for this program is around 368 billion Australian dollars (approximately 230-240 billion USD) over the next three decades.
However currently the oceans are becoming more “transparent” and likely soon submarines will be detectable. Is this correct ? And if so are our “Generals” gearing up to fight “the last war” again?
Advanced underwater offence capable drones costing ~ $100 million per unit using AUKUS dollars would provide us with 2,300 units that would potentially provide a robust defensive capability around Australia, possibly matching or exceeding the protective capacity of the AUKUS submarine plan in terms of immediate territorial defence. The extensive coverage and distributed nature of such a force could create a formidable deterrent against direct attacks on Australia.
This “porcupine” strategy based on a large underwater drone fleet could be more conducive to regional trust compared to the AUKUS submarine “spear” plan. It would represent a clear shift towards a defensive posture, potentially reducing tensions and fostering a more cooperative regional security environment.
Ultimately, being a good neighbor and fostering a stable, cooperative regional environment may prove to be the most effective long-term security strategy for Australia in the evolving Indo-Pacific context
What more has Albanese up his sleeve to sell us out? What isn’t he telling us? Aren’t things bad enough already with AUKUS? As Simon says: “Ultimately, being a good neighbor and fostering a stable, cooperative regional environment may prove to be the most effective long-term security strategy for Australia,” good trade relations with our neighbours and greatest trading partner, China. AUKUS has put a target on our back that wasn’t there previously, and clearly, there’s more bad news coming. Albanese has deceived us, let us down, and become a traitor.
BJ “What more has Albanese up his sleeve to sell us out?”
Could it be that closer to home, literally, the UniParty have your property title in their sights?
Former Senator Len Harris and Rod Cullenton seem to think so. Former actress (Neighbours) Nicola Charles has also been highlighting this situation. Another example of sleight of hand by the BAR? Time will tell.
I think it was former WEF savant & useful idiot, Klaus Schwab, who said ‘You will own nothing and be happy’.
Now I see how that is possible – legal trickery.
USA..United States of Armageddon..finger wagging from the sidelines on the latest mass murder in Gaza,but not serious enough to put a spanner in the flow of killing material to Bibi the butcher.It’s not personal, it’s only business.Mafia # 101.By bending over for our ‘great friends”,we are complicit.
Has anyone bid for “Bibi ,the Musical?” But who gives a fuck? The footy finals are coming up,spring is in the air,and we can resume our slumber.
The sad part to all of this is the underlying “protection of borders” race to the bottom by both the LNP and Labor. In trying to outdo each other they have lost perspective. From the “I don’t think… I know” Macron moment where we tore up the contract to build conventional submarines based on a design developed from nuclear (what the ….?), the bad strategy/decisions have kept coming.
Keating is right in saying that Australia can look after itself, but only if we purchase weapons that would destroy an attacking armada, instead of Abrams tanks and howitzers.
Simon’s 2,300 autonomous underwater drones would be a serious start.
AUKUS is all about Australia giving the UK an US lots of money in exchange for “nuclear” knowledge. Anything US on our soil makes us a target. We should have learnt by now, from Vietnam to Afghanistan, that being military buddies with the US comes at a cost.
Some right-wing potties fart that if it wasn’t for the US, we’d be speaking Japanese by now, to which I respond, “I have been since I was 12.” Had Pearl Harbor not been bombed, the USA would not have entered the war! That does not mean that we owe the US our sovereignty. Another lot of right-wing potties, namely Poo Lean Hanson’s One Neuron, whine about the UN and the WEF, but have no problem with the US and hope that Donnie Done-A-Shit will win the November Election.
Interesting: recently both Indonesia & Malaysia visited Russia to sign up to BRICS+
Maybe the deployment and control of underwater drones via the Aukus subs is the (secret) plan. Any other aspiration for those subs just does not stack up. I might add that underwater drones could be designed for many multiples of purpose.
Pingback: This week’s nuclear news- miles too long- sorry! – Equilibrion
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, Senator Katy Galagher and CEO of ACOSS Cassandra Goldie,
I reported to each and all of you 2 illegal debt schemes administered by Services Australia. None of you ever acknowledged the abuse.
Scheme #1. Services Australia provided me with an objection letter instead of a formal review decision required by law. The initial decision was never changed as no formal review was conducted.
Scheme # 2. Family Assistance office automatically issue debt notices for a full Rent Assistance if parent was not eligible for FTB. This is illegal.
Both of the schemes are based on vulnerability of welfare recipients who are unaware they are being abused. Australian taxpayers are unaware they pay for the production of objection letters, their AAT reviews, etc. AAT should never review objection letters as they are non-legally binding documents.
Anthony Albanese, Katy Gallagher and Cassandra Goldie, you have to explain why you did nothing to stop it.
Just a short hop up the coast is a lovely town called Rockingham, where i lived once, and I still keep in touch with friends there.
Offshore is Garden Island which is where OUR navy has a base, with service personnel living in the town.
Now the locals are fighting off the fact that there is to be a waste facility for radioactive waste on the island.
The wharfs will be readied for USA and UK (And whoever) ships and subs to rotate into.
To top it off they are having to make provision for approx 700 service families from USA to start the new base when all over the globe residents are moving heaven and earth to get the Yanks out.
With a triple whammy heating up the locals are exceedingly peed off, and feel they have been sold a dud, while the rest of the country focuses on the dopey subs deal they are likely to be overrun by Yankee servicemen with all the anti-social behavior that goes with it.