Life on the West Island - The 51st State?

Information released in recent days seems to reveal that the West Island’s two major political parties have signed up to a dud AUKUS deal, which was promoted as guaranteeing our national security by the projected delivery of up to eight nuclear powered submarines in around 30 years’ time.

This flaws now apparent in the arrangement include that by the time of delivery, the technology will be superseded or irrelevant; that the mooted cost of $400 billion will almost certainly blow out; that the deal does not in fact guarantee that any subs will be provided; that the pact does not ensure that either America or Britain would come to the West Island’s defence in the event of an enemy nuclear attack; and that we are outsourcing our national security to states beyond our control.

Stinging criticisms of the AUKUS deal have come thick and fast from eminent engineers, scientists, national security experts and now from extremely senior retired politicians. For example, former Prime Minister Paul Keating was especially scathing. His interview on the ABC’s 7.30 included many quotable quotes, such as:

What’s wrong [with AUKUS] is that we completely lose our strategic autonomy: the right of Australian governments, and the Australian people to determine where and how they respond in the world is taken away, if we let the United States and that military displace our military and our foreign policy prerogatives. I think we’re now defending the fact that we’re in AUKUS. If we weren’t in AUKUS we wouldn’t need to defend. If we didn’t have an aggressive ally like the United States; aggressive to others in the region, there’d be nobody attacking Australia. We are better left alone than we are being protected by an aggressive power like the United States.

It’s aggressive because it’s trying to superintend, from the Atlantic, the largest Asian power – which is China with four times its population, a navy of the same size – they’re going to try and superintend it as the primary – get this – the primary strategic power in Asia. That is, 9,000 km from the California coast, facing a country of 1.4 billion, they’re going to superintend them. What this is all about is the Chinese laying claim to Taiwan. And the Americans are going to say “no, no, we’re going to keep these Taiwanese people protected” even though they’re sitting on Chinese real estate. Taiwan is not a vital Australian strategic interest. Look, China’s got an economy now, according to the IMF, 20% larger than America. What are they expecting, for them to move around in rowboats? Canoes maybe? So, they developed their own submarines, their own frigates, their own aircraft carriers. They are the other major state in the world.

Now we’re going to get AUKUS, but not the submarines. What we’re going to get is what Kurt Campbell, the Deputy Secretary of State has said: “We’re going to tie these guys up for 40 years.” What AUKUS is about in the American mind is turning the suckers in Australia, locking us up for 40 years with American bases all around. So AUKUS is really about, in American terms, the military control of Australia. The Albanese government with their policy is likely to turn Australia into the 51st state of the United States. We don’t need to be basically a pair of shoes hanging out of the American backside.

Within days of the Keating interview, the federal government tabled in parliament more details of the AUKUS agreement, which raise concerning issues. In particular, cooperation under the agreement is to be carried out in such a manner as to “not adversely affect the ability of the United States and the United Kingdom to meet their respective military requirements and to not degrade their respective naval nuclear propulsion programs.” So much for the “guarantee” of our national security! The West Island could fork out $400 billion or more and not receive a single nuclear submarine if one of the other signatories to AUKUS finds it inconvenient. This alone should be enough for the West Island to tear up the agreement. Added to this is its unnecessary provocation of our largest trading partner, China.

Former West Island Foreign Affairs Minister Gareth Evans outlined the cynical reasons why the West Island signed up to this dud “national security” deal:

In Australia, domestic politics have been a key factor from the outset. While for the Morrison Government the primary driver of the AUKUS decision was, no doubt, the ideological passion of senior Coalition ministers for all things American, it is hard to deny political opportunism came a close second. Morrison was deeply conscious of the opportunity the deal presented to wedge the Labor opposition in the defence and security space, where the ALP has long been perceived, rightly or wrongly, as electorally vulnerable. That the nuclear dimension of the deal was bound to ruffle some feathers in Labor ranks was an added political attraction.

Perhaps the most compelling reason for the West Island to dump the whole AUKUS deal is that our “allies” are already moving away from using manned nuclear-powered submarines, because they are becoming increasingly easy to detect even when on the ocean floor due to advancements in satellite surveillance technology. This defeats their use in spying from offshore on supposed enemies, such as China. Evans argues that it is not too late for the West Island to mend its fences with France, and revive an order for French nuclear-powered submarines, which could be delivered at least 20 years before any AUKUS craft might become available. But he concedes that neither major party is likely to take this course.

Instead, our political leaders seem determined to turn us into the 51^st State of the Union.