AUKUS just met Britain’s budget reality

Dear Editor,

John Healey’s resignation as UK Defence Secretary should give Australians pause.

AUKUS is often discussed in Canberra as though it is simply a matter of alliance confidence, strategic patience and official reassurance. But the submarine plan is not just a diplomatic agreement. It is an industrial, political and budgetary chain running through Washington, London and Canberra.

When Australia’s Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Richard Marles was in the United Kingdom for AUKMIN talks, the official statement said SSN-AUKUS remained on track. Yet within hours, the UK minister responsible for defence had resigned over defence spending.

That is not a minor detail.

I served as a logistics officer in the New Submarine Project in the early 1990s, joining just weeks after the keel of HMAS Collins was laid. That experience taught me that submarine programs are never just about platforms. They are about industry, money, workforce, sustainment, politics and time.

That is why I have argued in more detail at markcroxford.net/read that AUKUS has now met Britain’s budget reality.

Nuclear-powered submarines may still be the right strategic answer for Australia. But pretending the risks are merely theoretical does not make the policy stronger.

Australians deserve a more honest conversation.

AUKUS may survive John Healey’s resignation, but his departure exposes the uncomfortable machinery underneath the promise. Australia has not just bought future submarines. It has bought exposure to the defence problems of its closest allies.

Regards

Mark Croxford
Navy veteran, former New Submarine Project logistics officer, and former media and political adviser to Minister for Veterans’ Affairs 2000-2001

.

.

ChatGPT image

.

.


.


.