AUKUS sells sovereignty through foreign capacity

Dear Editor,

AUKUS is being sold as sovereign capability, but sovereignty is not created by a slogan.

Collins was difficult, but it was our difficulty. Australia owned more of the build, the learning curve, the industry base, the sustainment pain and, eventually, the capability.

AUKUS is different. The decisive submarine capacity sits inside United States and United Kingdom shipyards, budgets, workforce constraints and naval priorities. We do not command those systems.

That is the real risk.

Nuclear-powered submarines may be the right strategic answer for Australia. But a capability is not sovereign because ministers call it sovereign. It is sovereign only if Australia controls enough of the delivery, sustainment, timing, risk and exit options to protect its own interests when partners disappoint.

I argue this more fully at markcroxford.net/read.

Australians do not need every classified detail. But they do deserve to know whether AUKUS gives us real control, or merely dependence with better branding.

Regards

Mark Croxford
Navy veteran, former New Submarine Project logistics officer, and former Navy public relations officer in Defence PR 1994-2000 dealing with media criticism of the Collins-class submarine.

.

.

ChatGPT image

.

.


.


.