Australia’s blind leap into the AUKUS abyss

The AUKUS deal is a national scandal, and those responsible for implementing this deal need to face the judgment of history – and of the Australian public.

Australia’s decision to sign a 50-year treaty with the United Kingdom – locked in under the increasingly strange AUKUS security agreement – is not just a new stage in its defence arrangements, but an endless commitment to a strategy that no one seems to understand. Dubbed the “Geelong Treaty”, the agreement has been described by Defence Minister Richard Marles as one of the most significant treaties ever made between Australia and the UK. But just a quick scratch of the surface shows that this isn’t just a treaty – it’s a treaty within a treaty, resting beneath the broader AUKUS agreement – so we’re told – but it excludes the United States, the most powerful and central member of this agreement, an exclusion now will raise even further questions.

While Australia and the UK have tied themselves up in a financial and military deal that will last for half a century, the US has taken a step back, currently reviewing its role in AUKUS as part of its broader “America First” policy. This was barely acknowledged in the Australian media or within politics, even as the government signed a binding agreement with a nation whose own shipbuilding industry is in need of Australian taxpayer funding to be viable.

Marles, who was trying to make sense of all of this, said that the treaty “is the natural evolution of what we’ve agreed… it’s another step forward down the AUKUS path”. What this means is unclear, as is where it will lead us to, or why Australia is so desperate to stay on this path. This latest agreement seems to formalise intentions that have long been announced but never fully defined – intentions to build the SSN–AUKUS class of submarines, to be co-developed with the UK and possibly the US. But with no timeline, no concrete outcomes, and no guarantees, the agreement feels less like a strategic defence partnership and more like a very expensive exercise in blind faith and keeping up appearances.

What we do know so far is that Australia has already handed over $1.6 billion to the United States for the privilege of participating in AUKUS, and has so far received nothing in return. And with this new UK treaty, we’re committing even more public money to the construction and design of submarines that we might not ever see, and includes funding upgrades to British shipbuilding facilities in Barrow-in-Furness.

This is a direct subsidy to foreign powers, and instead of stepping back or reassessing the entire AUKUS deal, Australia seems to be doubling down. While both Britain and the US are reconsidering their commitments to AUKUS, Australia continues to send money overseas with no expectation of a return – like an eager or naïve donor trying to buy a seat at a table that doesn’t exist and never will. At least with the French submarines deal – that was cancelled to make way for AUKUS – we knew exactly what we were receiving: 12 Attack-class submarines at a contracted cost of $90 billion.

The absurdity of this is even more extreme when considered alongside Australia’s own domestic needs – the $1.6 billion already spent on AUKUS could have transformed sectors in crisis, such as health, education and housing. Medicare has seen some modest improvements under this Labor government, but imagine what a billion-dollar injection could have done to a struggling health sector. University systems are underfunded and facing cutbacks – how much difference would $1.6 billion make to education? Even local defence could be overhauled to suit modern Australian needs, instead of clinging to a Cold War doctrine that ended 30 years ago, or hanging on to the relics of 19th-century colonial imperialism.

Marles can claim this is a “good deal” for Australia for as long as he likes, but saying this with a straight face takes a certain level of political expertise and skill. After almost a decade of Liberal governments defined by disinformation and a relationship with the truth that always seemed optional, it’s concerning to see the current Labor leadership continue with this charade on national security. AUKUS has become the albatross around Australia’s neck that’s supported by both the major parties, compromising Australia’s sovereignty and, essentially, confronting a threat that hasn’t yet arrived and probably never will: China.

The shipbuilding billions disappearing into the ether

As it stands, the US Navy is already overstretched – barely able to meet its own requirements, let alone having the capacity to build and export nuclear-powered submarines for allies such as Australia, something US defence experts have already admitted. Rather than expanding their own capacities to meet genuine military and strategic needs, the AUKUS agreement is beginning to look like a bailout in disguise – a convenient funnel of cash from allies to prop up an ailing American industry.

If this was simply a one-off “friendship” contribution, it might be written off as strategic investment to keep friends onside. In addition to the $1.6 billion that’s been handed over – including a $800 million payment just in the past few weeks – the total commitment to US shipbuilding will end up being $4.7 billion, something which seems to be a financial rescue operation for US naval contractors. And if that’s not bad enough, we’re doing the same thing for Britain’s shipyards too. Taxpayer money is being used not to fund Australia’s own defence readiness, but to revive and sustain the shipbuilding industries of other nations. And these aren’t just allies – they are commercial players and competitors in the global defence markets that stand to profit, regardless of whether Australia ever receives a single submarine.