AUKUS Submarine Deal: Reactions and Analysis | Allan Behm on ABC 730
VloĆŸit
- Äas pĆidĂĄn 13. 03. 2023
- As details of the AUKUS submarine deal are unveiled in the US, Allan Behm, head of International & Security Affairs at the Australia Institute, joins ABC's 730 for analysis.
đ§ The biggest stories and the best analysis from the team at the Australia Institute, delivered to your inbox every fortnight(ish). theaus.in/newsletter
â€ïž If you'd like to become a supporter and help us make more videos like this, visit: theaus.in/donateYT
As Keating said, like throwing toothpicks at a mountain.
So why not just roll over for the Chinese
@@petersouthernboy6327 The Chinese are smart. They are not dumb. They want to control the world that is why they are everywhere, in Africa, Europe. People don't see that the subs are a deterrance. If the bully knows that he can beat you and steal your lunch money, he will do so. But if the bully knows that you have a weapon that can kill him, he will think twice. If you think in the future, these chinese will not try to take over Taiwan, Australia or other countries, ask the Ukrainians.
By the time they are ready. Boy you would already be rolled over
A brave move indeed , almost as brave as a man wearing budgy smugglers antagonising a rabid rottweiler with a tooth pick!
@@petersouthernboy6327 Why not be smart and do business with them without hypocritically attacking them over their own internal policy issues? We need them more than they need us.
What a lemon deal
The blind leading the blind
46 billions for 1 sub a total rip off
Going along with the US has worked well in the past. Just think of Korea , Vietnam , Iraq (twice!) , Afghanistan etc. Fantastic record.
You left out the part about Saving us in WW2.
Stan quite conveniently forgets that little distraction called World War 2. In fact - in 1942, the Australian PM formally requested of President Roosevelt that US troops be garrisoned in Australia and that the Australian military be placed under General MacArthurâs command.
@@yakidin63 Well it's obvious that WW2 wasn't started by the US , The US came in late and I think if the US wasn't involved we still would have been fighting the Japanese which is not the case for the wars that I mentioned. Perhaps you're suggesting that because they helped us in WW2 we are obliged to go into every war they start for ever.
No one is forcing Australia to buy these things. But just remember, if the chinaman ever attacks Australia, then they will have to defend themselves just like how the Ukrainians are defending themselves. Nobody will come to their rescue.
â@@stanstreatfield3485 read the real history, WW2 had effectively been ended by the Russian's efforts both on the European and Japanese front. The US came in late and took all the credit.
Decades of publicity and negotiation about these hundreds of $billions being spent on something that will probably be torpedoed and sunk within a short time of any future war breaking out. That uranium will land permanently on the bottom of the ocean floor. Why the hell are we wasting this indecent amount of money when so many other things urgently need doing, things that will make a real difference in the lives of Australians.
Shame on Labor for going ahead with this deal.
I am so angry at my tax dollar going to this amount of my hard earned wasted I will change my lifelong vote
Australia GDP is 1.357 trillion and 368 billion is 27% of annual GDP. Averaging over 20 years commitment will still be about 1.35% per year of GDP. Add 1.35% to total annual defense budget of 2% of GDP. So Australia is committed to 3.35% of GDP on military spending for the next 20 years. Not including cost overrun.
@@stevencher9968 The greatest threat to Australia in 240 years is ourselves. Loss of top soil, rivers creeks clogged with mud, 90% forest and bush cleared. Farm land becoming less productive. Oh yeah climate change . Thousands species of plants and animals evolved over hundreds of millions of years gone in 240 years. Think what $280 billion plus could be done on the land , a few trees worth there. Not glowing rust buckets with a life span of 30 years and no Australian in their right mind wants to crew or spend 12 months underwater. No sun, no barbecues, no recreational topside on the casing like the diesel subs. Throw a chop of the glowing reactor.
@@stevencher9968 I think the only person impressed with this figure manipulating will be you, and shows just how you missed the point, it is a waste of any money that has to be found by cutting other services
As a US tax payer, I am angry my tax dollars provide security to countries that don't pay their fair share.
I think the US should leave NATO and also leave Australia to fend for itself.
The US has the largest mil in the world. Larger than the top 9 combined.
The US doesn't need NATO nor does ti need Australia.
As a US tax payer, I think Australia should fend for itself and stop riding the alliance coattails of the US.
What the Texas professor doesnât mention is that storing the uranium after the subâs 25 year life doesnât entail opening the reactor to extract the fuel.
When nuclear submarines are scrapped the entire reactor hull section is separated and sealed for long term storage.
He also doesnât mention that Australia already has its own facilities to develop weapons grade uranium, by itself.
Where can australia make weapons grade uranium?
â@@bofty By recycling old submarine nuclear reactors since they don't want the waste back! ;-)
Nah just kidding: the voting public here in Australia would never allow it to happen. Thank god we live in a democracy here unlike in China!
@@bofty Lucas Heights in Sydney, but itâs currently only used to make medical radioisotopes.
@@nonpartisangunowner4524 Lucas Heights canât make weapons grade uranium though
Throw 12 billion a year at the car industry and youâd be a world leader in that
Our cars were shit
@@joncarolyn no, they werenât
0:34 well done, Mr B. You kept a straight face while saying that. Kudos to you.
I agree with him.
@@KayAteChef That's unfortunate. Their "leadership" in the Pacific has resulted in poisoned islands and poisoned food supply for an entire population, who have had to relocate without compensation.
And for what? So the US could figure out that using hydrogen bombs against a foreign navy is an ineffective strategy. Massive fail.
What scale of salesman did this?
The best defence against terrisom allover the world thanks to aukus we must protect against terrisom stronger than ever
China is Australia's largest trading partner, outpacing the combined purchases of the next three partners. Australia's exports to China account for 10.4% of its GDP. In 2022, Australia had a total trade surplus of AUD 135 billion, with China contributing AUD 103 billion. Australia is spending AUD 368 billion on the acquisition of these nuclear-powered hunter-killer fast-attack submarines to protect its trade routes with China from China.
China's sole objection to the AUKUS submarine is that it violates the NPT. China has no problem with Australia developing and building its own nuclear-powered or nuclear-armed submarines. The US and UK will eventually persuade the IAEA that these HEU-powered hunter-killer fast attack submarines are for peaceful and non-military use.
AUKUS will also provide additional incentives to China and India to expand their nuclear submarine fleets and countries with a nuclear supply chain, such as Brazil, South Africa, Pakistan, Iran, and North Korea, gets the green light to develop nuclear-armed and nuclear-powered submarines.
Exactly. We'll get a nuclear arms race in the Asia-Pacific, thanks to the imperial ambitions of the United States.
Absolute tragedy for us and all future generations.
Yep... Project Iron Boomerang is key to making this a realityđ
QUESTION...
How many Hunter Class Frigates, Hobart Class Destroyers and Canberra Class LHDs could $368 Billion buy...?
Money better spent I would sayđ
Thatâs 40 years from now and the British already said they would take care of decommissioning the subs when time comes or have a contractor I believe Germany did all of the Soviet unions old subs
Question is that we could now have CUBA II in development, where Australia becoming CUBA II and duel probably will be between USA and China . We don't need this !
If the u.s can sell nuclear power then so can russia and china. This includes nukes.
Big Price to be paid for a little freedom !
The entire reactor segment will be removed from the sub. Therefore the HE Uranium will not leave the vessel and therefore Australia will not have access to weapons Grade material.
It is still definitely pushing the boundaries of what can be considered fair game but it is not what the supposed expert suggested.
We cannot even keep a highly radio active pellet the size of a 5 Cent piece falling off the back of a truck somewhere between Perth and Adelaide!
@@rsinclair6560 luckily nuclear reactors are a bit larger than a 5 pence piece
@@regarded9702 Agree, The cost will blow out over $500 billion so better off spending on a Westinghouse AP1000. 8000 megawatt powerstation, share the power. Energy shortage solved. Green house gas emissions solved Location ???...TBT.
@@regarded9702 Umm, his point was not about the size of the pellet, but about the safety protocols or lack thereof đ
Nuke-power submarines x8nos is not for defence but for confrontation or provocation to China. Do Australia really need it. Hopefully this deal come to Australia benefits and not disadvantages. â â
Absolute disgrace. This amount of money could transform Australia - instead blown on 8 subs and makes war more likely.
Highly enriched hypocrisy.
Well if Malcolm had the guts to ask French for nuclear submarines fist up Australians wouldnât have had to pay double.Please abc donât even mention prayer as a front line defence against China because that didnât work out for Tibet thank goodness we are getting the subs first then we can pray for peace
Wow, Allen was not fawning over Biden for once đ€Ł
How about helping Aussie battlers keep a roof over their heads and feed their families before agreeing to billions for submarines. Who gets the nuclear waste? Canberra?
What do America and the UK do with their waste?.
We don't. All 22 retired UK boats are still moored. We don't have the infrastructure to deal with it atm.
Akin it to the automobile industry economic benefit is deceptive. The absolute worse way to spend $368b.
Dilemma for Australia: The removal of the left government will lead to the construction of a nuclear power plant. The price of electricity and gas is 20 times lower. Massive construction of hospitals, factories and social housing. Increase in pension for different groups. Significant drop in the cost of living. Complete international neutrality.
The richest country in minerals, water, livestock, farms and much more. One of the highest cost of living countries. We need Gaddafi in power..
Australia has already said it will not aquire nuclear weapons, if it chose to go against that then it would be serious. It does not break the nuclear weapons no proliferation treaty at all. The real question is the US and UK subs visiting or later on being maintained in Australia will they be carrying nuclear weapons. Both countries do not ever comment on this as a standard.
We have nuclear armed vessels visit Australia, and have for a long time as far as I know. So, nothing will change in that regard.
Many nations with Carrier Groups or Fleets have docked in Australia in the past, during mostly war games and exercises.
But I wouldnât be surprised if there has been a case of a UK/US Nuclear armed SSBN visit or passed through your waters.
@@GuyWilson706 Submarines passing through your territorial waters must be on the surface, its the law as far as i recall.
I am sure that many have and maybe some have had nuclear weapons on them but we will never know. I do not ever recall a time that a nuclear submarine either SSN and especially SSBN has been allowed to dock in Australia or New Zealand.
Australia doesn't no if America has nukes passing through or based at pine gap ,a no other country no if there there our not.
What could possibly go wrong?đđđ
I'm sorry but I can not abide Tingle. I'll look elsewhere for the detail on these subs.
Prepayaring for a war or protecting Australian.can't understand while most citizens are suffering inflation. Very soon most will become homeless....
Why is this a problem. Why is this a US vs China issue. You have to remember that China is not near north America. It is probing the south Asian countries. It is not taking over the islands in America, but it is totally affecting Australia, New Zealand and all other countries near China. If US just lets go of these, then you all - Australia, New Zealand, Indonesia, Philippines, Malesia, Thailand and many more will only be speaking Chinese.
Paranoia much? What a load of rubbish. There is no way China could invade Australia. As the saying goes âa shipâs a fool to fight a fortâ. They donât need to. Successive Australian governments have been selling anything not nailed down to foreign interests, including China, for decades. China can just come in and buy the place up like their doing already. No need for war.
Simplistic, incorrect and generally stupid summary of the situation.
Good old military industrial complex anyone doubt who runs the show đ
Australia should develop Civil Nuclear Power.
Doesn't Pacific stand for PEACE? The late David Lange Prime Minister of New Zealand is turning in his grave.
Ican smell the uranium. Better get used to using chop sticks. David Lange
They should be painted pink and stuck up the establishments rear end.
France is laughing !
lol. . . The Australian Automotive Industry . . . does not exist. Went the way of the dodo.
Australia the next Ukraine patsy for Nato
The Art of War by Sun Tzu. The "victorious" AUKUS is catastrophically losing the economic war against the Kremlin and of course losing the war in Ukraine. AUKUS nuclear submarines are needed "urgently" at the Au berths. AU Gov "boldly" entered the war with two countries with an incalculable number of nuclear weapons. Our AU Gov neo-Nazis have gathered to turn half of Australia into ashes. What's next for AUKUS? Electromagnetic pulse (EMP-weapon), also transient electromagnetic disturbance (PVE) is possible EMP (HEMP) or Non-nuclear electromagnetic pulse (NNEMP). Putin is wise not to rush easily destroying Western equipment with artillery. The best weapon of President Putin? "Sanctions against Russia". Time for the West to destroy their own economy. The occupation of all Ukraine by the Kremlin is excluded. Impact on the US economy. USA? 12 oil refineries burned down to begin with. What passage. The AUKUS war with China will take place one of these days. And what? 50 -150 million Chinese refugees will go to Eurasia. Good luck.
BULLSHIT,too much HEMP.đđŠđșđŹđ§đșđžđșđŠđŽââ ïž
Stop the deal China is not a threat to Australia , I support China in trade.
2.30 'a defacto war footing' what? wasn't the amount quoted as 0.1% of Aus GDP over 20 years? Really? War footing against who, goat herders?
If you take the defence of your nation seriously a nation with the geographic size and relatively low population of Australia needs the range only a nuclear engine can provide. China will be on your doorstep when no-one is looking whether you play nice or play tough. You're getting some muscle to back up the rhetoric.
Good on ya.
BTW don't worry about the waste, Aus may be responsible for it but, both USA & UK have ways to disassemble and reprocess or if needed dispose of spent fuel rods.
We'll work something out, we always have.
Wrong and wrong. That's a foolish, cavalier and carefree attitude towards a potential nuclear war.
The most generalised concerns/criticisms I've ever heard. If these experts want validity to their general pessimistic argument, detailed explanations to why the program is a bad idea, including examples, are needed for a proper debate.
ASK INDIA IF THEY WANT TO TAKE CARE OF THE NUCLEAR WASTE?
Why canât they give us the subs for free like the stuff they give to Ukraine.
Good point! đ
If we are brother, we should have military aids from uncle Sam.
her eyes go from left to right, weird
What a rubbish, unbalanced report. Absolutely shameful.
Care to expand on that? The key point that this will be leveraged to get Australia to march in lock-step with the US on one their fun filled armed sight seeing tours, is hard to disagree with.
ABC have been 90% pro AUKUS for the last 2 years featuring such sub-humans as Stan Grant and his ASPI homebois - the is rare negative coverage my Neoliberal friend.
@@JohnnyThousand605Or let our sub mariners operate in diesel subs that will be spotted by Chinas 3 new satellites that give them 24 hour surveillance of all our waters. Whoâs team you on.
You need to elaborate
Sad to see Australia losing its sovereignty đą
I don't understand the criticisms here to be honest.
Australia needs nuclear powered subs if it wants to be a serious player in the indo-pacific. Diesel subs can only move at about half the speed of nuclear or they become insanely loud. They also have massively less range and submersible time. They simply won't fill the role these subs need to.
That means they have 2 options: LE reactors which need to be refuelled every 7 years (Australia doesn't have the ability or material to refuel them so they would have to be sent back to France, or Australia would have to develop the capability), or HE reactors which last 30 plus years.
The HE reactors mean that unless the subs service life is extended, Australia does not need to have them refuelled. This is the better option I would argue.
If AU want HE reactors then they can only ask US or UK. However, UKs current reactors are based off of a US reactor in some way, so UK can't export without US permission anyway.
So Aukus is necessary for Australia to have a credible submarine force. I just don't see a way around it.
I agree. You can't please everyone no matter how much right you do, and knockers are going to be knockers.
Your premise is flawed. "Serious player in the Indo-Pacific" = Lapdog to the United States.
The quarrel is between the US and China. It isn't Australia's business.
Itâs funny Frances junk diesel subs donât compare to us and Uk subs and the guy talking about the end of the subs life and what to do with the nuclear waste he says itâs still weapons grade capable which it isnât after 35 years and they have to sit for 100 years before they can be opened up and dealt with he knows nothing about