By Wang Quan

Since the US, the UK and Australia announced the creation of a so-called trilateral security partnership, that is AUKUS, in September last year, the three countries have insisted on advancing the collaborative effort to develop a nuclear-powered submarine for Australia regardless of the concerns of the international community. The move has sparked widespread debate in Australia. According to a report from Australian media on July 29, some scholars, including Air Marshal John Paul Harvey, the former Chief of the Capability Acquisition and Sustainment Group under the Australian Department of Defense, believed that the Australian government’s development of the nuclear-powered submarine project, which will cost more than 100 billion US dollars, is but a loss-making business.

Australia is to lack autonomy over future nuclear-powered submarines, the report said. The main reason lies in that the intellectual property rights (IPRs) of all the components of the Australian nuclear-powered submarine, including the hull, onboard management system, weapon system, combat system (with sonar system included), and communication system, will be under the protection of the US and the UK. Australian side thereby cannot change or upgrade these systems without authorization.

The Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) believed that the Australian nuclear-powered submarine combat system will be developed on the basis of the AN/BYG-1 combat control system for the US Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines as expected. Although the research and development will nominally be done by Australia and the US in collaboration, the initiative is in the hands of the US. In addition, the Australian nuclear-powered submarine is likely to use the US-made Mk-48 torpedo as the main weapon, and it is difficult for the Australian side to get access to the core technology in upgrading the heavyweight torpedo, though its involvement in the project. “This is determined by the national industrial base. A heavyweight torpedo capable of automatic cruise and guidance, is comparable to a miniature submarine, representing an integration of multiple advanced technologies and equipment. Even the most basic machinery manufacturing can only be accomplished by the one with long-term industrial accumulation, which is precisely what Australia lacks.”

Although the trilateral nuclear-powered submarine agreement has stipulated a rule of “cooperative research and development and cooperative construction”, the Australian media believed that the so-called cooperation is only confined to paper files, and the Australian shipbuilding industry cannot benefit from it.

First of all, Australia does not have the right to design independently. According to the agreement, the Australian side cannot change the nuclear-powered submarine design according to its own needs and instead can only accept it passively. Second, Australia does not have the right to construction and is more likely to win the assembly right. The Australian side has long been aware of this and has been trying to find ways of escape in public opinion, saying that assembly is not necessarily totally useless, since it can increase the Australian industry’s understanding of nuclear-powered submarines at least.

The ASPI believed that the Royal Australian Navy’s pursuit of nuclear-powered submarine autonomy is “extremely unrealistic”; after all, Australia is in lack of the necessary independent research and development and manufacturing capabilities. The weapon configuration of the Royal Australian Air Force is a good example to show this point. As one of the first batches of countries in the world to establish an air force, the active fighting jets in Australia are almost entirely imported. Even the Loyal Wingman unmanned aerial vehicle (UVA), “the first military aircraft developed in the past half a century” as called, has been made by the US Boeing-led Australian industrial team.

For a long time, Australia has developed a concept that it is inevitable for Australia to outsource to acquire sovereign air combat capability if it cannot afford dependent development. It is expected that this mode is likely to be applied to nuclear-powered submarine development in the future.