What's new

Australia’s Submarines Make Waves in Asia Long Before They Go to Sea

Viet

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
29,950
Reaction score
0
Country
Viet Nam
Location
Germany
Some nations fear an accelerated arms buildup in a region where larger countries have already ramped up their military spending or capabilities.

Image
The HMAS Sheean, a diesel-electric submarine, arriving in Hobart, Australia, in April. Nuclear submarines would enable the Australian navy to run deeper and more quietly.

The HMAS Sheean, a diesel-electric submarine, arriving in Hobart, Australia, in April. Nuclear submarines would enable the Australian navy to run deeper and more quietly.Credit...Australian Defence Force Via Getty Images

By Chris Buckley
Sept. 21, 2021

China is swelling into a military superpower. India, Vietnam and Singapore are spending more on defense. Japan is leaning to do the same. Now Australia, backed by the United States and Britain, has catapulted the military contest with Beijing in Asia into a tense new phase.

Their deal last week to equip Australia with stealthy, long-range nuclear-powered submarines better able to take on the Chinese navy could accelerate an Asian arms buildup long before the submarines enter service.

In response, China may step up its military modernization, especially in technology able to stymie the submarines. And by confirming the Biden administration’s determination to take on Chinese power in Asia, the new weapons deal may tilt other big military spenders like India and Vietnam into accelerating their own weapons plans.
Countries trying to stay in the middle, like Indonesia, Malaysia and others, face a potentially more volatile region and growing pressure, as Australia did, to choose sides between Washington and Beijing.

“The picture is one of three Anglo-Saxon countries drumming up militarily in the Indo-Pacific region. It plays to the narrative offered by China that ‘outsiders’ are not acting in line with the aspiration of regional countries,” said Dino Patti Djalal, a former Indonesian ambassador to the United States. “The worry is that this will spark an untimely arms race, which the region does not need now, nor in the future.”

The submarines won’t hit the water for at least a decade. But the geopolitical waves from their announcement have been instant, while giving Beijing time to marshal opposition among Asian neighbors and plot military countermoves.

Japan and Taiwan, both strong United States allies, quickly endorsed the security agreement.

Other Asian governments have, through their remarks or silence, signified misgivings or apprehension about riling China. Many leaders in Southeast Asia want the United States to remain a security mainstay, said Ben Bland, the director of the Southeast Asia program at the Lowy Institute in Sydney.

“But they also fear that the increasingly strident approach taken by the U.S. and allies such as Australia will push China to respond in kind,” he said, “driving a cycle of escalation that is centered on Southeast Asia but disregards Southeast Asian voices.”
Even before the deal, some governments had deployed new ships, submarines and missiles, at least partly out of worry about China’s rapid military buildup and contentious territorial claims. China accounts for 42 percent of all military spending across Asia, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

Japanese policymakers have begun to publicly consider increasing military spending beyond 1 percent of its gross domestic product, a cap that the country has maintained since the 1970s. South Korea, focused on the threat from North Korea, has increased its defense budget by 7 percent a year on average since 2018.

Image
Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison boards a Royal Australian Air Force plane in Sydney on Monday, as he heads to the United States for a meeting with President Biden.

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison boards a Royal Australian Air Force plane in Sydney on Monday, as he heads to the United States for a meeting with President Biden.Credit...Joel Carrett/Australian Associated Press, via Associated Press
India has ratcheted up military spending as tensions with China have risen, though the economic hit from the coronavirus may slow that trend.

ADVERTISEMENT
India plans to acquire another 350 locally assembled military aircraft in the next two decades, its air force chief said this month. Japan is working on hypersonic missilesthat could threaten Chinese naval ships in a conflict. Taiwan, the self-governed island that China regards as its own territory, has proposed a $16.8 billion military budget for next year, including $1.4 billion for more jet fighters.

The Biden administration promises to help Asian nations counter China’s military buildup, something the new agreement with Australia highlights. That agenda is likely to be discussed in the White House this week when President Biden hosts other leaders from the “Quad,” the grouping that includes Australia, Japan and India.

Sign up for the Australia Letter Newsletter:
Conversation starters about Australia and insight on the global stories that matter most, sent weekly by the Times’s Australia bureau. Plus: heaps of local recommendations.
Sign Up
“China is the pacing threat that we have to be concerned about, not only today, but also in the near term and in the long term,” General John E. Hyten, the vice chairman of the United States’ Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at an event for the Brookings Institution last week.

ADVERTISEMENT
But many governments across Asia, especially in Southeast Asia, hope to avoid having to make the same choice that Australia’s prime minister, Scott Morrison, made last week in declaring a “forever partnership” with the United States.

Image
Chinese sailors on the deck of the Nanchang, a new guided missile destroyer, near Qingdao in China’s Shandong province in 2019.

Chinese sailors on the deck of the Nanchang, a new guided missile destroyer, near Qingdao in China’s Shandong province in 2019.Credit...Pool by Mark Schiefelbein
India, which has veered between border clashes with China and efforts to patch up ties with its neighbor, has been muted about the agreement. So has South Korea, which wants to keep steady relations with Beijing while it focuses on potential conflict with North Korea.

Indonesia’s foreign ministry said it was“deeply concerned over the continuing arms race.” Malaysia has voiced worry.

Lee Hsien Loong, the prime minister of Singapore, a city-state with good ties to both Beijing and Washington, diplomatically told Mr. Morrison that he hoped “the partnership would contribute constructively to the peace and stability of the region,” the Straits Times reported.

ADVERTISEMENT
Outwardly, Australia’s plan to eventually build at least eight nuclear-powered submarines might seem to make little difference to China’s calculus. With about 360 vessels, the Chinese navy is the biggest in the world by number, and has around a dozen nuclear-powered submarines. Its nuclear submarine fleet is likely to grow to 21 by 2030, according to the United States’ Office of Naval Intelligence.

The United States’ Navy has about 300 vessels, including 68 submarines, all of them nuclear. Even if Australia is relatively swift and efficient — not traits that have marked its submarine acquisitions over the decades — its first nuclear-powered submarines may not be commissioned until later in the 2030s.

Image
Xi Jinping, China’s top leader, presenting the flag of the People’s Liberation Army to a naval captain in Sanya, in China’s Hainan Province in April.

Xi Jinping, China’s top leader, presenting the flag of the People’s Liberation Army to a naval captain in Sanya, in China’s Hainan Province in April.Credit...Li Gang/Xinhua, via Associated Press
Positioning the hard-to-track submarines closer to seas near China, Japan and the Korean Peninsula could be a powerful deterrent against China’s military, said Drew Thompson, a former Pentagon official responsible for relations with China.

ADVERTISEMENT
“The Middle East wars have ended,” said Mr. Thompson, now a visiting senior research fellow at the National University of Singapore. “We are in an interwar period, and the next one will be a high-end, high-intensity conflict with a near-peer competitor, probably involving China, and most likely in northeast Asia.”

After condemning the submarine agreement last week, the Chinese government has said little else. But China’s leaders and military planners are sure to consider military and diplomatic countermoves, including new ways to punish Australian exports, already hit by bans and punitive tariffs as relations soured in the past few years.

Beijing can also accelerate efforts to develop technologies for finding and destroying nuclear-powered submarines well before Australia receives them. Most experts said a technological race was more likely than a generalized arms race. China’s output of new naval ships and fighter planes is already rapid. Its anti-submarine technology is less advanced.

Nearer term, Chinese officials may step up efforts to marshal regional opposition to the submarine plan and the new security grouping, called AUKUS, for Australia, United Kingdom and United States.

ADVERTISEMENT
“If you’re China, this also makes you think, ‘Well, I better get ahead of this,’” said Elbridge Colby, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense in the Trump administration. He said: “If Australia takes this big step, then Japan could take a half step, and Taiwan takes a half step, and then India and then maybe Vietnam.”

Image
French President Emmanuel Macron and former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull standing on the deck of the HMAS Waller, a diesel-electric submarine operated by the Royal Australian Navy, at Garden Island in Sydney, Australia, in 2018.

French President Emmanuel Macron and former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull standing on the deck of the HMAS Waller, a diesel-electric submarine operated by the Royal Australian Navy, at Garden Island in Sydney, Australia, in 2018.Credit...Pool by Brendan Esposito
But Beijing has created its own high barriers to winning support from neighbors. China’s expansive, uncompromising claims to waters and islands across the South China Sea have angered Southeast Asian countries. Beijing is also locked in territorial disputes with Japan, India and other countries.

“This AUKUS agreement very vividly shows that East Asia has become the focus of United States global security strategy,” said Zhu Feng, a professor of international relations at Nanjing University in east China. “It’s a reminder to China that if we can’t ease tensions with neighbors over the South China Sea and East China Sea, the U.S. will continue trying to take advantage of this tension.”

Ben Dooley in Tokyo and Choe Sang-Hun in Seoul contributed reporting.
 
. . .


Australia must take Southeast Asian reactions to AUKUS seriously
22 Sep 2021|Susannah Patton
SHARE
Print This Post
20210902ran8535379_0410.t6138130f.m2400.xZHbIE6O81Yf7K2nq-e1632284365675.jpg

When Australia announced the AUKUS pact together with the United States and United Kingdom, it knew that China would be hostile and France would be disappointed. Predicting the reaction in Southeast Asia would have been more difficult: views vary. From Australia’s perspective, its relations in the region have generally been good in recent years. So much so, that Jakarta even welcomed Canberra’s 2020 defence strategic update, though it foreshadowed Australia playing precisely the more regionally ambitious role that it is now pursuing.

While some countries, notably the Philippines and Singapore, were positive about the AUKUS announcement, statements from Jakarta and Kuala Lumpur reflected concerns that the AUKUS arrangement would contribute to a regional military build-up, raising tensions and making conflict more likely.

These perspectives don’t accord with Canberra’s strategic world view, so the temptation to dismiss them in various ways will be strong.
Most fundamentally, some will see Indonesia and Malaysia as strategically naive: China is launching new ships and submarines much faster than the US, let alone Australia. And a move like AUKUS that signals a strong US commitment to the region should help prevent China from dominating it, something every country is worried about. They’ll take comfort from the fact that the Philippines, one of the key claimant states in the South China Sea, is much more supportive, and that Vietnam is likely to be too.

Some will try to airbrush Southeast Asia out of the ‘Indo-Pacific’ entirely, pointing out that Japan and India, the two most consequential regional powers, are supportive of AUKUS.

And some will argue that the Indonesian reaction was ‘avoidable anxiety’—in other words, something that could have been prevented with better Australian diplomacy.

Others will say that private reactions, especially in the region’s defence ministries, which work closely with Australia and the US, are probably more positive than what’s being said publicly. They’ll point out that practical defence cooperation remains strong; actions speak louder than words.

Canberra must resist the solace of these approaches and take regional reactions to AUKUS seriously.
Regional views matter, because Canberra’s own defence strategic planning describes Australia’s cooperative defence activities with regional countries as ‘fundamental to our ability to shape our strategic environment’. It notes the importance of our defence forces maintaining operational access in the region, and of our being able to lead coalition operations when it is in the interests of the region that we do so.

In short, our ability to respond to plausible China-related contingencies in Southeast Asia depends on regional countries seeing that our interests align with theirs. Euan Graham’s account of the 2020 West Capella incident, involving the US, Australia and Malaysia, neatly illustrates this point. A US Navy strike group sailed close to the area where a Malaysian drillship, the West Capella, was being intimidated by a Chinese maritime force. Though the US intended a strong message of reassurance, Malaysia had mixed feelings about the intervention, fearing that the presence of any warships and vessels could increase tensions and raise the risk of conflict.
At the heart of these differing perceptions is this: Australians by and large see the US as a benign and moral actor, upholding the regional security order. By definition, its actions don’t destabilise the region. Some of our neighbours are more ambivalent, seeing both the US and China as contributing to a more tense and unstable region. These concerns were eloquently expressed by Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in his 2019 Shangri-La Dialogue address. That speech drew the ire of some Americans, who argued it was wrong to see the US and China as morally equivalent.

Taking this sense of moral equivalence seriously is not the same as agreeing with it. Australia should not resile from AUKUS or the idea that the full range of our security cooperation with the US is beneficial for the region. But because not all countries automatically agree, these benefits must be demonstrated, not merely asserted. This is why it’s so important for the US to participate in mutually beneficial regional economic arrangements, like the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, and continue to provide public goods, like vaccines.

A second, related opinion across the region is that AUKUS indicates an intention by outside powers to determine the future of the region, adding to fears that ASEAN’s influence and coherence are being eroded. This perception arose not because of the substance of AUKUS—an agreement to share defence technology—but because of its form, a loudly announced Anglosphere security partnership. That cannot be undone, but it has lessons for the way Australia talks about the extensive deepening of the US defence relationship envisaged in last week’s AUSMIN statement.

We shouldn’t exaggerate the degree of negative opinion in the region about AUKUS. But if there’s any uncertainty, the prudent course of action would be to assume that concerns are real and deeply held, not to blithely hope that ultimately Southeast Asia will come around to our way of seeing the world.
 
.
Australia military is not in the same league as China.

The only thing Australia army did well is killing innocent civilians.


It’s not about Australia being in the same league, it’s about Australia acting as a force multiplier for the US military.


Look at what their purchasing and developing with the US:

Nuclear attack subs
Tomahawk cruise missiles
JASSM-ER stealth cruise missiles
LRASM stealth antiship missiles
Precision Strike Missiles
Developing hypersonic missiles with US
Basing for US military
 
.
It’s not about Australia being in the same league, it’s about Australia acting as a force multiplier for the US military.


Look at what their purchasing and developing with the US:

Nuclear attack subs
Tomahawk cruise missiles
JASSM-ER stealth cruise missiles
LRASM stealth antiship missiles
Precision Strike Missiles
Developing hypersonic missiles with US
Basing for US military

Wonder what China's response will be?
 
.
Just for members information, USA has military base in Australia which is in Darwin, closest part of Australia into Indonesia...............


1632365552040.png
 
.
It’s not about Australia being in the same league, it’s about Australia acting as a force multiplier for the US military.


Look at what their purchasing and developing with the US:

Nuclear attack subs
Tomahawk cruise missiles
JASSM-ER stealth cruise missiles
LRASM stealth antiship missiles
Precision Strike Missiles
Developing hypersonic missiles with US
Basing for US military

Say whatever you want to say, but fact remains that North West Pacific is world most dangerous water for Aircraft carrier. There is nothing US and Australia can do about it.
 
. .
Say whatever you want to say, but fact remains that North West Pacific is world most dangerous water for Aircraft carrier. There is nothing US and Australia can do about it.
they are good at cutting goatherd kid‘s throat.

The best thing would be to arm up North Korea to counter or keep South Korea occupied with latest armament, and Pakistan against India to keep it occupied.

Following UN resolutions have only benefited the Anglo-Saxon world to keep its edge and then they come up with this Nuclear Supplier Group nonsense to keep non-Anglo Saxons down.

China needs to integrate its military with its Allies and prepare a 1st Strike Nuclear Policy. Along with a build up in Nuclear Weapons to become a peer competitor with US/Russia.
 
.
The best thing would be to arm up North Korea to counter or keep South Korea occupied with latest armament, and Pakistan against India to keep it occupied.

Following UN resolutions have only benefited the Anglo-Saxon world to keep its edge and then they come up with this Nuclear Supplier Group nonsense to keep non-Anglo Saxons down.

China needs to integrate its military with its Allies and prepare a 1st Strike Nuclear Policy. Along with a build up in Nuclear Weapons to become a peer competitor with US/Russia.

What about more Chinese cooperation with Russia?

Arm up North Korea as you said. (Limited utility)

And perhaps Iran to keep the US somewhat focused on the Middle East.

I'm thinking China and Russia cooperation would be the most logical thing to counter AUKUS.
 
.
I feel like this agreement is a prelude to the US basing nuclear weapons / missiles in Australia...
Australia might say that they are not pursuing military, or even civilian, nuclear capability... but they will just say that the nukes belong to the US and is not theirs... In any event it will simply make Australia a prime target in a hot war... which is totally worrisome for the ASEAN neighborhood..

That being said.. I also find the statement from Scott Morrison regarding Australia not pursuing nuclear capability as ridiculous, and likely, untruthful... How would they expect to build, operate, and maintain SSN subs locally without having the nuclear related knowledge, tech and infrastructure..? Especially for a sub with a HEU fueled reactor...? If the plan was simply to buy or lease a readily available nuke sub, be it Virginia or Astute class SSN's, then yeah... it's somewhat still believable... as we can expect the manufacture, maintenance, etc will be done in the US or UK while Australia is only operating it..
 
.
Say whatever you want to say, but fact remains that North West Pacific is world most dangerous water for Aircraft carrier. There is nothing US and Australia can do about it.

Yes its the most dangerous waters for your aircraft carriers. I can see why China is freaking out over the Aussie subs.
 
.


Australia must take Southeast Asian reactions to AUKUS seriously
22 Sep 2021|Susannah Patton
SHARE
Print This Post
20210902ran8535379_0410.t6138130f.m2400.xZHbIE6O81Yf7K2nq-e1632284365675.jpg

When Australia announced the AUKUS pact together with the United States and United Kingdom, it knew that China would be hostile and France would be disappointed. Predicting the reaction in Southeast Asia would have been more difficult: views vary. From Australia’s perspective, its relations in the region have generally been good in recent years. So much so, that Jakarta even welcomed Canberra’s 2020 defence strategic update, though it foreshadowed Australia playing precisely the more regionally ambitious role that it is now pursuing.

While some countries, notably the Philippines and Singapore, were positive about the AUKUS announcement, statements from Jakarta and Kuala Lumpur reflected concerns that the AUKUS arrangement would contribute to a regional military build-up, raising tensions and making conflict more likely.

These perspectives don’t accord with Canberra’s strategic world view, so the temptation to dismiss them in various ways will be strong.
Most fundamentally, some will see Indonesia and Malaysia as strategically naive: China is launching new ships and submarines much faster than the US, let alone Australia. And a move like AUKUS that signals a strong US commitment to the region should help prevent China from dominating it, something every country is worried about. They’ll take comfort from the fact that the Philippines, one of the key claimant states in the South China Sea, is much more supportive, and that Vietnam is likely to be too.

Some will try to airbrush Southeast Asia out of the ‘Indo-Pacific’ entirely, pointing out that Japan and India, the two most consequential regional powers, are supportive of AUKUS.

And some will argue that the Indonesian reaction was ‘avoidable anxiety’—in other words, something that could have been prevented with better Australian diplomacy.

Others will say that private reactions, especially in the region’s defence ministries, which work closely with Australia and the US, are probably more positive than what’s being said publicly. They’ll point out that practical defence cooperation remains strong; actions speak louder than words.

Canberra must resist the solace of these approaches and take regional reactions to AUKUS seriously.
Regional views matter, because Canberra’s own defence strategic planning describes Australia’s cooperative defence activities with regional countries as ‘fundamental to our ability to shape our strategic environment’. It notes the importance of our defence forces maintaining operational access in the region, and of our being able to lead coalition operations when it is in the interests of the region that we do so.

In short, our ability to respond to plausible China-related contingencies in Southeast Asia depends on regional countries seeing that our interests align with theirs. Euan Graham’s account of the 2020 West Capella incident, involving the US, Australia and Malaysia, neatly illustrates this point. A US Navy strike group sailed close to the area where a Malaysian drillship, the West Capella, was being intimidated by a Chinese maritime force. Though the US intended a strong message of reassurance, Malaysia had mixed feelings about the intervention, fearing that the presence of any warships and vessels could increase tensions and raise the risk of conflict.
At the heart of these differing perceptions is this: Australians by and large see the US as a benign and moral actor, upholding the regional security order. By definition, its actions don’t destabilise the region. Some of our neighbours are more ambivalent, seeing both the US and China as contributing to a more tense and unstable region. These concerns were eloquently expressed by Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in his 2019 Shangri-La Dialogue address. That speech drew the ire of some Americans, who argued it was wrong to see the US and China as morally equivalent.

Taking this sense of moral equivalence seriously is not the same as agreeing with it. Australia should not resile from AUKUS or the idea that the full range of our security cooperation with the US is beneficial for the region. But because not all countries automatically agree, these benefits must be demonstrated, not merely asserted. This is why it’s so important for the US to participate in mutually beneficial regional economic arrangements, like the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, and continue to provide public goods, like vaccines.

A second, related opinion across the region is that AUKUS indicates an intention by outside powers to determine the future of the region, adding to fears that ASEAN’s influence and coherence are being eroded. This perception arose not because of the substance of AUKUS—an agreement to share defence technology—but because of its form, a loudly announced Anglosphere security partnership. That cannot be undone, but it has lessons for the way Australia talks about the extensive deepening of the US defence relationship envisaged in last week’s AUSMIN statement.

We shouldn’t exaggerate the degree of negative opinion in the region about AUKUS. But if there’s any uncertainty, the prudent course of action would be to assume that concerns are real and deeply held, not to blithely hope that ultimately Southeast Asia will come around to our way of seeing the world.
Sounds weird
Indonesia and Malaysia are concerned of Australia submarines however they are not concerned of chinese submarines. The first will come in a decade while the other country has it now and wants to build more.
I wouldn’t say Indonesia is a coward but Malaysia will receive a medal.
 
.
Yes its the most dangerous waters for your aircraft carriers. I can see why China is freaking out over the Aussie subs.

China is relatively low key. The ones shouting loudly are French and Indonesia.
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom