China’s economic and military capabilities as well as its belligerence have led to a change in regional security paradigms
announcement of New Australia-UK-US (aucus) tripartite security agreement has naturally generated animated debate in strategic circles, as in Washington on September 24, just days before the first individual Quad Leaders Summit to be hosted by United States President Joe Biden. Last week, HMS Queen Elizabeth, the head of the United Kingdom’s Carrier Strike Group, arrived in Japan after conducting exercises with India, Malaysia and Singapore and crossing disputed waters in the South China Sea. Exercise Malabar 2021, held in the Western Pacific on 26–29 August 2021, brought together the US Navy, the Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force (JMSDF), the Royal Australian Navy and the Indian Navy for the second year running.
Indo-Pacific is an important issue
Earlier in April, France, which, like the United Kingdom, has historically been an Indo-Pacific power with territories and bases across the region, formed a multi-nation state in the Bay of Bengal with four Quad nations (USA, Japan). Participated in naval exercises. , Australia and India). All this points to a vigorous strengthening of bilateral, trilateral and multilateral security dialogues and structures, which seem to differ in scope and activity, but which converge on the core issue of maintaining peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific. .
There is no denying that China’s economic and military capabilities have grown rapidly, but its belligerence in particular has led to a tectonic shift in regional security paradigms.
The Quad is not a security system, although it is widely felt that without a strong security base, it will play a limited role in dealing with the real challenge of China’s militarization. The Malabar exercise is not a naval alliance, even though cooperation is designed to facilitate communication and interactivity in times of need. In response to China’s growing military power and its adverse impact on regional stability, many countries are obliged to review their defense preparedness.
In August, Japan’s Defense Ministry proposed a US$50 billion budget for fiscal year 2022, representing a modest 2.6% increase in its annual defense spending. The traditional limit of reducing defense spending to less than 1% of GDP is no longer sacrosanct. Its defense white paper highlighted for the first time the urgent need to take stock of developments around Taiwan, a clear acknowledgment that Japan’s own security is tied to stability in the Taiwan Strait where muscle-flexing by China is the new norm. It is not without reason that Australia’s defense budget has increased the outlay for the ninth year in a row. For the financial year 2020-2021, it touched AUD 44.61 billion (USD$34.84 billion), representing an increase of 4.1% over the previous year.
The AUKUS agreement will facilitate the transfer of nuclear submarine propulsion and manufacturing technologies to Australia, the first example of a non-nuclear nation achieving such a capability. Even if the first of the eight nuclear-powered submarines will be available only around 2040, or perhaps a few years earlier, the fact Australia is operating such advanced platforms adds a new dimension to the evolving maritime security architecture in the Indo-Pacific. This conclusively quells a long-standing domestic debate as to whether it was time for Australia to assess China through a strategic lens, overcoming purely business considerations that weigh on its China policy. was dominating.
A chance for Britain
The AUKUS agreement is also a vehement claim of relevance to the US-Australia Security Treaty (ANZUS). New Zealand, the largest, withdrew from the treaty in 1984 which ironically still bears its initials. Its “nuclear-free” stance was in contrast to the US Navy’s non-disclosure policy regarding nuclear weapons on incoming ships. Despite the close ties, Australia’s future fleet of nuclear submarines will not be allowed access to New Zealand’s ports or waters, as Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said.
AUKUS provides a new opportunity for the United Kingdom to directly re-establish itself in the Indo-Pacific. It is already a member of the Five Eyes (FVEY), an intelligence-sharing coalition built on Anglo-Saxon solidarity (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, UK and US).
There is no substitute for AUKUS Quad. At the same time, it does not diminish the importance of the Quad as a forum for consultation and coordination on a wide range of topics such as maritime security, free and open trade, health care, critical technologies, supply chains and capacity building. On the other hand, the AUKUS submarine deal is an undeniable example of strategic defense cooperation, and a game-changer at that.
In 2016, Japan’s Mitsubishi-Kawasaki consortium, which builds Soryu-class diesel-electric submarines, lost to France’s Naval Group (formerly known as DCNS), which decided to replace six of its Collins in Australia. Won a contract to build 12 diesel-electric submarines. square utensils. The shortfin Barracuda Block 1A submarine offered by France was a diesel-electric version of its Barracuda-class nuclear attack submarine. It is this heightened threat perception that has now driven Australia to switch from conventional to far more powerful nuclear attack submarines.
strange attitude of beijing
China has, as expected, strongly criticized the Aukas and submarine deal as fueling instability and fueling an arms race. This is sheer hypocrisy. China has the world’s fastest growing fleet of sub-surface fighter aircraft, including the Type 093 Shang-class nuclear-powered attack submarine (SSN) and the Type 094 nuclear-powered Jin-class ballistic missile submarine (SSBN). . Its growing fleet of conventional diesel-electric submarines with AIP (air-independent propulsion) capability. Its nuclear submarines are on the hunt in the Indo-Pacific. Yet, China denies Australia and others the sovereign right to decide on their defense needs!
For India, it operates an indigenously built SSBN (INS Arihant) after returning the leased SSN (INS Chakra) from Russia. It operates several conventional submarines, however, including the Scorpene-class diesel-electric attack submarine, which is far less than it actually needed, which was built under Project 75 at Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Limited (MDL) in collaboration with the French Naval Group. have been built.
Australia’s role got a boost
Australia’s proposed nuclear submarines, whether the UK’s Astute-class attack submarine or the US’s Virginia-class ships, would potentially be fully equipped with advanced US weapons such as Mark-48 torpedoes, Harpoon anti-ship missiles and Tomahawk cruise missiles. These will give Australia a lot of punch in terms of stand-off ability. Being located far away from any other country, the diesel-electric attack submarines that currently operate, or even those that it may have received from France, have a longer mission range and duration than nuclear There is limited capability in the case of U-powered submarines. The increasing attention to anti-submarine warfare over a more wide area is clearly changing the calculations.
Australia’s nuclear submarines will help strike a new balance of power in the Indo-Pacific, especially with the US and UK Australia now having a more meaningful naval deterrence of its own to defend its sovereign interests. Australia stands ready to play a stronger role in ensuring peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific.
France’s momentary bickering over the cancellation of the contract by Australia should soon subside. As a major Indo-Pacific power, France is an important part of the regional security calculation. The setback ‘down under’ could prompt France to refocus on partners like India, which must strike a balance between continued imports and implementing the all-important Atmanirbhar Bharat in defense manufacturing.
Susan R. Chinoy is the Director General of Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defense Studies and Analysis. Views expressed are personal
.