AUKUS

AUKUS
Formation 15 September 2021; 44 days ago

Type Military alliance

Purpose Collective security

Region Indo-Pacific

Membership   Australia

  United Kingdom

  United States

announced on 15 September 2021 for the Indo-Pacific region

under the pact, the US and the UK will help Australia to acquire nuclear-powered submarines.
[3]
 Although the joint announcement by Australian prime minister Scott Morrison, British prime
minister Boris Johnson and US president Joe Biden did not mention any other country by name,
anonymous White House sources have alleged it is designed to counter the influence of China in
the Indo-Pacific region.[4][1] However, Johnson late

The pact also includes cooperation on

"cyber capabilities,
 artificial intelligence,
 quantum technologies 
and additional undersea capabilities"

Under the pact, Australia will acquire new long-range strike capabilities for its air force, navy and
army.[3] 
The pact will focus on military capability, separating it from the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing
alliance that also includes New Zealand and Canada.[6]

On 17 September 2021, France, which is an ally of the three countries, recalled its ambassadors
from Australia and the US; French foreign minister Jean-Yves Le Drian called the pact a "stab in
the back"[7] following Australia's cancellation of a French–Australian submarine deal worth
€56 billion (A$90 billion) without notice,[8][9] ending efforts to develop a deeper strategic
partnership between France and Australia.[10][11][12]
Background

The earliest seeds of the Quad grouping were sown in 2004, when the
United States, Australia, India, and Japan came together to provide
humanitarian assistance after the devastating Indian Ocean earthquake
and tsunami. In 2006, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and his
Japanese counterpart, Shinzo Abe, noted in a joint statement that
“India, Japan, and other like-minded countries in the Asia-Pacific”
needed to cooperate on mutual interests.

In 2016, Australian prime minister Malcolm Turnbull signed a A$50 billion (€31 billion) deal with

the partly French government-owned company Naval Group (known as DCNS until 2017) to
design a new generation of submarines, known as the Attack-class, under the "Future
Submarine Program", scheduled to replace the Collins-class

 2019, Australia signed a strategic partnership agreement with Naval Group to design and
construct twelve submarines to be built in Australia.[23][24] However, the project was beset by
delays and cost overruns, leading to uncertainty and tension behind the scenes.[9][25] The revised
cost, including inflation during the length of the program, was A$90 billion (€56 billion).[26]

Australia–UK–US negotiations
A trilateral discussion was held between Johnson, Biden and Morrison at the June 2021 G7
summit held in Cornwall, England
.[37][42] The talks took place without Macron's knowledge.[39] This approach was possible as a result
of the UK not entering into a formal foreign policy and security treaty in the post-Brexit deal with
the EU. As a result, the UK was free to pursue enhanced cooperation with other allies

Nuclear-powered submarines

, only six countries

Currently, only six countries have nuclear submarines, the five permanent members of the UN
Security Council (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States) and India.
[7]
 The New York Times reported that Australia will probably buy highly enriched uranium (HEU)
from the US for the nuclear reactor that powers the submarine.[59][note 3] The United States' naval
reactors are all pressurized water reactors (PWR).[61] The latest UK propulsion system is
the Rolls-Royce PWR3 that will power the Royal Navy's new Dreadnought-class submarines
currently being built and is "based on a US design but using UK reactor technology".[62][63]
US officials have said that sharing nuclear propulsion technology with Australia is a "one-off" and
that they have no "intention of extending this to other countries".[64][65] South Korea, also a US ally,
has had ambitions to acquire nuclear-powered submarines since 2017 and was reportedly
refused US assistance in September 2020 because of nuclear non-proliferation.[66][67][68]

Long-range guided missiles[edit]

Morrison announced together with nuclear-powered submarines that Australia would rapidly
acquire other capabilities "throughout the decade" including Tomahawk cruise missiles for the
navy's Hobart-class air warfare destroyers and the AGM-158B Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff
Missile (JASSM-ER) for the air force's F/A-18F Super Hornet and F-35A Lightning II multirole
fighter aircraf

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said that

Australia did not have any "reciprocal requirements" as a consequence of the US sharing nuclear
submarine propulsion technology such as Australia hosting intermediate-range ballistic missiles.
[76][77]

Computer and cybertechnology[edit]

The announcement of AUKUS included the stated aim of improving "joint capabilities and
interoperability. These initial efforts will focus on cyber capabilities, artificial intelligence, quantum
technologies, and additional undersea capabilities."[78] Tom Tugendhat, chair of the British
Commons' Foreign Affairs Committee, later commented on Twitter that "Bringing together the
military-industrial complex of these three allies together is a step-change in the relationship

Nuclear proliferation concerns

Australia and Brazil[85][86][note 4] would be the first countries without nuclear weapons to have nuclear-
powered submarines. Concerns were raised that this may lead to increased risk of arms
proliferation if other countries follow the same approach because it would involve other countries
enriching uranium for naval reactors, potentially creating more avenues to develop material
needed for nuclear weapons without the safeguards provided by regular inspections.[

People's Republic of China[edit]

The People's Republic of China (PRC)'s foreign affairs department spokesperson Zhao
Lijian said, "The nuclear submarine cooperation between the US, the UK and Australia has
seriously undermined regional peace and stability, intensified the arms race and undermined
international non-proliferation efforts".[102] Lijian also said "The three countries should discard the
Cold War zero-sum mentality and narrow geopolitical perspective".[103] Spokesperson Hua
Chunying said "China is firmly opposed to the US, the UK and Australia's malicious exploitation
of loopholes in the NPT and the IAEA safeguards mechanism".[104]
LATEST

AUKUS? Quad? FOIP?

A fragmented approach
cannot counter China
YATHARTH KACHIAR PRIYA VIJAYKUMAR POOJARY
Only a coherent policy for the Indo-Pacific will work. The
West needs to offer a strong economic balance to Beijing.
Although a substantive movement has developed aiming to contain
China – AUKUS being only the most recent example, adding to the
reconstituted Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, or Quad, as well as a
newly-launched Indo-Pacific strategy by the European Union – these
efforts are each standalone.

FOIP DREAMS
. The recently conducted Malabar exercise off the coast of Guam
points towards increasing military interoperability among these
nations.

The Quad also has stated ambition – reiterated during the first in-
person leaders’ summit on 24 September – to develop collaboration
across various sectors.

Talk of a “Free and Open Indo-Pacific”, or FOIP, has extended to

aims for cooperation in arenas such as climate change, infrastructure
projects and connectivity, countering Covid-19, critical technologies
and resilient supply chains.
 

 the EU will struggle to match China’s Belt and Road Initiative. While
the EU managed approximately €8 billion in funding across Asia from
2014–20, China’s pledged investment in the region under the BRI
is estimated to run to trillions

Can Japan Be a Bridge

Between AUKUS and ASEAN?
ASEAN countries have had varied responses to the pact. Some
Southeast Asians fear that AUKUS will intensify the arms race in the
Indo-Pacific, thus leading to a worsening security dilemma in the
region. Some implicitly supported AUKUS, and some have remained
silent.
 Japan has a unique position to achieve this, thanks to
two key advantages. On one side, Japan is a trustworthy “equal”
partner to Southeast Asia, and enjoying a “heart-to-heart”
relationship with the region under the approach laid out in
the Fukuda Doctrine. Meanwhile, Japan not only supports AUKUS but
is a major U.S. ally in Asia as well as a Quad member. Japan could
help bridge the two sides.

The ASEAN disunity over AUKUS

The AUKUS 
is an effort by the US to engage Australia in a deeper defence relationship. The UK
pivot to Asia currently sees the deployment of its carrier battle group in the region.
It buttresses this new military alliance. Australia believes that its dependence on
seaborne trade requires an augmentation of its naval capabilities through the
AUKUS partnership. Australia was conscious enough that on 20 September, it
issued a statement on its commitment to ASEAN centrality

It reassured ASEAN that, as its oldest dialogue partner (DP), it was appreciative of
ASEAN’s Indo-Pacific outlook.

It also denied that AUKUS was a defence alliance, allaying ASEAN’s concerns. It
took pains to emphasise its commitment to abide by the nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty (NPT), even though it would acquire US nuclear-powered submarines
without nuclear weapons. 

It reassured ASEAN that, as its oldest dialogue partner (DP), it was appreciative of
ASEAN’s Indo-Pacific outlook. It also denied that AUKUS was a defence alliance,
allaying ASEAN’s concerns. It took pains to emphasise its commitment to abide by
the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), even though it would acquire US
nuclear-powered submarines without nuclear weapons. 

Leaders of France, Australia

discuss ties in 1st call since AUKUS
Paris was furious after Australia ditched the deal last month, saying it had been
given no warning that Australia was instead negotiating a new defense AUKUS
pact with the U.S. and Britain. Australia had signed a contract in 2016 to buy the
French subs, a deal worth 50 billion Australian dollars ($36.5 billion) when signed.
France recalled its ambassadors to Australia and the U.S. in protest, with Foreign
Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian denouncing "a stab in the back." Paris is also insisting
on financial compensation.

"Close attention will now be paid regarding the situation for the French companies
and their sub-contractors, including Australian firms, impacted by this decision,"
the Elysee statement said.

Given the matrix of ASEAN and its consensus-based decision-making, it was seen
as a functional organisation without any strategic intent. It was expected to speak up
for the principles of ASEAN and the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast
Asia (TAC) if any power altered the situation. Now the AUKUS shows that the
Wayang of the Indo-Pacific has firmly brought big power rivalry  to their shores.

Indonesia expressed caution with AUKUS on 17 September. ‘Indonesia is deeply

concerned over the continuing arms race and power projection in the region’  and
reminded the commitments made under the NPT, TAC, and UNCLOS. The
statement focused on the nuclear submarines; otherwise, it could very well be
relevant to China as well! 

Indonesia itself is planning to increase its submarine fleet to 12 , though not nuclear
powered. Australian PM Morrison called the Indonesian President, Joko Widodo, to
explain the AUKUS

. Earlier this month, Australia and Indonesia held their 2+2 of Foreign and Defence
ministers. Indonesia saw AUKUS as something they were unaware of and which
may upset the balance in the region.

 Indonesia has a good bilateral engagement with Australia  and a trilateral with India
is being developed.
Similarly, Malaysia too appears astonished and caught in a civet trap. While worried
about power competiton in the region, it too talked about nuclear submarines. It
hopes for an ASEAN consensus on the AUKUS! 

In October, Malaysia was again protesting about Chinese ships encroaching its

waters but it prefers that other powers don’t enhance the power equation even if
ASEAN may struggle with China.

Singapore along with Malaysia is in a Five-Power Defence Arrangement

(FPDA) with UK, Australia, and New Zealand since 1971 and is more welcoming

Malaysia was again protesting about Chinese ships encroaching its waters but
it prefers that other powers don’t enhance the power equation even if ASEAN
may struggle with China.

VIETNAM
Vietnam has been more open to AUKUS. Their spokesman said “All countries
strive for the same goal of peace, stability, cooperation, and development in the
region and the world over”  and nuclear power can be harnessed for development.
Former Vietnam Ambassador Ton Nu Thi Ninh has noted that “ASEAN welcomes
a lasting, steady commitment of the US to the security, stability, and prosperity of
the Indo-Pacific” and  “the best moderation to any singular pre-eminence in the
Indo-Pacific is to have several powers or power clusters engaged rationally and in
concert with regional stakeholders, working for the common peace, security and
prosperity of the Indo-Pacific”. Vietnam shows greater pragmatism and sense of
balancing power through AUKUS and Quad. It recognises the limits on an ASEAN
role too well.

PHILIPINES

The Philippines is more welcoming of the AUKUS though President Duterte

sounded contradictory

. Secretary of Foreign Affairs Locsin on 19 September welcomed AUKUS. He

said “ASEAN member states, singly and collectively, do not possess the military
wherewithal to maintain peace and security in Southeast Asia” and “There is an
imbalance in the forces available to the ASEAN member states, with the main
balancer more than half a world away.

The enhancement of a near abroad ally’s ability to project power should restore and
keep the balance rather than destabilize it”. President Rodrigo Duterte on 27
November, however, was cautious,  expressing concern about a nuclear arms race in
the region.

Thailand has moved closer to China and is buying submarines from it . It now sees
its plans as justified after AUKUS. Former Thai Deputy Prime Minister Pinit
Jarusombat said AUKUS will intensify an arms race in the region , adding to the
burdens of the region and leading to a negative impact on nuclear non-proliferation
efforts. Cambodian Foreign Minister Sokhonn, in a call with Australian Foreign
Minister Payne, expected that the AUKUS will “not fuel unhealthy rivalries and
further escalate tension”.  They have not followed the Chinese sharp criticism this
time.

Both Myanmar and Laos have abstained from commenting on this alliance. China’s
view of AUKUS is that i t “will gravely undermine regional peace and stability,
aggravate arms race, and impair international nuclear non-proliferation efforts. It
runs counter to regional countries wishes .” China also sees AUKUS as an exclusive
club alien to the region.

Usa
For the US, it represents an ongoing effort to revitalise the “pivot to Asia” strategy initiated by ex-
president Barack Obama.
the British,
For the British, Aukus is part of its post-Brexit strategy to project a “global Britain” and uphold its alliance
with the Americans.

For Australia
For Australia, its embrace of the pact has sparked more questions than answers. It is unclear why it needs
nuclear-powered submarines, which are only expected to be ready by the late 2030s, in the first place.

Is the concern over an open conflict in the region if Beijing moves to reclaim the self-ruled island
of Taiwan by force?

Other treatize
And if the US and Britain go further to get Australia to host military hardware with
nuclear capabilities, it will undermine existing treaties including

 Asean’s TAC (Treaty of Amity and Cooperation),

 Zopfan (Zone of Peace, Freedom and Neutrality)
 and SEANWFZ (Southeast Asia Nuclear Weapon Free Zone)

Gunboat diplomacy – such as the limited projection of naval prowess to attain

foreign policy objectives – will increasingly play a bigger role as an instrument of
foreign policy.

The politics of AUKUS

AUSTRALIAs refusal to france for aukus

THE US administration’s decision to get Australia to cancel its

contract with France for the supply of conventional submarines
and, instead, get nuclear-powered submarines of the type the
Americans or British were using came as a rude shock to the
French who were informed of the decision only hours before it
was made public.

Initial expressions of deep umbrage by the French foreign minister,

the recall of French ambassadors from Washington and Canberra and
reports that the largely government-owned company that had made the
initial agreement with the Australians was capable also of delivering
nuclear-powered submarines contributed to what was termed a betrayal.

 The break between France — backed at least in some measure by Germany

— and the Anglophones (the US, UK, New Zealand and Australia) seemed
beyond repair.

Yet, within days a Biden-Macron conversation resulted in the return of the

French ambassadors to Washington and Canberra. The White House said
that “President Emmanuel Macron … and President Joe Biden … spoke on
September 22, at the request of the latter, in order to discuss the
implications of the announcement on September 15. 

he two leaders agreed that the situation would have benefited from open
consultations among allies on matters of strategic interest to France and
our European partners. President Biden conveyed his ongoing commitment
in that regard”. This was as much of an apology as the French could get and
the French president decided to accept this with alacrity.

French usa rivalry’

This was followed by many complaints from importers of French products
that the political disagreement between the two governments was leading
to a boycott by American consumers of French products.

AUKUS, a Reshuffle for International

Security and the End of NATO?
France is, so far, the country that has been affected the most when
Australia ditched the 38.6-billion-euro agreement to build 12 diesel-fuelled
submarines to procure American-built nuclear propelled ones instead. 

france is also an important actor in the Indo-Pacific region, the area of

influence of AUKUS, as there are approximately 1.6 million French citizens
living in that region.

LANCASTER HOUSE TREATIES?Downing Street Declaration[edit]

The 2 November 2010 Downing Street declaration[4] by President Sarkozy and Prime Minister
Cameron. The elements of this declaration are as follows.

 Defence and Security Cooperation Treaty: The purpose of this is to develop co-

operation between British and French armed forces, the sharing and pooling of
materials and equipment including through mutual interdependence, the building of
joint facilities, mutual access to each other's defence markets, and industrial and
technological co-operation.
 Nuclear Stockpile Stewardship: Collaboration on the technology associated with
nuclear stockpile stewardship in support of both countries' independent nuclear
deterrent capabilities, including a new joint facility at Valduc in France that will model
performance of nuclear warheads and materials to ensure long-term viability, security
and safety – this will be supported by a joint Technology Development Centre at
Aldermaston in the UK.
 Operational Matters: It was also decided to sign a letter of intent, creating a new
framework for exchanges between UK and French armed forces on operational
matters.
 Industry and Armaments: It was decided 

UKUS militarily speaking does not pose any real threat to China or the
region. It does, however, signals a very strategic game among all actors
involved. The pact has positively impacted the UK, who after Brexit, has
seen this agreement as a small victory over Europe. The United Kingdom
has finally set itself free from the subjugating practiced of the EU. AUKUS
has also come to strengthen the Global Britain policy it pursued since its
exit from the EU and its reclaiming its place in international affairs. 

Framce ka dukh
he announcement of the new AUKUS alliance between Australia, the UK
and the U.S. came as a shock for France. Paris has never been consulted,
nor notified in advance, despite the historic importance of the deal and
the huge implications that it bears for France’s interests, not least the
brutal termination of the contract to provide 12 submarines to Canberra.

 game changer in the Indo-Pacific

. Australia’s new threat assessment motivated a very politically sensitive
decision: to step up its game and move from a middle power to a nearly
great power status, by entering the exclusive club of the nuclear-powered
submarines holders (China, France, India, Russia, the UK and the U.S.).

Getting the UK, not an Indo-Pacific power, onboard does not sound
like a most relevant choice, but it does make sense if the U.S. prioritizes
closeness, interoperability and alignment.

The three countries have indeed a long history of close cooperation,

not least with the intelligence sharing arrangement of the Five Eyes.

AUKUS will thus become the new core around which the U.S. will organize
the constellation of its partners to check China.

This is certainly bad news for Beijing

. At the same time, Beijing will also exploit the AUKUS deal to its
advantage, in order to further justify its military moves, which probably
means that the security situation in the Indo-Pacific is likely to worsen.

Biden and realpolitik

the ire is even more acute vis à vis the American ally. Striking the AUKUS
deal and accepting to sell SSN to Australia is a pure realpolitik move
. The Biden administration has so far demonstrated that its systemic
rivalry with China is informing its whole external policy.

The frustration of an historic ally seems acceptable when it comes to the

core U.S. interests: staying ahead of China and checking it are now clearly
one of these.

 In January, Jake Sullivan, National Security Advisor, called for a “chorus of
voices” in front of China, with the Europeans being the most crucial of U.S.
partners.

Only the UK has been picked up.

France, a leading European power in the Indo-Pacific and a most proactive

defender of an Indo-Pacific approach within the EU, has been set aside.

Asean doesn’t want o appear bad to china

However, reality is that French and U.S. Indo-Pacific strategies have been
working in synergy, with Paris playing the role of a very efficient convening
power, able to coordinate with the four Quad countries as well as the
ASEAN nations that do not wish to appear as confrontational towards
China.

Hence, the clumsy AUKUS announcement seems more damaging than French
strategic autonomy when it comes to building up solidarity between like-minded
partners to face China. Beijing will only be so happy to use this development to
try to drive a wedge between them. In the wake of Afghanistan, the widening
gap between the U.S. rhetoric on the importance of allies and partners, and the
lack of consultation and consideration on important moves only urge the
Europeans to accelerate the path towards more strategic autonomy.

France’s Indo-Pacific commitment will endure

his said, France’s Indo-Pacific commitment will not weaken, not least
because the nation maintains significant sovereign interests in the region.
Territories in both the Indian Ocean (Islands of Mayotte and La Réunion)
and the Pacific (New Caledonia, French Polynesia…), host some 1.5 million
citizens and more than 90% of its large EEZ (9 million km²). France
maintains a military presence of 8,000 personnel to take care of this vast
area.
Therefore, France’s engagement in the Indo-Pacific is not a mere rhetorical
posture but a sustained commitment. Besides, some of France’s major
trade and security partners are located in the region, while the safety of
the maritime routes linking Europe and East Asia is key to its economic
security

Finally, the Indo-Pacific is the primary locus of the Sino-American strategic

rivalry that will (with all probability) shape the future world order

. France, a permanent member of the UN Security Council, is a capable

and responsible stakeholder that has already demonstrated the credibility
of its commitment to support a rules-based order and stability in the
region.

This year alone, Paris sent its nuclear-powered submarine (SSN) in the

South China Sea in February, held a quadrilateral France-US-Japan-
Australia amphibious exercises in May in a Japanese remote island, led
the La Pérouse naval exercise with the four Quad powers in the Indian
Ocean and sent Rafale fighters all the way to Polynesia and Hawaii this
summer

After AUKUS, France will step up its efforts to build up a network of middle
powers. Japan and India, while welcoming the new alliance, will strive to keep
Paris fully engaged in the region, and New Delhi might be interested in a new
defense deal. Paris is in good way to sell 36 Rafale fighters to Indonesia and
is working on fostering its partnerships with Malaysia, the Philippines and
ASEAN, with which a development partnership was inked in March. French and
European’s inclusive visions for the Indo-Pacific are convergent with ASEAN’s
approach, which may explain why the EU emerged as one of the most trusted
partners for these countries.
More importantly, Paris’ Indo-Pacific approach will be resolutely articulated with
the EU’s brand-new strategy in the region from now on. The two approaches
usefully work in synergy and complement each other. The EU’s strategy has a
strong focus on building resilient value chains, especially in semiconductors,
including by setting up a deal with Taiwan. Standards setting in trade, digital
domains and emerging technologies, “in line with democratic principles”, is one
of the priority objectives of the EU. The strategy even mentions “the EU’s interest
in engaging with the QUAD on issues of common interest such as climate
change, technology or vaccines”.

This shows that the EU’s priorities are in line with America’s core concerns and
that strategic autonomy is not averse to a necessary and close cooperation with
Washington and other key partners in the Indo-Pacific. The EU being
a normative superpower and a major economic player, the U.S. will not have
the luxury to dismiss it if it really wants to weigh on China’s choices. In the
glimpse of the brave new world that AUKUS just unveiled, France and Europe
remain significant and relevant players

AUKUS IS AWKWARD, BUT NOT

ABNORMAL: HOW U.S. FOREIGN
POLICY EXPERTS THINK ABOUT
AMERICA’S ALLIANCES
DINA SMELTZ, SIBEL OKTA
Many had thought a Biden presidency would mean a return to
appreciative and cooperative relationships between the United
States and its allies and partners around the world. France
certainly did — before the United States and Britain scuttled a
$66 billion French conventional submarine deal with Australia in
order to make their own sale of nuclear-powered submarines to
the land down under.

To be fair, Washington’s relations with Turkey have been in

shambles for quite some time (the S-400s, anyone?). This makes
it rather easy for the United States to prioritize virtually any other
interest over preserving its alliance with Ankara. The relationship
with France, however, rests not just on treaty obligations but also
on shared goals and values. That is precisely why the AUKUS
deal puts U.S. relations with France in a difficult spot.
aUKUS, China Sea Tensions
Put Indonesia in Tight Spot,
Analysts Say
Lying between China and Australia, vast archipelagic Indonesia hosts strategic sea
lanes linking the Indian and Pacific oceans and connecting the South China Sea with
waters off northern Australia. Submarines may pass undetected through its deep-sea
trenches.

Affront to nonalignment

The flexing of great power rivalry in Indonesia’s neighborhood is viewed as an affront

to its long-held foreign policy of nonalignment and resolution of regional tensions
through the Association of Southeast Asian Nations-centered diplomacy and
dialogue.

X “They think Australia might be deployed in what they consider to be their sea, and
waging conflict from it. This is one of their concerns. In the event of a terrible
conflict, it’s quite conceivable there would be conflict within their ‘tanah air’
[homeland]. They don’t want great power rivalry in their backyard.”

In addition, Gilang Kembara, a researcher at the Jakarta-based Center for Strategic

and International Studies, said the AUKUS submarines deal was “murkying the
waters” and raising fears of submarine accidents in Indonesian waters.

“Indonesia realizes it doesn’t have the capability to clean up any mess that could
occur from a malfunction or accident. The addition of nuclear-powered submarines
is adding one more to the club. We already have India and China with the same
capabilities,” Kembara told VOA.

AUKUS Is Only Half the

Equation
The United States and Britain should
prioritize economic ties in their emerging
Asia alliance.

 After the U.S., Britain, and Australia announced the AUKUS deal, the
Chinese government did not make any security overtures. Instead,
Beijing announced its bid to join the Comprehensive and Progressive
Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP)– the successor to the
Trans-Pacific Partnership that the United States helped negotiate but
from which it ultimately withdrew.

It is unclear whether China’s application will be successful –

especially considering Taiwan’s application to join the CPTPP – but it
nevertheless sends a powerful message to Asian countries. Unlike the
U.S. and Britain, China seeks to project itself as an economic power
instead of a military power.

Even countries like India, where leaders are increasingly skeptical of

China’s strategic objectives, do not want their country to become
pawns in increasingly hostile Sino-American relations.

Both Britain and the United States can design foreign policies better
suited to Asian nations’ economic priorities. Earlier this year, Britain
became the first country to pursue negotiations to join the CPTPP.
Joining such multilateral agreements and strengthening existing
bilateral trade arrangements can be an effective way to signal
Washington and Westminster’s commitment to strengthening Asian
economic ties.
However, America and Britain can work with Australia, Japan, and
the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries to sign
agreements to liberalize cross-border data flows and digital trade.

AUKUS Is a Short-
Term Mess but a Long-
Term Win for
Australia
The controversial deal puts Canberra on the right side of history.

By Alexander L. Vuving, a professor at the Daniel K. Inouye Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies.

If AUKUS is a signal, then one of its key messages is rather than hedge
between Beijing and Washington as most other countries are doing,
Australia has chosen the United States—and at a sharp price.

In another instance, Chen Hai, a senior official at the Department of Asian

Affairs in China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, told his South Korean
counterpart in 2017 that “a small country was refusing to listen to a big
country,” in regards to Seoul’s decision to install a Terminal High Altitude
Area Defense system

Lithuania is not qualified to attack China and this is not the way a small
country should act.” Pay deference to China, and you’ll be rewarded with
access to the Chinese market, investment, tourists, vaccines, and mor

But if you insist on equality and neutral rules when China seeks exceptions
for itself, you will be punished. The Philippines experienced this when it
brought its disputes with China in the South China Sea to the international
court of arbitration and won the case—only to have Beijing disregard the
result and step up its encroachment in the Philippines’ waters.
Australia, more than any other country, became a victim of China’s
economic coercion when it asked the World Health Organization to
investigate the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The following months saw an unprecedented number and amount

of Australian products—from beef, coal, timber, and wine to barley, copper,
sugar, and wool—barred from entering China due to non-transparent
Chinese restrictions.

These areas, collectively known as the Rimland thanks to Dutch-born American political
scientist Nicholas Spykman, repeatedly gave rise to most of the great powers in world history
—Assyria, Persia, Rome, India, and China, to name a few. However, these great powers
remained regional hegemons—not global ones.

This is because to dominate all of the Rimland, one must first gain access to
each of its most productive areas, and in this respect, a great power based
on a productive offshore region has a decisive advantage over any power
based on the Eurasian landmass

. As history—or better, geography—has it, the only global hegemons the

world has ever known are the United Kingdom and the United States.

THE CHINA DYNAMIC

As a Rimland power, China has to face not just a global rivalry with the
United States but also regional rivalries with Japan and India. With or
without Australia, an anti-hegemonic coalition among the United States,
Japan, and India is a logical response to this situation. But with its location,
productivity, and size, Australia can leave a large mark on the contest’s
outcome.

If it sides with China, it can help China become a partial hegemon in Asia
and the Pacific, but the U.S.-Japan-India coalition can still block China’s
bid for global hegemony

. If Australia joins the U.S.-Japan-India coalition, it is more likely on the

winning side. Aided by AUKUS—a strategic alliance of three major offshore
powers in the North Atlantic, the North Pacific, and the hinge between the
Pacific and the Indian Oceans—the combined coalition represents the
winning geography’s core and arithmetic of our time’s great-power
competition. Perhaps not coincidentally, all these powers are among the
most committed to a rules-based international order.
a. While France, Germany, Indonesia, and Malaysia have complained about
some aspects of it, Japan, Taiwan, and the Philippines have expressed their
support for the new trilateral alliance. In the European
Union, Denmark has implicitly given its approval while in the Association
of Southeast Nations, Singapore is publicly and Vietnam is subtly and
cautiously nurturing their hopes about the partnership. India is
also hiding its real thoughts, but it cannot hide the reality that AUKUS
helps sink the prospects of Chinese dominance.

Indonesia and Malaysia

Reiterate Concerns About
AUKUS Pact
Their statements reflect the trepidation that
many Southeast Asian governments feel
about rising Sino-American tensions.

. The Philippines, a U.S. treaty ally, has strongly backed AUKUS, saying

it offers a necessary counterbalance to an increasingly assertive
China. Other nations have struck a more neutral tone. Singapore has
expressed hopes that the deal will “contribute constructively to the
peace and stability of the region and complement the regional
architecture,” while Cambodian Foreign Minister Prak Sokhonn said
that his country “expected that AUKUS will not fuel unhealthy
rivalries and further escalate tension.”
This was reflected this week in reports that Singapore had welcomed
China’s bid to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for
Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), the successor agreement to the
trade pact negotiated by the Obama administration.

. But more ambitiously, beyond submarines, AUKUS seeks to win the

technology competition with China by pooling resources and integrating
supply chains for defence-related science, industry, and supply chains.
This will be the decades-long and multifaceted purpose of AUKUS — a
transnational project racing to seize advantages in artificial intelligence,
quantum computing and cyber technology.

The technologies at the heart of AUKUS are at the cutting edge of scientific research, and
promise to deliver unprecedented advantages in military power. The submarine project will
likely serve as a forcing function to drive much of this new collaboration. It is still unclear
how much of the submarines’ nuclear propulsion technology will be shared with Australia,
but the Australian defence community will almost certainly gain access to the submarines’
other state-of-the-art technologies, including sensors and data-processing systems for
maritime domain awareness and tracking and evading adversary forces.

FIVE EYES
What makes the United Kingdom and Australia Washington’s most valued technology
partners? They are members of the Five Eyes intelligence alliance, which over decades has
developed joint systems, organisations and processes for sharing collection responsibilities
and intelligence data.

FRANCE NEGLECTED

This is probably also why France was excluded from the grouping, prompting a sudden and
ugly diplomatic spat. Despite its likeminded interests in the region, and despite its military
power and activism, France does not share the systems and relationships that define the
Five Eyes. In the years to come, AUKUS will gain greater regional acceptance and utility if it
figures out how to share some of its prized defence technology and data with other
partners, including France and others in the region.
hould Russia Be Worried
by the New AUKUS
Alliance
thers were worried about the implications of the U.S. decision to share nuclear
submarine technology with a non-nuclear state (instead of the French diesel
submarines, Canberra will now get eight nuclear submarines).

For Russia, this means that any of its actions from now on will be viewed by
Washington within the context of the U.S.-Chinese confrontation. The White
House will, for example, turn a blind eye to Moscow’s cooperation with New
Delhi and Hanoi on military technology, seeing it as a way to shore up the
regional counterbalance to Beijing. Russia’s ongoing assistance with China’s
naval modernization program, on the other hand, will be closely scrutinized and
could become grounds for new U.S. sanctions against both countries.

There has been some speculation that AUKUS will, with time, become an Asian
equivalent of NATO, with more countries joining, from Canada and New Zealand
to Japan and South Korea, and eventually even India and Vietnam. These
predictions have unsurprisingly elicited concern in Russia.

Yet they are unlikely to come true. Countries like South Korea and India have no
desire to join a multilateral military alliance that could jeopardize their relations
with other countries. In any case, the establishment of a new structure is in itself
an indirect acknowledgement by Washington that the twentieth-century rigid
model of alliances is not right for this century. If anything, AUKUS is an attempt
to find a modern alternative to NATO.

It’s inevitable that the role of NATO in U.S. strategy will decrease, but that’s not
necessarily in Russia’s long-term interests if it means the organization will be
replaced with structures such as AUKUS. NATO has detailed and clearly
articulated decisionmaking procedures and mechanisms for reaching
compromises among its many members. Decisions made by NATO may be
unpalatable for Moscow, but they are generally consistent and predictable. The
same cannot be said of less heavyweight structures such as AUKUS, from which
any number of improvised reactions could ensue, inevitably adding to the
political risks.

or this reason, it is the world’s oceans rather than continental Eurasia that will be
the main battleground between the United States and China.

For Russia, as a predominantly land power, that is overall a good thing—as long
as Moscow doesn’t strive to position itself at the epicenter of the Chinese-
American standoff.

n a couple of decades’ time, Australian submarines could turn up off the

coast of Russia’s Sakhalin Island and Kamchatka Peninsula, or even cross
the Bering Strait into the Arctic Ocean, creating a new potential threat for
Russia’s Northern Fleet. There is every reason to suppose, however, that
their main routes will lie much further south, and will not directly impinge
upon Russian interests.

COMPARISON WITH THE THIRD ALLIANCE TRIPPLE

Back in May 1882, when Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy agreed to
establish the military and political bloc known as the Triple Alliance, it’s
unlikely that anyone in Europe gave a second thought to the possible long-
term consequences.

After all, the aim of the alliance was purely the containment of France,
where revanchism was rife following the country’s defeat in the Franco-
Prussian War of 1870–1872.
There were no bigger plans in Berlin, Vienna, or Rome at that time. Yet
little more than thirty years later, the European continent was awash with
the bloodshed of an unprecedented war.
More Than Submarines:
Implications of AUKUS
in the Air Domain
The benefits of AUKUS for Indo-Pacific competition transcend nuclear submarines.

F35 PLANES
BY USA TO AUSTRAIA

THE US ADVANTAGE
The first and perhaps most significant potential effect of the agreement
is to enable U.S. air forces to practice and refine the burgeoning agile
combat employment (ACE) concept. ACE is a concept designed to
confound an adversary’s targeting processes by using multiple airfields
in one region to disperse air forces and project combat power from
many locations. 

 the U.S. is tacitly acknowledging that the concept of a fixed,

centralized air hub of operations used in the post 9/11 conflicts of the
last two decades — for example, at Ramstein Air Base, Germany; Al
Udeid Air Base, Qatar; and Bagram Air Base, Afghanistan — is
probably less effective against current U.S threats.

2
Furthermore, because the inventory of the Royal Australian Air Force
(RAAF) includes so many aircraft also operated by the United States,
maintenance and logistical support of these aircraft will benefit from
economies of scale.

A third potentially noteworthy benefit to U.S. air domain capabilities

from the AUKUS agreement is expanded access, basing, and overflight
(ABO) permissions in the region. ABO permissions are a standard
assumption of contingency planning; however, as the United States
experienced in 2003  when it was forced to amend plans for a northern
assault into Iraq from Turkey, ABO permissions are never guaranteed.
By making a “definitive strategic choice ” through ratification of the
AUKUS partnership, however, Australia has effectively chosen sides 

Why AUKUS Alarms

ASEAN
The bloc is struggling to preserve unity—and can’t decide what to
do about the new U.S.-China rivalry.

But it’s not just China that’s working around ASEAN to achieve its goals.
The Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy espoused by Australia, India,
Japan, and the United States is a case in point.

The strategy has innocuous-sounding principles: freedom of navigation and overflight,

adherence to international law, and regional connectivity. But its power is it highlights
principles China rejects. Most ASEAN members are maritime states and would strongly
support these principles, but supporting the U.S.-led strategy publicly would rile China. For
fear of enraging Beijing, ASEAN has struggled to take a collective position.

The same goes for the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue—known as the Quad
and formed by those same four states—which ASEAN countries fear is
another red flag to China’s bull. Although the Quad, innocuously enough, is
working on tangible deliverables—such as vaccine delivery, climate
measures, and emerging technologies—it can also bring power to bear in
and around the South China Sea in the form of joint military exercises and
training. In August and October, the four Quad members’ navies conducted
maritime exercises in the Philippine Sea and the Bay of Bengal,
respectively. As a testament to these drills’ growing importance, the United
States announced plans to possibly include Britain’s Royal Navy in the
future. 

AUKUS intensifies Pak-India rivalry

. If Australia can be equipped with more nuclear materials so too can India —
Modi and his acolytes will reason.
India’s Defence Minister Rajnath Singh has hinted that New Delhi may alter its
“no-first-use of nuclear-weapons” policy. If such Indian-provoked hostility occurs,
New Delhi’s war-mongering hawks can trigger a renewed nuclear arms race in a
South Asia already teetering on a nuclear knife’s edge.

Such Indian escalation could force China to similarly alter its “no-first-use nuclear
weapons” policy, triggering a sinister snowball effect of nuclear armament and
proliferation.

The US-Indian collaboration in sensitive defence technologies tilts the strategic

power balance in South Asia. If Modi’s BJP retorts to AUKUS in kind by shoring
up their own naval nuclear capabilities, this could force Islamabad’s hand to
strengthen its alliance with China on the strategic chessboard of naval security in a
perpetual nuclear stand-off.

India, with a blatant disregard to the 1968 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of

Nuclear Weapons (NPT), the UN’s UNSC Resolution 255 and the UNSCR 984
related nuclear security assurances since long, operates nuclear combat vessels in
the Indian Ocean.
India has proven itself to be highly negligent with nuclear weapons. The state-
induced nuclear smuggling and uranium theft in Jharkhand, Tamil Nadu and
Nagpur can easily exacerbate black market smuggling and sales to terrorists. This
must be of grave concern to the international community. The radioactive fallout
could be cataclysmic.

India already operates the Chakra II (a Russian Akula-class stealth offensive

submarine) and the INS Arihant class of nuclear-powered ballistic submarines
missiles, including pressurised light-water reactors (PWRs) powered with enriched
uranium capable of firing torpedoes and submarine launched ballistic missiles
(SLBMs) with a profound potential to jeopardise regional maritime stability

India not only introduced nuclear weapons in South Asia but has egregiously
added a nuclear dimension to the Indian Ocean Region (IOR). Delhi desperately
aspires for a “blue water navy” status and its extensive naval acquisitions enhance
Indian warfighting, reconnaissance and anti-submarine capabilities empowering
India’s Navy with a strategic outreach in the Indian Ocean.
AUKUS legally leverages a seldom-used loophole in the 1968 NPT and the IAEA
Statute, enabling nuclear armed states to divert fissile material away from the
IAEA inspection if it is used for “peaceful” pursuits, including submarine
propulsion.

India diplomatically hedges security concerns between the US versus China,

especially since its diminished role in Afghanistan. New Delhi deployed troops to
Russia’s recently held Zapad military drills in Belarus and is a full member of the
China-led Shanghai Cooperation Organization. However, Delhi now finds itself in
an uneasy limbo where it’s increasingly difficult to diplomatically juggle
conflicting priorities given escalating American-China tensions. Delhi is now
likely to intensify its naval alliance with Washington DC.

Naval security ties between Beijing and Islamabad have over the years
strengthened by a series of arms procurements, as Pakistan is modernising its naval
warfare capabilities by acquiring Chinese-manufactured technologically cutting-
edge frigates, confirmed Admiral M Amjad Khan Niazi, Pakistan’s Naval Chief of
Staff.

Pakistan Navy’s purchase of Jiangwei-II class F-22P frigates

, eight Yuan Class Hangor Air Independent Propulsion (conventional) submarines,

Fast Attack Craft Missiles (FAC M like ),

C-602 Anti-Ship missiles,

FN-16 SHORADS Surface to Air Missiles,

including four Type 054A/P multi-purpose naval missile frigate and

medium-altitude long-endurance unmanned combat aerial vehicles.

Such sophisticated weaponry collectively enhances Pakistan Navy’s surface

search and tracking radars, surveillance ships, close-in-weapons-systems (CIWS)
and long-range missile capabilities.

With swiftly evolving threat dynamics and maritime security upgrades, Pakistan’s
decision-makers would need to intensify the induction of advanced maritime
surface platforms like more corvettes, frigates, shallow water attack submarines,
and offshore patrol vessels, which gains added urgency in light of AUKUS which
increasingly overshadows the traditional QUAD.

akistan already is and must further upgrade naval fleet capabilities with modern
surface, subsurface and anti-air weapons, sensors and combat management system
(CMS) with long-range, anti-submarine and anti-surface warfare capabilities via
long-range patrol jets, unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAV), state-of-the-art
weapons and surveillance systems to maintain maritime peace in the Indian Ocean
and Arabian Sea.

Aman
Pakistan amply demonstrated its desire for oceanic and seafaring stability during
the Aman 2021 multinational maritime peace-building counterterrorism drill.
Aman 21 exhibits Islamabad’s commitment toward responsible statecraft in
maintaining peace and security in the Indo-Pacific, Arabian Sea and beyond. In
light of AUKUS and escalating maritime tensions between global powers, Pakistan
can increasingly host similar peace-driven maritime protection and de-escalation
confidence-building naval exercises.

Despite AUKUS optics, it will take Australians at least ten years to operate nuclear
submarines. Beijing already has an upper edge. China leased the Australian ports
of Darwin and Newcastle and has a “Blue Water Navy” capable of operating
globally, across world oceans.

eu Europe

has not been unresponsive to these changes. In reaction to U.S.

calls for greater burden-sharing, Europeans have stepped up
efforts to boost their defense, especially amid a deteriorating
security environment, Russian aggression, and terrorist attacks on
European soil. Defense budgets are on the rise. Initiatives have
been launched to foster collaborative armament projects
and strengthen collective operational readiness. Europeans have
beefed up their military engagement in their neighborhood,
particularly in the Sahel. Concerned by China’s growing
assertiveness, the EU has diversified and strengthened its Indo-
Pacific partnerships through engagement with Japan, India, and
the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
The Chinese side opposes this agreement and urges the British side to proceed
from [the principle of] safeguarding the nuclear non-proliferation system, handle it
cautiously, and think twice,” Wang said, according to the Chinese foreign ministry

The first was that the United States, Australia, India, and Japan have a
vested interest in upholding the rules and norms of the current order;
augmenting existing institutions; ensuring freedom of navigation and
trade; and promoting connectivity, economic development, and security
within existing rules and standards
.
The second was that all four Quad members believed that China’s rise
and the reach of its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)  posed a threat to
them and the region.

hina-Russia coordination helps break

AUKUS encirclement
By Wei DongxuPublished: Oct 19, 2021 07:03 PM
   
v Against this backdrop, the China-Russia joint naval drill includes new subjects
and displays high levels of mutual trust. China has a strong and reliable partner in
the Western Pacific: Russia. This time, China has sent its most advanced 10,000-
ton-class Type 055 large destroyer, while Russia dispatched the main force of its
Pacific Fleet. This demonstrates that China and Russia attach great importance to
defense cooperation.

Against this backdrop, the China-Russia joint naval drill includes new subjects and
displays high levels of mutual trust. China has a strong and reliable partner in the
Western Pacific: Russia. This time, China has sent its most advanced 10,000-ton-
class Type 055 large destroyer, while Russia dispatched the main force of its
Pacific Fleet. This demonstrates that China and Russia attach great importance to
defense cooperation.

he Chinese People’s Liberation Army

Navy (PLAN) was represented by the new
Type 055 guided-missile stealth
destroyer Nanchang  and Type
052D guided-missile destroyer Kunming,
as well as the Type
054A frigates Binzhou  and Liuzhou and
the supply ship Dongpinghu. There is a
significant degree of overlap between the
ships present at these latest drills in the
western pacific and those that took part
in the Russian-Chinese Joint Sea
2021 exercises in the Sea of Japan earlier
in October.

AUKUS deal reflects Cold War

mentality: Pakistani experts
The AUKUS security partnership between the United States, Britain and Australia
reflects the Cold War mentality and zero-sum mindset of some western countries, said
Pakistani experts and former diplomat

AUKUS: US offshore balancing strategy to

contain China
Us aims
AUKUS reflects the US grand strategy of offshore balancing:
(a) aggressively following up the core pillars of its strategy in the Asia-Pacific
region. One of which is sustaining key strategic allies vis-à-vis the rise of any
potential adversary and the perceived peer strategic competitor (in this case
China)\\
(b) ; (b) strengthening and empowering its allies in terms of economy and
military forces against the rapid regional rise of China;
(c)
(c) retaining a power projection in the Asia-Pacific region to which the US claims
to be the predominant player for over a century. It may not retrench from the key
sea-lines of communication (SLOCs);
(d) upholding its key strategic military basis for carrying out military contingency
plans when and if needed in collaboration with its allies and partners in the region;
and

(e) more importantly arguing for the so-called non-proliferation measures in line
with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the NPT.

Key Points

 The marshalling of new alliances in the Indo-Pacific region, like the Quad and
AUKUS, has rung the bell for the commencement of a New Cold War.
 It could end up being a serious threat to nuclear non-proliferation, bypassing real
concerns about the risks that nuclear technology poses.
 If the United States and China fail to manage their rivalry, the world will face severe
disruption.
 It is, therefore, imperative to develop a clear understanding of any such New Cold
War, including of the pitfalls for the allies of both the global powers.

ition among the great powers have created the basic conditions for a new Cold War. Of most
concern, however, are the warnings by some scholars that the rivalry between the two powers
could be spiralling down towards a Thucydides Trap, for which Taiwan may become the
trigger for a kinetic conflict. Many Americans worry that China will prove to be a dangerous
foe. There is much anxiety about China, which could lead to conflict as the situation
deteriorates.

bv ober minds suggest that if Australia is going to shut the gate in respect to China,
potentially putting at risk more than $100 billion of exports, it will have an impact on the
living standards of Australians. That is the problem when you try to wrap the totality of
government under the umbrella of national security

Now, after seeing the US forge new alliances and build military capabilities
in the Ocean, China too will expedite its ICD "Integrated Counter
Diplomacy" alongside building up more nukes, frigates, nuclear submarines
and aircraft carriers in order to protect its stakes

v ossibly, China will also forge a powerful military and defence alliance
comprising China, Russia, North Korea and Pakistan solely to
counterbalance and neutralise the newly formed AUKUS. Also, China will
further harden its stance on Taiwan with increased naval activities in the
South China Sea where it is already aggressively asserting its claims on
disputed territorial waters and here a little standoff can lead to the path of
military confrontation between the US and China.

It would be completely unjust not to mention the existence of another

security coalition – 'QUAD', comprising the US, India, Australia, and Japan in
the Indo Pacific. Anticipatedly, this security alliance will be vibrant and
active in its naval activities solely to contain China. However, India here will
be given a special role against China’s ascendancy. For that, the US-India
defence trade cooperation is likely to expand with existing agreements –
(LEMOA), (COMCASA) and (ISA) – between them.

By Waseem Shabbir
October 19, 2021

The geopolitical dynamics are rapidly shaping up in strategically important

regions of the world – heralding no signs of peace, cooperation and
interdependence among international power blocs in the near future.

At present, the dominant unipolar world order (three-decades after) has

begun decaying by repeating its cycle and budging fast towards its
transition to bipolar or multipolar order. The gradual shifts in the current
unipolar world order have brought US hegemony into a state of jeopardy.
Thus, the United States will not be averse to going to any extent to dispel
these evolving shifts which are posing a great threat to its worldwide
unilateralism.

In the wake of various paradigm shifts on the global stage, it is solely the
economic, military and strategic rise of China through its billion dollars
mega-project of connectivity called the BRI (Belt and Road Initiative)
spreading from south and central Asia to Europe to the African continent,
which is becoming a formidable challenge to US hegemony, adding to its
consternation.

Thus, after decamping from Afghanistan and several other countries

including Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon, and Libya in the Middle East which
are no more relevant, the US, to shield and protect its global dominance
and world unipolar political structure, has resorted to stage a new war
theatre in the Asia-Pacific with the single objective to contain, hinder and
coerce China’s advancements and ascendancy in the region with full
cooperation from its allies.

While pursuing aggressive manoeuvres, on September 16 this year

Washington forged a new trilateral security agreement with the UK and
Australia named (AUKUS). Under the garb of "freedom of navigation", "free
and open Indo-Pacific" and "rule-based order" this new coalition entirely
aims at countering Chinese power in the Asia-Pacific. According to this pact
of $ 66 billion, Australia will be assisted to build 12 nuclear-powered
submarines. These efforts will enhance Australia’s naval power to impede
and challenge China’s preponderance in the Asia-Pacific. China’s embassy
in Washington accused the pact of being a coordinated effort towards a
"cold war mentality and ideological prejudice".

However, the formation of AUKUS will be a humongous loss for France after
it was replaced by the US and UK with regard to providing nuclear
submarines to Australia. France’s foreign minister Jean-Yves Le Drian also
views the new agreement a stab in France's back after it lost the deal to
Australia. In fact, international alliances and pacts always stand brittle in the
face of changing states' interests.

AUKUS will certainly give a boost to the nuclear race in the region which
however violates the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty signed in 1968.
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian stated that the deal would
seriously undermine regional peace and stability and would severely
intensify the "arms race". Now, after seeing the US forge new alliances and
build military capabilities in the Ocean, China too will expedite its ICD
"Integrated Counter Diplomacy" alongside building up more nukes,
frigates, nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers in order to protect its
stakes; thus making the region more volatile and vulnerable.

Possibly, China will also forge a powerful military and defence alliance
comprising China, Russia, North Korea and Pakistan solely to
counterbalance and neutralise the newly formed AUKUS. Also, China will
further harden its stance on Taiwan with increased naval activities in the
South China Sea where it is already aggressively asserting its claims on
disputed territorial waters and here a little standoff can lead to the path of
military confrontation between the US and China.

The world knows that Japan and South Korea survive under US influence
even in today's age and they don't pursue their independent foreign
policies. However, Australia was scapegoated for the first time by being
dragged into this arms deal – solely for US interests – with an assigned role
to counter China’s rising influence in the Asia-Pacific. Much resentment was
seen among Australians, as highlighted by the number of demonstrations
they carried out against their government for becoming America's partner
in war and belligerence rather than focusing on solving the many other
serious issues it faces including Covid-19, climate change and rising
inflation.

It would be completely unjust not to mention the existence of another

security coalition – 'QUAD', comprising the US, India, Australia, and Japan in
the Indo Pacific. Anticipatedly, this security alliance will be vibrant and
active in its naval activities solely to contain China. However, India here will
be given a special role against China’s ascendancy. For that, the US-India
defence trade cooperation is likely to expand with existing agreements –
(LEMOA), (COMCASA) and (ISA) – between them.

China will certainly focus on Pakistan and strengthen it militarily to

counterbalance India’s hegemonic designs. Now, Pakistan’s alliance with
China and India’s with the US will further intensify the rivalries between
India and Pakistan; the repercussions of this aggravated hostility would be
devastating for the whole region.

Amidst this rising power contest, the US with full support of its allies and
partners is likely to target China’s maritime and mainland projects of
connectivity now. The certain sensitive geographic points which are on the
US radar to be targeted are the Strait of Malacca, Taiwan Strait, the
Kyaukpyu Port of Myanmar, Gwadar Port of Pakistan and the Hambantota
Port of Sri Lanka. Among all aforementioned projects, the Strait of Malacca
through which a quarter of all world trade flows is the most vulnerable
point to be blocked by the newly emerged security coalition; this will be a
great jolt to China to throttle its maritime trade. Currently, 80 percent of
China’s oil alone also passes through the Malacca Strait, and this oil supply
is becoming highly risky and unsafe by heavy militarisation by the US nexus
with its allies in the Asia-Pacific.

Articles I, II, III of the Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) states that, nuclear weapon
states (NWS) are not to transfer to any recipient whatsoever nuclear weapons
technology and not to assist, encourage, or induce any NNWS to manufacture or
otherwise acquire them. In this case, the apparentdecline of American power and
willingness to maintain global balances has resulted in a general deterioration of
regional security. However, the future US transfer of such weaponry in the region
and the name of extended deterrence will provoke a cascade effect on peace, and it
willaffect an already crippled non-proliferation regime.
In March 1963, the US  President John F. Kennedy stated that every man, woman, and
child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles, hanging by the slenderest of threads,
capable of being cut at any moment by accident or miscalculation or by madness.
The weapons of war must be abolished before they abolish us. Critically, the recent
security pact between the US, UK, and Australia is more likely to violate
internationally recognized covenants of nuclear nonproliferation, rather than,
maintaining the standards of the NPT and promoting peace.  

Australia will be only the second country to be provided the naval propulsion reactor (NPR)
technology by the US, which had produced the world’s first SSN, the USS Nautilus, in 1954.
The UK had been the first, when the US supplied it the S5W pressurised water reactor (PWR)
design, complete propulsion machinery set, auxiliary equipment, as well as fissile material
for core fabrication and the offer to reprocess spent fuel in the US.

S5W powered the Royal Navy’s first nuclear-submarine, HMS Dreadnought, launched in
1960. A third generation PWR, namely, PWR3, will now power the four successor
Dreadnought class ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) that will replace the Vanguard class
submarines from 2028 onwards and will host the Royal British Navy’s nuclear deterrent.

Though the NPT bans outright the sale of nuclear-submarines, it has no specific guidance on
leasing or on trade in NPRs. In 2012, the Indian Navy took another SSN, of the Akula class,
on a 10-year lease at a cost of $2 billion. The double-hulled submarine was returned in June,
a year earlier, owing to an explosion on board that damaged both its hulls. Russia is
reportedly modernising another Akula class attack submarine that will be delivered to the
Indian Navy by 2025 under a $3 billion 10-year lease.

India has simultaneously pursued a classified programme to indigenously design and build
three 6,000-tonne SSBNs, conceived way back in 1998. The first of the series, INS Arihant,
however, joined service only in 2016, with its successor, Arighat, due to join next yea
Beijing’s ‘string of pearls’ strategy designed to encircle India has led it to sell Bangladesh
two refurbished Type 035G Ming class submarines for $204 million in 2017, and eight S20
submarines to Pakistan for about $5 billion that will join the Pakistan Navy by 2028.

India also believes that the Maldivian island of Feydhoo Finolhu, which a Chinese company
acquired in 2016 on a 50-year lease for $4 million, may be used as a listening post to track
Indian naval movements in this strategic part of the Indian Ocean and to berth nuclear
submarines.

To signal its outreach into the region, the Boris Johnson government recently dispatched a
carrier strike group led by its new £3-billion aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth into the
contested South China Sea. Britain’s Defence Secretary Ben Wallace announced that
following on from the strike group’s inaugural deployment, the UK would permanently
assign two ships in the region from later this year.

Apart from the AUKUS submarines, Canberra has unveiled a $90 billion plan for building
new naval ships and submarines, more than $1 billion in modern shipyard infrastructure, and
up to $62 million in workforce growth and skilling initiatives to enable the delivery of these
platforms.

These moves certainly do not envisage a resurgence of “Rule, Britannia” of the British
Empire. But they may presage an eventual supplanting of India by the UK in Washington’s
scheme of things, signalling the Biden administration’s waning dependence on India in
rebalancing the power equations in the littoral.