Conceived in secrecy and born in haste, Aukus is on its last legs. When will Labor call the undertaker? | Allan Behm

TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:

"Challenges Mount for Australia's Aukus Agreement Amid Submarine Capability Concerns"

Conceived in secrecy and born in haste, Aukus is on its last legs. When will Labor call the undertaker? | Allan Behm analysis cover image The Guardian 5.3
Image Source: https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/07423e80f49fa12bdc390863e5e7fdd5ecdeda5e/318_127_3942_3153/master/3942.jpg?width=1200&height=630&quality=85&auto=format&fit=crop&overlay-align=bottom%2Cleft&overlay-width=100p&overlay-base64=L2ltZy9zdGF0aWMvb3ZlcmxheXMvdGctb3BpbmlvbnMucG5n&enable=upscale&s=61946a42b53f69b49d473b9d723dc46d
Original Article Source: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jun/12/conceived-in-secrecy-and-born-in-haste-aukus-is-on-its-last-legs-when-will-labor-call-the-undertaker
View Raw Article Source (External Link)
Raw Article Publish Date:
AI Analysis Average Score: 5.3
These scores (0-10 scale) are generated by Truthlens AI's analysis, assessing the article's objectivity, accuracy, and transparency. Higher scores indicate better alignment with journalistic standards. Hover over chart points for metric details.

TruthLens AI Summary

The Albanese government of Australia is currently facing significant challenges with the Aukus agreement, a trilateral security pact involving the United States and the United Kingdom, aimed at bolstering Australia's submarine capabilities. Despite its ambitious intentions, Aukus has been marred by poor planning and execution from the outset. Initial skepticism from the US Navy regarding its shipbuilding capacity and Australia's ability to effectively integrate new submarine technologies has now evolved into a pressing concern. The Pentagon's recent review of the Aukus agreement, prompted by the need to align with the 'America First' policy, further complicates the pact's future. The review, led by Elbridge Colby, highlights critical bottlenecks in the US submarine production line, particularly for the Virginia-class and Columbia-class submarines, casting doubt on whether Australia’s financial contributions will yield any significant improvements in production rates. This situation has left Australia's submarine ambitions in jeopardy, as the government grapples with the ramifications of its reliance on the Aukus framework.

The predicament is exacerbated by calls for increased defense spending, with US defense officials suggesting Australia needs to allocate 3.5% of its GDP to defense. However, Prime Minister Albanese has asserted that Australia will determine its own defense spending priorities. This moment presents an opportunity for a reevaluation of Australia's approach to its defense needs, especially after over two decades of reliance on Aukus. The urgency for a new strategy has never been clearer, as the government must now reconsider its submarine capabilities independent of the Aukus agreement. The historical success of the Collins-class submarines serves as a reminder that Australia possesses the engineering and technological expertise to develop its own defense solutions. As the situation stands, it is imperative for Australia to pivot towards a more self-reliant defense strategy, thereby establishing a plan that prioritizes national interests over external dependencies.

TruthLens AI Analysis

The article presents a critical perspective on the AUKUS security pact involving Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. It underscores the challenges and doubts surrounding the initiative, particularly in relation to the US's capacity to deliver on its commitments. The author, Allan Behm, paints a grim picture of AUKUS, suggesting that it may be nearing its end due to various operational and financial inadequacies.

Political Context and Motivation

The motivations behind this article appear to center around increasing scrutiny of the AUKUS agreement. By highlighting the issues faced by the agreement, the author may aim to prompt public and political discourse regarding Australia's defense strategy. The language used is critical, possibly intending to rally opposition against the government's current defense policies and decisions.

Public Perception

The narrative constructed in the article seeks to evoke skepticism and concern regarding AUKUS. By framing the agreement as flawed from its inception, it may foster a perception of mismanagement and political opportunism within the Albanese government. This could lead to diminished public trust in the government’s capacity to handle national defense effectively.

Information Control and Omissions

While the article is rich in criticism, it may be overlooking potential benefits or positive aspects of the AUKUS agreement that supporters could argue. This selective focus could be an attempt to shape public sentiment against the government without providing a balanced view of the situation.

Manipulative Elements and Reliability

The article exhibits a high degree of manipulative potential due to its strong language and one-sided narrative. The use of phrases like "conceived in secrecy" and "born in haste" suggests a deliberate effort to frame AUKUS negatively. This could lead to questions about the overall reliability of the claims made, especially if they lack significant counterarguments or supporting evidence from the government or defense analysts.

Comparative Analysis

When compared to other articles on AUKUS, this piece stands out for its overtly critical tone. Other reports may provide a more balanced view, including the potential advantages of the agreement. This disparity suggests a deliberate effort to influence public opinion, potentially aligning with a specific political agenda.

Potential Impact on Society and Economy

The implications of this article could extend to public opinion about defense spending and foreign relations. If the narrative gains traction, it may influence political discourse around defense policy, leading to calls for reevaluation of AUKUS and potentially affecting Australia's strategic alliances.

Target Audience

The article seems to resonate more with audiences skeptical of government actions and those advocating for stronger accountability in defense matters. It may appeal to left-leaning political groups or individuals concerned about national security decisions.

Market Implications

In terms of financial markets, uncertainty around AUKUS could affect defense contractors' stock prices, particularly those linked to submarine production and military contracts. Investors may respond to the perceived instability of the agreement, leading to fluctuations in related stocks.

Geopolitical Relevance

The discussion around AUKUS is highly relevant in today's geopolitical landscape, particularly regarding US-China relations and regional security dynamics in the Indo-Pacific. The article underscores the fragility of international defense agreements, especially when domestic capacities are questioned.

Artificial Intelligence Involvement

There is no clear evidence that artificial intelligence played a role in the writing of this article. However, if AI models were used, they might have influenced the tone or structure, possibly steering the narrative towards a more critical stance due to programming biases. The choice of language and framing could reflect an AI's training on predominantly critical or negative content related to defense agreements.

In conclusion, the article's reliability may be undermined by its one-sided perspective and lack of comprehensive analysis, which could lead to a skewed understanding of the complexities surrounding AUKUS.

Unanalyzed Article Content

Source URL: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jun/12/conceived-in-secrecy-and-born-in-haste-aukus-is-on-its-last-legs-when-will-labor-call-the-undertaker

Most of us avoid thinking about the end of life and the “last things”. The Albanese government is no different: it is now deeply invested inAukus, with no other solution to Australia’s need for an effective submarine. While it may be a bit early to call for the undertaker there is no doubt that the Aukus patient is in serious trouble.

Aukus had a less than immaculate conception. It was conceived in secrecy and born in haste, a tribute to political opportunism and a travesty of disciplined planning. The enthusiasm of theatrical announcements notwithstanding, it was in trouble from the beginning. The US Navy had serious doubts about both the ability of US shipbuilders to deliver submarines in any workable timeframe and the ability of the Royal Australian Navy to integrate and operate them. That was not a question of trust but of capacity – on both sides.

And, of course, experienced and well-informed Australian defence planners rang the warning bells from the beginning.

Now reality has caught up with us. The Pentagon has announced a review of the Aukus agreement to ensure that it meets President Donald Trump’s “America First” policy. The US submarine construction program is in trouble. Australia’sUS$500m contributionto its submarine building industry will have no impact on the production rate, which needs to double if our ambitions are to be met. There’s no money back offer here.

But injury is sure to follow insult. The US review will be led by Elbridge Colby, the undersecretary of defense. He is a clever Trump acolyte who signalled his scepticism well before Trump won the presidency. The passage of Trump’s “big beautiful bill” through the Congress, and the looming prospect of a massive debt blowout, can only have reinforced his doubts.

These doubts are well grounded. In several reports dealing with Aukus, the Congressional Research Service identified critical bottlenecks in the US production line for both the Virginia-class and the new Columbia-class ballistic missile submarines. And it is just as concerned about Australia’s ability to absorb the new technologies. It should be.

The defense secretary Pete Hegseth’s can-rattlingat the Shangri-La conferencein Singapore further diminished Aukus’s chances. Hegseth told the defence minister, Richard Marles, that Australia needed to up its defence spending target to 3.5% of GDP. Of course, there was no suggestion on how the money should be spent. Spending for its own sake fits the bill, which is more or less what Aukus has been about from the beginning.

Quite properly, the prime minister’s response was textbook: Australia will decide on its defence spending for itself. And perhaps now is the time for Albanese to institute a parliamentary inquiry into Aukus.

So, where does all of this leave the pact? Far from being in the deep oceans, it is further up the proverbial creek. The best that Australia might have hoped for was the homeporting of a few US Virginia-class submarines on rotation at Fremantle in Western Australia, stretching out over the next several decades. Even that does not really meet US needs for forward positioning of attack submarines in the northern Pacific – the entire reason, it would seem, for the former prime minister Scott Morrison’s precipitate and unadvised decision in the first place.

From the beginning, the Labor team has been reluctant to call the ambulance or the undertaker. The Albanese government has no other submarine plan – Aukus is it. Or at least, Aukus was it. The Elbridge review is a circuit breaker. It forces the Albanese government to address Australia’s submarine needs and capabilities in a considered and disciplined way for the first time in more than 20 years.

Thinking about the last things encourages some of us to think about resurrection and the next life. Just as Australia could marshal the engineering and technological skills to plan and build the Collins-class submarines, so it can do it again. The Americans have effectively made the decision for us. It’s time for plan A – where “A” is Australia, not Aukus. We have to get on with it – now.

Allan Behm is a special adviser at the Australia Institute in Canberra

Back to Home
Source: The Guardian