The US seems to be getting cold feet over giving Australia one of its most secret weapons, with a new report revealing eight critical, unanswered questions.
The first USS Virginia-class submarine entered service in 2004. Since then, another 37 have been built or ordered. And an unknown number of those completed before 2017 incorporate low-grade steel supplied under a quality-control corruption scandal.
Jamie Seidel https://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/military/cold-feet-big-problems-emerge-in-controversial-usaustralia-submarine-deal/news-story/80ffc6683018f7eaa4bf417559fe673e 29 May 23
US Congress appears to be getting cold feet over giving Australia one of its most secret weapons.
Meanwhile, it's pressing ahead with plans to redesign its nuclear submarines to suit America's specific needs – not Australia's.
The Congressional Research Service report, Navy Virginia Class Attack Submarine Procurement: Background and Issues for Congress, pulls no punches about the core project behind former Prime Minister Scott Morrison's 2021 defence collaboration announcement.
The document, issued late last week, specifies eight critical unanswered questions of concern.
• When will the deal be authorised?
• Will it approve the sale of two, or "some other number" of US submarines?
• When will these submarines be removed from the US Navy?
• Will they be old submarines? Newly-built submarines? Or a mix of both?
• How much will Australia pay? And how much will it subsidise the upgrade of US shipyards?
• Can the US meet its own submarine needs as well as those of Australia?
• Will the project make any difference in deterring China?
• What are the risks versus the benefits of giving Australia such immensely secret nuclear and submarine technology?
"Selling three to five Virginia-class boats to Australia would reduce the size of the US Navy's SSN force by three to five boats," the report states.
Seller's remorse?
The report says sceptics of the deal believe "it could weaken deterrence of potential Chinese aggression if China were to find reason to believe, correctly or not, that Australia might use the transferred Virginia-class boats less effectively than the US Navy would".
That's not just a matter of the skills and training of Australian submariners.
It's also an admission of concern that this may effectively mean the US had lost two to five submarines if Canberra doesn't automatically participate in US conflicts.
"Australia might not involve its military, including its Virginia-class boats, in US-China crises or conflicts that Australia viewed as not engaging important Australian interests," the report warns.
Defence Minister Richard Marles said as much in March when he revealed Australia had "absolutely not" promised to do Washington's bidding when it came to Taiwan.
And that would diminish US Naval fleet numbers even further, unless the Australian submarines were replaced.
Sceptics of the SSN AUKUS pathway might argue that it would be more cost-effective for US SSNs to perform both US and Australian SSN missions while Australia invests in other types of military forces, so as to create a capacity for performing other military missions for both Australia and the United States."
But behind the debate is a simple equation of supply and demand.
"In a nutshell, the challenge for the industrial base – both shipyards and supplier firms – is to ramp up production from one 'regular' Virginia-class boat's work per year … to the equivalent of about five 'regular' Virginia-class boats' work per year."
It adds that no such additional purchase orders have yet been made and that doubts surround the ability of US naval yards to meet the extra demand. The US has only two shipyards capable of building nuclear-powered submarines.
The report warns that – even under pre-AUKUS plans – the US Navy's desire to sustain a minimum of 66 nuclear attack submarines is likely to be unachievable.
The current number of 49 is expected to fall to 46 by 2028, with existing building programs only lifting this number to 60 by 2052.
Buyer beware?
The first USS Virginia-class submarine entered service in 2004. Since then, another 37 have been built or ordered. And an unknown number of those completed before 2017 incorporate low-grade steel supplied under a quality-control corruption scandal.
But the US Navy has since shifted production towards a bigger version of the submarine. A 25m-long hull section will be added to carry four large vertical launch tubes. This allows the design to carry extra Tomahawk cruise missiles or drones.
The Congressional report puts the cost of these at $US4.3 billion ($6.5 billion) each.
And the US Navy has this year requested another modified version of the submarine.
Designated the "Modified VIRGINIA Class Subsea and Seabed Warfare (Mod VA SSW) configuration", this design is no longer optimised for the attack submarine role.
Instead, it will be equipped to conduct seabed sabotage operations against infrastructure such as undersea internet cables.
This version will cost about $US5.4 billion ($8.1 billion).
Australia may offset some of the cost of buying US submarines and upgrading US submarine facilities by providing a new base for US and UK operations.
London and Washington hope to begin basing nuclear attack submarines at HMAS Stirling, near Perth, in 2027.
This "Submarine Rotational Forces – West" facility will play host to year-long visits from both nations to provide training for ADF personnel and a support base for operations in the Indian Ocean, Andaman Sea and South China Sea.
"This rotational force will help build Australia's stewardship," a senior Biden administration official said earlier this month.
"It will also bolster deterrence with more US and UK submarines forward in the Indo-Pacific."
High stakes game
The Beijing-controlled South China Morning Post news service has released previously secret details of a submarine incident in January 2021.
Quoting a Chinese military research paper, it says three US surveillance planes had engaged in a "hunt" for People's Liberation Army submarines.
One of the aircraft, it claims, was met with a "significant" military response when it closed to within 150km of Hong Kong.
"The PLA, which was conducting a naval exercise in the area, responded swiftly by sending out a counter force, the size and nature of which remains classified," the Post states.
"The two forces were so close that the US military 'self-destroyed' its floating sonars to prevent the sensitive devices from falling into China's hands."
US Indo-Pacific Command told The War Zone that one of its P-8A Poseidon patrol aircraft had been intercepted in the South China Sea. It denied it had breached any international boundaries.
"The US P-8A that flew on 5 Jan 2021 was intercepted twice in international airspace between Woody Island and Hainan Island roughly 500km from Hong Kong," a statement reads.
"US and allied aircraft routinely fly in international airspace to maintain situational awareness and reinforce international norms."
Hainan Island houses one of China's main naval bases. This includes piers and dry-docks suited to its new aircraft carriers. And tunnels have been dug into the side of a rocky peninsula to house submarines.
Military analysts regard China's submarine technology as being "decades" behind that of the US and Russia.
But Moscow's precarious international position after its invasion of Ukraine has raised fears it may be willing to swap the technology with Beijing for material support.
And China's newest diesel-electric "Yuan" class submarines reportedly demonstrate new levels of quietness, carry advanced sonars and "might be actually pretty good at anti-submarine warfare," says Hudson Institute Center for Defence Concepts and Technology senior fellow Bryan Clark.
Jamie Seidel is a freelance writer | @JamieSeidel
No comments:
Post a Comment