A truism is that International Law constitutes codified politics bestowed by Great Powers.
More specifically if breaking non-proliferation conventions strengthens the Western Alliance then the NPT can be ignored. The NPT is "Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons" commonly known as the Non-Proliferation Treaty hence NPT.
The NPT is not only about nuclear weapons. Its "Third Pillar" is about the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
It appears that if acts promoting nuclear proliferation, on balance, favour the US/Western Alliance, then key parts of the NPT, and its spirit, can be ignored.
So running counter to the NPT's Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy is the US and UK, under AUKUS, assisting Australia to build warlike nuclear propelled submarines.
The prospect of the US and UK exporting 93+% weapons grade HEU to be used in the reactors of Australian nuclear submarines runs even further from "peaceful use". Also see Wiki's reference and linked explanations to 93% HEU.
21 comments:
The bigger danger is the timelines involved. Neither the US nor the UK have any spare capacity left for the foreseeable future. I suspect behind the scenes the actual level of down sizing of capabilities for the 'export version SSN' will make for tense and lengthy negotiations.
The fastest timeline I can see assuming a 2022 start for finalising design etc is 2042 or 20 years from now...More likely a realistic timeline even with US help is more like 30 or 35 years. That is unless the UK can cut the Dreadnought production line for an Aus. Astute
It took India 32 years from the day it decided on adding n-boats in 1984 (SSN from USSR of the Charlie class) to commissioning the Arihant. I suspect setting up an entire nuclear value chain in Australia and getting boat crews and support personnel upto speed is likely not gonna happen any faster...It helps to remember, Russia despite occasional hold backs, handheld India on design, operational and testing aspects..will US/UK do that?
And goodness forbid things go south in the next decade and a n-weapon ability is added along the lines of the low yield W76-2 to Aussie SSN based BGM-109s, then we are looking a further 5-10 years of intense negotiations as n-weapons on an Aussie SSN will likely elicit a far far more furious response from China as n-propulsion is tolerable, n-armament less so
It is a litany of bad choices and Australia has to choose one of them....if foolishness was a capital crime, they would have hanged scotty from new scaffolds at Long Bay yesterday
PS: Just a thought experiment, what if China or France decided to equip Indonesia with a leased LEU SSN and asked them to base it out of West Timor....Say a older 93 class or one of the retiring Rubis class...i wonder what China's return play gambit will be!!!
Thanks Ghalib
As usual your knowledge and arguments are convincing and a little alarming!
India's experience forms the best equivalent to what Australia may do, and experience, I venture. And maybe low yield warheads, on loan from the US, on Aus sub fired Tomahawks, possible.
But why should we stop at "low yield"? As latest Emperor of North Korea say "country that turns to nuke weapons shouldn't limit self".
Pete
Actually I go by the argument that there is nothing called a 'tactical nuke'. It will be the epitome of madness to think otherwise....
The pakistanis thought battlefield TNWs on the Nasr missile were a bright idea....(they are finding with a crashing currency and economy in the doldrums, they cannot eat HEU for lunch after all)
the bigger problem being New Delhi or Beijing will not care about the kT yield that a n-missile packs....upon launch how will they know if the 'dial a yield' has been set to 5 or 50 kT?
Once a second strike scenario kicks in, then it will come down to a use it or lose it situation.... then 10 kT or 1 MT will most likely not matter...
Under Xi and predecessors, the CPC has neither allowed the CMC to permit SSNs to mate n-weapons on their CJ-10 missiles nor has it been a serious topic of discussion to start allowing Shang or Jin boat captains to have firing authority (upon approval from the top) ala the US till Bill Clinton.
If memory serves me right till the the JL-3 started serious testing, even the JL-2 bearing Jin SSBNs were not having any mated warheads....I think it is still the case as the CPC has strong inhibitions on that count...Those inhibitions might melt away once AUKUS takes shape in the form of the first boat arriving at RAN base Perth circa 2042...things might become about as comfortable as an unclothed derriere on a rather tetchy porcupine.
It is a situation that won't spare any major actor from India to Japan... plus throw in the fact that even with mitigation measures climate change will be far worse and god forbid like today's power crisis in China, rivers start drying up and crises multiply...I shudder to think of the 2-3 ways real crazy stuff could happen in the next 2 decades....
This is all now open to question and a slippery slope is now visible....
It all sounds like "a bridge too far", if I may say. By 2040, the SCS environment will likely change a great deal. If we just look back 20 years, 2001, there was no Facebook, no Twitter, no iPhone. Even 3G was just launched in Japan.
SCS is a small pond. Between Vietnam and the Philippines, it's just ~1000km. In many places, like the Gulf of Siam, Gulf of Tonkin, it is very shallow. By 2040, the SCS will be rigged with microphones, sonar arrays, etc. And you will have AI-controlled robotic mines, robotic torpedoes in swarms roaming about, as well as ASW UAVs. In the vast Pacific, an SSN has places to hide, but can it survive in the SCS in 2040? Besides, to get to the SCS, there are natural choke points (they work both ways) and the opposing side will be waiting in ambush.
KQN
Hi Ghalib [your Sep 30, 2021, 5:39:00 PM]
Yep the PLAN also suffers Party vs Navy chain of command complication not only in SSBN but its SSNs and SSKs.
Hopefully the PLAN sub corp will continue to be hobbled by anti-initiative pressures on submarine Captains.
With PLAN SSBNs hemmed in within the first island chain Using their SLBMs or Losing them to mainly US ASW forces, may indeed cause unpredictable situations.
Pete
Hi KQN [your Oct 1, 2021, 5:41:00 PM]
Australia's Collins (with no LIBs or AIP) operating in the SCS till the 2050s will indeed be dangerously noisy as China wires its near seas for acoustic interceptioin.
Meanwhile Aus SSNs will not be at their best in the narrows and shallows in a crescent from the Solomons Islands, PNG, Torres Strait and Indonesian Archipelago all the way to the Malacca Strait. And this is BEFORE Aus SSNs get to the SCS and other China near seas.
Australia will need to be aware of its relatively large fast moving SSN's narrows-shallows limitations.
Aus, without its own SSKs from the 2050s, may need to increasingly rely on Singaporean, S Korean, Japanese and maybe Indian aand Indonesian SSKs for closer to shore, littoral, narrow-shallows work.
Regards
Pete
I don't understand the reason for the above nuclear tipped missile references.
US has adequate retaliation capability in case of unlikely Chinese (or North Korean) first nuclear use, other than possibly Chinese attempt on Taiwan, which is also unlikely if China makes claims Taiwan to be internal to China.
If not for retaliation, any nuclear use would be a first strike, and Australian nuclear first strike on China is unimaginable except as a parody of a "Wolf Warrior" movie.
Reliance on US nuclear backup is the last REAL bulwark to support non proliferation. Nuclear proliferation in pacific would make non-proliferation pressure against Iran (and other possible rogue players) collapse, which would in turn increase likelihood of real weapons being used, perhaps preemptively. This is a line we really don't want to cross.
Continued discussion on NPT threats:
The biggest threat in South China Sea is Taiwan. If a Chinese attempt on Taiwan can be deterred, so can threats on Senkakus, Philippines maritime sovereignty, etc. I think these things can be done by bottom mounted sensor arrays, mobile AI mines, etc.
Take the prizes off the table and the aggressive contestants will most likely calm down, and the NPT can be preserved in some shape or other.
Yesterday (in Asia), October 1st, 38 PLA aircraft penetrated Taiwan ADIZ. I do not know if a conflict will nicely wait until AUKUS has SSNs.
Taiwan is an Achille heel of the West. Today's economies depend on semiconductors. 90% of the world's AI chips are made in this island. The best fab plants are located there (TSMC). There is a US embargo on advanced chips to Chinese tech companies. When you look at it, semiconductors are what oil was in the prelude to WW2 in the Pacific.
As to Xi. A Chinese emperor rarely cares about human or economic costs. That is what the history book says. And we can see that right now with China taking over their tech giants while nuking trillions dollars worth of market value without blinking. The Middle Empire was never a nice neighbor, unfortunately.
KQN
October 2nd, it's 39 PLA aircrafts, 20 during the daytime, 19 at night. They are testing, sniffing out Taiwan defenses, as well as wearing them down.
Hopefully, QUAD and NATO have run contingencies planning. We better decide now on our potential responses, since there will not be time for consultations if a conflict breaks out.
China showed (in Zhuhai) its Sea Guardian UAV with airborne AESA radar and dispensers for sonobuoys. Life is going to get harder for submariners when AI gets thrown in the mix.
KQN
A few days ago, famed engineer Shmakov of the Malachite bureau (Alfa, Losharik, Severodvinsk, etc.) passed away at 91. Russia is losing some of their famous engineers in the past year, AK, Mig-31, Ilyushin. Those are going to be big shoes to fill.
KQN
A bunch of unrelated updates:
The Indian military, under the Chief of Defence Staff, appears to be moving toward setting up a 'Rocket Force' that combines both ground-based conventional & nuclear forces, by subsuming both the Missile Regiments/Regiment of Artillery (that uses conventionally-armed ballistic & cruise missiles) as well as the land component of Strategic Forces Command (that controls the nuclear-armed arsenal), though the command chain for the latter would still require Nuclear Command Authority approval.
This seems to be similar in profile to the Chinese PLARF (PLA Rocket Force), but it remains to be seen what differences the Indian version could have in terms of command & composition.
https://www.news18.com/news/explainers/explained-what-is-a-rocket-force-which-gen-rawat-says-india-needs-to-fight-battles-of-the-future-4212896.html
=====
A good article (accompanied by an amazing artwork) by HI Sutton about the Arihant-class SSBN, which I've somehow missed so far:
https://www.navalnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Indian-Navy-Arihant-Class-Submarine-Cutaway-scaled.jpg
Article:
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/05/5-years-of-submarine-secrecy-indias-unique-arihant-class-is-still-in-hiding/#prettyPhoto
=====
It got me thinking....I've said previously on here that once the S-5 SSBN class takes over the Deterrence role, the Arihant-class boats may be refueled, refitted & converted to perform a SSGN role by carrying up to 6 x cruise missiles in the silo space which could have carried a single large SLBM or 3 x smaller SLBMs**, giving them a not-insubstantial capability of up to 24 x vertically-launched cruise missiles per boat (twice the number carried by Virginia Block-IV).
If the last two boats in the Arihant-class indeed turn out to be longer, with 4 x additional missile tubes (for a total of 8) in an additional compartment, which I'm calling "Arihant Stretch", these two boats (S4 and S4*) could be converted to carrying up to 48 x vertically launched cruise missiles. An extremely substantial capability that goes beyond what even the Virginia Block-V plans to deliver with 36 x cells).
These cells could also be capable of carrying future Scramjet-based anti-ship weapons like the BrahMos-II, in reduced numbers of course, as these are significantly larger/heavier.
Toward the late-2030s/early-2040s (which is when the last 2 x S5 SSBNs would probably be delivered, coinciding with conversion of S4 and S4*), I think the Arihant & Arihant Stretch could evolve into very critical conventionally-armed land-attack assets in the Indo-Pacific that could threaten Chinese bases anywhere between Horn of Africa to the South China Sea.
That includes bases on Djibouti, Gwadar (Pakistan), any possible build-up at Sri Lanka, support against possible Chinese amphibious invasion of Andaman islands, all the way to the Chinese submarine bases on Hainan & man-made island facilities within the Nine-Dash Line.
I kinda wish they build more of them concurrently to the S5 & Alpha SSN, maybe outsource production completely to Larsen & Tourbro.
**On that note, also found a picture of one of the Arihant's missile tubes (visibly in a three-pack configuration for K-15 SLBMs) being handled by crane, either being inserted or removed from the submarine:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Enek623UUAEMcGI.jpg:large
(I think I remember seeing the above image on your blog before, but not a 100% sure)
And a satellite image of the first-of-class Arihant from 2015 (before its commissioning), with its silo doors open for the world to see:
https://ibb.co/PgY18BQ
====
A good 35-minute watch (or better yet, listen) on the subject of AUKUS, Indo-Pacific, QUAD & India-Australia relations:
https://youtu.be/ZyhgOdSJ-BE
Hi KQN
Unfortunately the Quad is not formally organised to face China. Europe-centric NATO definitely not organised to do so.
AUKUS, Five Eye "alliance" (which brings in Canada and NZ) and ANZUS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANZUS are a little mored helpful.
US bilateral alliances with South Korea and separately with Japan are useful.
It is to regional regret that South Korea and Japan continue not to bury their 1945 differences - otherwise considerable submarine resources they expend keeping watch on each other
could be redirected against China.
Thanks KQN [your Oct 3, 2021, 1:55:00 PM]
I was wondering whether Radiy Shmakov did time in one of Stalin's cruel defense industry Gulag stockades.
But seems Radiy Shmakov was too young for that experience so he escaped the shortened life under Communism effect https://newswep.com/the-participant-in-the-creation-of-the-first-nuclear-submarine-the-designer-of-malakhit-radiy-shmakov-died/
As Russia (Communist or Putin) is a perpetual enemy of the free West one hopes no-one as effective will replace Radiy Shmakov or replace other effective Russian defense engineers as they die off.
Thanks Gessler
Your Oct 3, 2021, 3:21:00 PM
Thanks for your fresh views on India's high level of SSBN secrecy and possible evolution to SSGNs.
Regards
Pete
Hi KQN Oct 2, 2021, 8:48:00 AM
"The Middle Empire was never a nice neighbor, unfortunately."
refreshing to see someone mentioning the key historical perspective. The 'Middle Kingdom' was and through the CCP remains a virulent 'racist supremacist entity' that expected/expects nothing less than vassalage and tributary status from its neighbors in return for a relatively 'peaceful' existence (with the occasional bloody nose thrown in from Peking to remind them of their 'subordinate' status or punched just for fun). It also pays to remember some of the most brutal massacres/genocides was committed by the Qings on the Dzungar Khanate in today's conflict zone of Ladakh-Aksai Chin-Kashgar zone. Ofcourse, Mao's bout of manic craziness from 1958-1974 killed upwards of 50 million chinese making Hitler look like an errant school boy. Mao rivals Stalin as the world's leading genocidal leader
PS: To give one instance ' the customary and traditional boundary of china' just keeps shifting westwards since 1951. It was in Rutog tibet in 1951 and now has shifted west enough to Pangong Tso lake and they want a big chunk of Depsang too...why or how would anyone trust such an inherently schizophrenic entity that seems to wallow in victim-hood perpetually. Plus the troops on the border and sallies into Indian land are all ways to wear India down if possible and keep reminding them of the limitless ability of China to be mean spirited (of course returning the favour will lead to howling about victimhood )
Hi Gessler @Oct 3, 2021, 3:21:00 PM
I think while L&T have substantial abilities, I think on an overall basis, they are still a kind of sub-systems integrator who are capable of design support for MDL or Hindustan Shipyards. They are not a DCNS (yet)....
Unless the Government decides to handhold a SSGN construction process and then hands it over, L&T cannot become a DCNS or a Sevmash. As of now it has the partial abilities of a Rubin design bureau and a Sevmash (harking back to the old soviet days of keeping design and construction entities separate)
That said, each 3.2 m diameter Arihant Silo can hold 3x0.52 m diameter Nirbhay LACM or 12 Nirbhays and may be 6 more in the horizontal launch area near the torpedo tubes. 18 Nirbhays and 18 torpedoes is a decent layout for a small SSGN. Once the Manik 4.25 kN engine is tested enough, we can get rid of the turbojet that limits Nirbhay to 647 km and resume Nirbhay testing to 1,000 km. This should help India field a sub-launched LACM on similar lines such as the BGM-109 or the CJ-10...
The 8 Silo Arihants and 8-12 silo S-5s can do SSBN role while the 4 silo SSBNs can be turned to small but very capable SSGN platforms...and I guess India's P-75A subs will be SSGN by definition as they will carry Brahmos-I/II and the Nirbhays.
@GhalibKabir at 6:12 PM
I was thinking they could because it would essentially be the same submarine they'd have already built 4 times over by then. Regardless, it's wishful thinking anyway. There's no indication of Arihant/Arihant Stretch production continuing beyond S4*.
"That said, each 3.2 m diameter Arihant Silo can hold 3x0.52 m diameter Nirbhay"
Is that all? Considering they can hold 3 x 0.74m diameter K-15s I would have expected more than 3 of the smaller 0.52m LACMs.
Gessler @Oct 3, 2021, 11:46:00 PM
What you say is certainly feasible as L&T has indeed been in the thick of constructing the 4 Arihants. Based on public sources, I am still under the impression L&T was one of main integrators with government players role being heavy given the 'strategic asset' angle. It is very possible that I could be wrong about underestimating L&T's abilities.
Of course, I meant 'at a minimum 3 Nirbhays per silo', I am sure they can re-work it to quad-pack for 4x4 -16 Nirbhay layout or even a mix of 2xquadpack Nirbhays and 2xtriple pack of Brahmos (given range extension to 800 km in the near future) for a 14 missile sub/supersonic mix layout in the VLS and possibly another 6 Nirbhays in the tube launch area for horizontal firing.
It is certainly doable and yours may be not all 'wishful thinking'. A 20-22 missile holding SSGN with 18 torpedoes as well with likely not so strenuous efforts needed to modify is a very attractive proposition...In fact they can even get things started by modifying the Arihant once Arighat and S4 are well and truly tested/commissioned with the K-4...
2 SSBNs, 1 Russian origin SSN and an SSGN sounds an interesting proposition by 2030.
The current military balance (the US/China) could be maintained for another 10 years. But it seems GDP and military budget of China would surpass the US in about 20 years. That's a huge event. The US is trying to delay the process of rebalancing by UKAUS QUARD or else, that's not really about human rights / Freedom of navigation / ideology, just a rebalance due to the strength.
We are military observers, and we should realize that justice is always a relative idea, no judges of all on earth, that's pure politics issue.
I believe the policy makers of US, China, Russia, India are quite similar and smart enough to make a good deal with each other when the situation gets clear, maybe in 10 years or so.
Hi Anonymous [at Oct 10, 2021, 11:01:00 AM]
Yes there's a place for moral relativism. Two are:
1.South Korea was an authoritarian country, slaughtering many, before, during and after the North Koreans invaded and
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiang_Kai-shek was a dictator in mainland China AND when he took over Taiwan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiang_Kai-shek#Regime
Some housekeeping: Note that the acronyms are not "UKAUS QUARD"
but AUKUS and the QUAD.
Post a Comment