Thankyou readers, but, I can't begin to answer the 40+ comments received since Australia's September 16, 2021 AUKUS Australian SSN decision. I invite readers to argue among yourselves in Comments.
Instead I'll write extra articles that need to be raised about this vast subject. This is beginning with SSN arms race possibilities. This may link an Indonesian SSN program with Russia and/or South Korea.
Indonesia has always been sensitive to its near southern neighbour Australia's arms acquisitions and resulting defence capabilities. This had been particularly in terms of conventional subs (SSKs). Once Australia expressed a 2009 White Paper intention to build 12 large SSKs significant factions in Indonesia's Navy and military-industrial-political complex began advocating a 12 Indonesian SSK navy to match.
Now some Indonesian factions are advocating Indonesian nuclear submarines. Russia, a past (submarine) and current (jet fighter) arms supplier to Indonesia, might assist in an Indonesian SSN project.
South Korea, Indonesia's current SSK supplier, has sufficient nuclear technology and broached intentions to build SSBNs. Indonesia and South Korea already have a joint stealth jet fighter program. In a joint South Korean-Indonesian project SSNs for both the South Korean Navy and Indonesia Navy could eventually be produced. The US (now permitting Australia to have nuclear propelled subs) can no longer ban US ally South Korea (on non-proliferation grounds) from using nuclear propulsion for submarines.
Catastrophic Indonesian submarine accidents, seen lately with KRI Nanggala, are a worry. Indonesia's land (and sea) nuclear facility threatening "Pacific Ring of Fire" is cause for concern that increases even unintentional dangers of any future Indonesian SSN. That may all increase risks of a regional, radiation, environmental, disaster, that could also impact Australian waters.
I'm deeply sceptical Indonesia has either capability or will to go nuclear in the forseeable future. They may well be factions arguing for it, but the reality is Indonesia's sub capability significantly trails Australia. I suspect Indonesia is more concerned by what Malaysia, Singapore and China is doing these days, than anything Aus gets up to: yes there will be some dog-whistling, but the vast majority of Indonesian establishment simply isnt interested in (a) spending lots of money of subs and (b) Australia in general.
ReplyDeleteI'm probably going to invite trouble with this comment, but its always felt to me that Aussie perception of Indonesia as a diffuse threat is overblown and exaggerated - maybe in the Sukarno era of of "Konfrontasi" it held some water, but these days its an anachronism.
I'm also sceptical about Korea in short-medium term, but for different reasons: their primary opponent is NK, not China, and the Subs they currently have or are building are well suited to the task. Nuclear propulsion may emerge in due course, and quite probably the Aus decision has cleared some perceived obstacles and maybe accelerated plans, but I still think this is a relatively low priority for them.
I do think it may dramatically change the calculus in Japan. They are concerned somewhat with NK, but their primary threat is considered China - who are building lots of SSN's. They have long history of building big and innovative boats - indeed Japan's current classes of diesel boats are about the size of early nuclear era boats. They have built nuclear powered ships too. Once its clear that the Aus plans are indeed going ahead, and assuming the diplomatic fallout isnt too bad, I suspect they will move ahead with their own program. Being able to produce some kind of parity-platform SSN to what China is building will be a big attraction. The only remaining optical issue being their own domestic view on this, and, to a lesser extent, their self-defence posture. If they do - they will keep it fairly quiet and low-key.
O ye of little faith Clive
ReplyDeleteIndonesia is no longer the capability small fry to be dismissed so easily. Combining SKor and Indonesian financial resources could finance SKor's already highly developed peaceful nuclear sector into nuke propulsion.
SKor realises that its SSBs are a handicapped second strike platform against NK and China.
J's and SK's relationship as frenemies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frenemy also means once one goes nuclear propulsion the other will likely follow. Both see existential threats in nuclear armed NK and China.
The US (even under Biden) is increasingly seen as too far to help as much as it was in the past. Also Trump, or America First Worse, may win in 2024, making the US nuclear umbrella even a weaker concept.
Pete
worth a reproduction with due credits to Gazza from GrongGrong
ReplyDeleteGazzaFromGrongGrong
(With apologies to Gilbert and Sullivan)
Ah Doggie, he’s the model of a moderate Prime Minister,
but underneath’s an ad-man who just couldn’t be more sinister,
a bubble-living, answer-dodging, scheming happy-clappyist
whose policies have mostly been the nastiest and crappiest.
His vaccine rollout work has been so very unreliable,
disastrous, far too late, and that should surely make him liable,
and when we think of bushfires we remember his ineptitude,
which now, with all this chaos, would suggest he lacks the aptitude.
Right now we need a leader for our sovereign capability
who demonstrates consistently remarkable ability,
a person with a vision that is truly inspirational
that promises a future that is inter-generational.
But Scott just leads a party that has proved to be incompetent,
unfit to be considered as responsible for government,
a rabble that has stuffed around with scandals and hypocrisy,
a mockery of what we need for guiding our democracy.
Yet now we’re stuck with AUKUS and more Morrisonic blathering,
an obfuscation bubble-bath with lots of soapy lathering,
a deal about some submarines that seem quite hypothetical
in some far-distant dreamland that is purely theoretical!
Minor issue: All likely conflict zones (I can think of) for Indonesia are nearby. Only reason for SSN I can see is posturing. That raises the question of how angry is the Indonesian public at Australia: Is it enough to throw away that much money.
ReplyDeletePete, remember when I said this was going to be an interesting decade? I would like to re-phrase my statement.
ReplyDeleteThis is going to be a VERY interesting decade.
The notion of either SK or Indonesia acquiring SSN should be evaluated against a number of meaningful metrics : political will; financial resources; opportunity cost; and most importantly strategic or tactical rationale.
ReplyDeletePolitical will is somewhat subjective to political leadership and in this respect the SK President had been pushing the U.S. for assistance in this direction. The Australian development will obviously add momentum to this push. I doubt Indonesia currently has this as a priority for a number of reasons.
Acquiring and maintaining SSN is a significant military expenditure and you clearly need to have the type of financial budget to make it happen. SK in 2020 has a US$46B military budget and is projected to exceed that of Japan by 2025. Indonesia in comparison stood aside US$9.5B in 2020. Such a budget with Indonesia would not be sufficient. A Virginia cost US$3.5B and an Astute US$2.8B and that is provided it is not made locally. Frankly a locally tailored made program by Australia will more likely sink the program when it becomes financially untenable due to blow out.
Finance is a finite resource regardless of the size of your military budget and opportunity cost becomes a necessary consideration in the equation. A Jangbogo III cost US$900 million and a Son Won-il cost US$300 million. You can get a lot more SSKs for the cost of one SSN.
That can only be evaluated against your strategic posture and tactical consideration in submarine deployment.
SK's main threat is NK. Distance is not an issue and so submarine deployment is in the littorals. Does SK have the need for power projection at long distances that warrant spending on SSNs? The same question can be applied to Indonesia. Australia's need for SSN is well documented and so I will not labor on it.
China has in recent months made it obvious that it would not hesitate to attack Australia and its cities. That is an existential threat that we should treat seriously. Currently we don't have any meaningful launch range strike weapons as a practical deterrence. SSNs and Tomahawks will give us at least some meaningful form of deterrence to strike back.
Brumby
See Aus Gov owned ABC News article, updated Sep 21, 2021, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-09-20/australia-ambassador-asean-aukus-statement/100477086 which may in part feed on my article above - specially on the arms race angle.
ReplyDelete"Australia seeks to allay South-East Asian concerns over AUKUS nuclear submarine deal"
"Key points:
Australia's neighbours Indonesia and Malaysia have expressed concern that AUKUS could encourage an arms race
Australia's ambassador to the Association of South-East Asian Nations says it doesn't change Canberra's commitment to the regional body
Australia says it remains "staunch" in its support for the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty." [Ha! Ha! the Aus subs will use bomb grade 90+% HEU in their reactors, as used in Virginias AND Astutes]
"Prime Minister Scott Morrison spoke to Indonesian President Joko Widodo yesterday after the country’s Foreign Ministry said it was "deeply concerned about the continuing arms race and power projection in the region" after the announcement of the three-way agreement."
Yet "Singapore has not raised any objections to the Australian government's announcement while the Philippines issued a statement saying Australia has the right to boost its defences."
See much more at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-09-20/australia-ambassador-asean-aukus-statement/100477086
I must say this eruption of dismay, over the adoption of nuclear powered submarines is what is needed in our region, quite frankly. The CCP is a huge power, and one that hinges on those around then being ill-equippedin both doctrtrine and hardware to be a deterrent. The more regional capability the greater the risk for the CCP. Spreading the load and the capability, disincentivises the CCP, more political clout by those threatened, and in the forums they frequent. The greater the involvement, the less the CCP has room to maneuver. Yes in reality its a smart way to achieve capability without firing a shot.
ReplyDelete