Photo of
India's "S-1" land
based nuclear submarine reactor at Kalpakkam an Indian nuclear enclave 45 km south of Chennai. (Photo
courtesy The
Hindu). Australia will probably
need a similar sized land based reactor. This time for nuclear submarine
reactor simulation training. The reactor will probably be built at Australia's Lucas
Heights, Sydney reactor complex. The current civilian reactor at Lucas
Heights cannot perform the rapid ramp-up and slow-down actions used in the
nuclear attack submarine reactors that Australia will be buying under AUKUS.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Australia's Federal Election is on May 21, 2022. But our future A$200 Billion nuclear submarine purchase has been sadly played down as an election issue.
Thanks Anonymous for your May 10, 2022 comments in identifying key points in the ASPI Strategist article "Australia considering next-generation US and UK designs for nuclear submarines".
In the article the Chief of the RAN's Nuclear Powered Submarine Taskforce, Vice Admiral Mead, is heroic in his nuclear proliferation safety claims - no mention of our neighbours being worried. Australia buying weapons grade HEU in reactors used to power Australia's future nuclear attack submarines (SSNs), may open up a proliferation can of worms.
Playing Devil's Advocate here, I would argue:
1. "Would there be proliferation worries if key nations in Australia's region used HEU in their own submarine reactors?"
2. Lets start with Indonesia which has a history of buying weapon systems (including fourteen Whiskey-class submarines) from Russia.
3. Looking at IMF rankings of nominal GDP by country Indonesia ranks 17th, which is not too far behind Australia's rank of 13th. Indonesia may well surpass Australia's GDP in 10 years. That may mean a larger Indonesia defence budget to buy SSNs than Australia's budget.
5. Indonesia has shown itself to by hypersensitive about Australia having a stronger submarine arm. From 2009, when Australia Defence White Paper was projecting 12 new conventional submarines (SSKs), key parts of the Indonesia military-industrial complex also started talking 12 new SSKs for Indonesia. Australia's plans for nuclear propelled submarines make Indonesia even more nervous.
6. Countries that wish to operate SSNs always (to my knowledge) have onshore training reactors (see photo and caption above). Australian political statements are limited to reactors that are never opened on submarines. Politicians and some in uniform have neglected to add that we will need an on land training reactor. I assume Australia will build its submarine training reactor at Sydney's Lucas Heights reactor complex (or perhaps at Fleet Base West near Perth) in the 2030s.
Australia needs SSNs to
face China. But Indonesia may then decide to buy SSNs to face China and Indonesia's future SSN armed neighbour, Australia.
8 comments:
Indonesia has its own 9 dash line related issues with China. It flies US made jets, has ordered French Rafales and is a customer for German-Korean subs...
It might come down to how Indonesia is handled diplomatically in the larger Indo-Pacific picture me thinks....compared to the kind of animosity that hostile neighbours have such as in the in the Indian sub-continent or Eastern Europe, Australia and Indonesia have much less reasons for being mutually tetchy and concerned about their aims and abilities.
Putin is capable of risk taking, however, I have serious questions about him leasing an Akula sub to the Indonesian Navy on 3 counts
1. China - It is almost 100% guaranteed go down very very badly in Beijing...even the idea might not be entertained by a Beijing with big leverage over a post-Ukraine Russia. China is very likely to veto such a thought in the Russian echelons.
2. Indonesia's nuclear infra is non-existent and I think this cannot be stressed enough, nuclear engineers and technicians don't grow on trees and building domestic nuclear ecosystems from scratch is no joke, both money wise and effort wise.
I posit that Indonesia has nowhere close to the manufacturing base required to even contemplate a nuclear propulsion based submarine. I am willing to bung a Monash (100 $) bill on the table as a wager with you mate on this one.
3. Indonesia cannot expect support even for an SN-BR type project with the help of France with the ostensible figleaf of a LEU based SN-BR SSN to counter NPT issues. France will not cross the US and proceed...It cannot even it wanted to as the Indonesians are decades behind even the much criticized Brazilians in the nuclear infra sphere.
Lastly, even leap frogging Australia GDP wise won't help jump over these barriers. (I seriously think Indonesia will not be able to the foot the bill even for a 2 SSN fleet)
Indonesia and Australia and the larger Quad might all be best served if Indonesia's SSK fleet acted as a complement to the other partners SSK-SSN fleets.
ASEAN led by Malaysia and Indonesia will not be helped one bit if they keep flapping around like wet hens throwing a hissy fit...Throwing their lot with India-Quad-Ozzie land is better.
Pete a few thoughts;
Firstly on training reactors, you are correct, SSN operators have always had them. However to date SSN operators have always had a nuclear power industry. If Australia reached a training agreement with the RN or USN for the nuclear-trained engineers to serve on RAN SSNs, it is not clear to me that Australia would need a training reactor. We will need Australian know how expanded, but in ARPANSA, ANSTO and ANU the kernel of that knowledge base already exists. It needs expanding (about doubling in size in fact.)
Second on Indonesia I agree with Ghalib. Indonesia has not yet built even small research reactors comparable to Lucas Heights in Sydney. Past proposals have involved Chinese or Russian help and have all fallen through. So they are far behind India in expertise.
The other thing that still concerns me with Mead's comments is timing. It bothers me nobody will nominate a start date for construction of SSNs in Australia. Without that how can industry plan to assist? I think we should do what the UK MoD did at the start of the Astute program and bring Electric Boat in as a managing contractor to run the ASC yard. They got them up to speed in about three years.
Ofcourse, anything can happen over time. What I talk about is the possibility of such an occurrence, namely Indonesia getting an SSN.
Australia has many advantages in terms of bloc membership, geopolitical currents, economic strength and technological capabilities.
What chance does Indonesia have to cover all those 4 bases?
Bloc membership and economic strength is gettable with effort and indeed Indonesia is getting there
geopolitical currents and technology abilities - highly unlikely anything similar to Australia will happen any time soon.
PS: Mountains of 'facts at that time' changed as Australia and friends were inclined to make it change and all factors were 'alignable' and hence they aligned.
Tomorrow Indonesia can announce a national security policy shift to include SSNs and given its limitation as cited above, we can be quite sure and add a red lobster note on top of the monash note to up the wager that in 5-10 years Indonesia will exactly be at the same spot.
Hi Ghalib and Anonymous
With all your compelling arguments I take back "Anything can happen in Indonesia"
and I agree Australian use of training reactors in the UK or US could happen
I'll present your arguments in an article or two today.
Cheers Pete
Firstly there are great fallacies in such arguments. Russia is not like Ukraine, where you throw money and actually they sell IP to you. In some western circles, people are actually happy that the Russians bombed the shit out of Ukrainians, and punished them for selling all the Soviet IPs to China (or whoever is ready to buy them, *cough* Pakistan).
But if people are thinking Russians are like that, then they living in la-la land. Then they never understood the Russian psyche. And like it or not, Indo Russo relations are not going to fall apart. I am not going into the argument this is right or wrong, but this is a kind of a love-hate relationship.
This is embedded in the Indian psyche, and this is also embedded in the Russian psyche regarding India. On the technology cooperation part, this is at the same level as the UK-US defense treaty, without treating India as a junior partner. But I think westerners don't like this, for obvious reasons.
And, Russians don't have that kind of relationship and cooperation and trust with any other nation in the world (not saying this is true or false, but Russians believe this).
If they start doing this now, selling key tech in the open market, then it is another thing, but very unlikely. But I don't think westerners understand Indo Russo psyches.
But on Indonesia, it is laughable to think they are capable of such. India investing in nuclear technology since the 50s. And in HEU since the 80s. If we wanted, we had accepted Obama's offer in 2010 to bring the whole enrichment program into the inspection regime and in return the US provide technology. But we hadn't done that.
Such programs are necessary if a country wants to be independent in building SSBN and SSN.
Nuclear subs are not just about building the hull. That's why I laugh every time when someone says India going to adopt an LEU reactor from France.
Indonesia is not even there where Brazil is right now, and even Brazil is feeling handicapped.
If Indonesia starts now on the path of getting know-how and know-why. It's a 30 40 years path, and the whole path is a bed of thorns. You need ultimate dedication and a great deal of sacrifice to achieve such things.
Further, do the Indonesians be ready to spend such an exorbitant amount? The Indian defense budget is not just 1.5% of GDP.
Also like to add, the purchasing power of the Indian govt in INR is huuuuuuuuuuuugeeee,, which exists in very few countries. And because of the Indian industrial base, it acts as a force multiplier.
Interesting comments on India-Russian rels from Ian Hill, Lowy Interpreter, May 11, 2022, "What the Ukraine crisis means for the Indo-Pacific"
https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/what-ukraine-crisis-means-indo-pacific who writes in part:
"Second, New Delhi’s tacit support for Russia – welcomed by Moscow as “balanced and independent” – is unsurprising. Yet, in truth, New Delhi is in a strategic quandary. On the one hand, India enjoys a historical “special and privileged strategic partnership” with Russia – buttressed increasingly by close relations between Putin and Modi.
Moscow has been India’s main arms supplier for decades, and remains crucial for new systems, logistical support and spare parts. Energy ties are substantial and growing, with Indian investment in Russian oil and gas development complementing Russian involvement in India’s domestic refining and petrochemical sector. Strategically, India values ties with Moscow as a hedge against Beijing.
Yet, New Delhi is wary of the greater convergence between Russia and China, and of Moscow’s recent steps to upgrade ties with Pakistan – intended no doubt as a signal to India not to take Russia for granted. For its part, Russia is suspicious of India’s moves to intensify economic and security cooperation with the United States, notably through the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue.
Uncertainty over the India-US relationship is based on whether or not Washington will impose CAATSA (Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act) on New Delhi’s current acquisition of Russian S-400 missile defence systems (as it did with Turkey). There may also be implications for India’s supply of BrahMos missiles (using Russian technology) to the Philippines."
Arpit@May 12, 2022, 5:23:00 PM
We have a saying in Tamil and also Japanese 'the heavier the rice grains get, the lower the rice plant bows'. I say this for a reason as India's purchasing power has a key caveat
It is not 'our money' because it is based on capital account surplus that balances our huge trade and hence current account deficit. Unlike China or Japan that run huge current account surpluses and hence their dollar reserves are kinda 'their own savings', India is using what can be called as 'the world's excess savings' as it has the trust of investors growing at 7% every year.
The Indian industrial base is a key strength no doubt, but the money bit is more complicated....may be as Indians we can take genuine pride but stay humble about it like the Chinese and the Japanese.
Post a Comment