.jpg)
This includes physical visits to 7 (west to east in map below) Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Fiji, Tonga, Samoa and Kiribati. China is also holding Internet “visits” to the remaining 3, the Cook Islands, Niue and the Federated States of Micronesia.
The US bases in the large, rich, island of Guam are within the much smaller, poorer, islands of the Federated States of Micronesia. So its no surprise that Micronesia's President, David Panuelo, has told leaders of the other 9 Pacific nations that he won’t endorse China’s plans.
Australia's new Foreign Minister, Penny Ying-Yen Wong - from today is conducting visits to most of those island nations over the next few weeks to try to head off China's moves. The 10 island nations have traditionally been Five Eye friendly, with Australia and New Zealand being "Deputy Sheriffs" to keep it that way.
China wants the 10 nations to sign
up to a comprehensive agreement covering police, security, communications
infrastructure and fisheries. China training police is significant because most
of the island nations do not have defence forces.
Instead it is island police forces who
provide paramilitary power in most of the nations. If China trains these police
forces it is these forces that could launch regime changes/coups against
their island leaders if those leaders pursue policies not to China’s liking.
Chinese Illegal Fishing
China’s fisheries plan has added significance
in that China’s vast naval militia fishing
fleet conducts the most illegal fishing in the region - especially tuna trawling.
Chinese infrastructure loans, which usually include generous commissions/bribes for Pacific Island
leaders, would make China’s illegal fishing legal in many Pacific waters.
Chinese infrastructure offers are thought to include improved mobile phone networks and new internet telecommunications generally. These new networks could more easily be monitored by China’s NSA.
China’s new ambitious plans for
these island nations will be on the way to dual-use air and sea ports that
could gradually morph into Chinese air and naval bases. This would fundamentally free China from the present situation in which its air and naval forces can be hemmed in within the first island chain in time of war.
"Pot Calling The Kettle Black"
A historical example of similar
creeping island nation domination is US control of Caribbean islands. For example this is present in:
- The Bahamas which hosts the US’s huge Atlantic Undersea [Submarine] Test and Evaluation Center (AUTEC)
and
- the USN's Guantanamo Bay Naval Base maintained by force in an ever reluctant Cuba. This Base was
Yet it is US conventional and nuclear military power that has protected Australia in the past and present.
More see CNBC News' May 25, 2022, report.
12 comments:
Thanks Pete, it is a good article and that map is very helpful in illustrating the geographic magnitude of the challenge.
The good news is that the new Labor government now seems well and truly committed to AUKUS and the multiple naval capability upgrades, not just subs, that we require. The bad news is that we may well need those subs sooner rather than later.
I find myself furious to think that the previous government let things deteriorate to this point without making an effort to speak personally to the Pacific Island leaders. Plans like China's five year one are not dreamed up overnight. They require analysis, planning and resourcing prior to implementation. You have to wonder how long this has been developing?
The comments of ASIO that this was NOT an intelligence failure, seem quite pointed now. Presumably previous Ministers were warned this was coming.
I do not defend US imperialism in the Caribbean either, though I think Australia's role in Pacific Islands has been much more benign. That is our best card to play IMO. We can't "outmuscle" China, even now. Australia needs to remind PI nations that they are better off with Australia. Things like education and work opportunities to PI citizens are much better carrots to offer to encourage PI nations to turn away from China. Pointing out that the Chinese funds are loans, not aid, is also important.
Rarely for a politician, Rudd was right about the RAN needing 12 subs back in 2009. We should have started building them back in 2010.
Hi Pete,
Regarding the part about Chinese illegal fishing, it appears that the QUAD has begun to take some concrete steps to tackle this problem. While the media headlines were grabbed by larger initiatives like the launch of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), the QUAD's recently concluded summit in Tokyo included the launch of several initiatives which seem to have not grabbed as many eyeballs:
The Indo-Pacific Partnership for Maritime Domain Awareness (IPMDA)
"...This initiative will transform the ability of partners in the Pacific Islands, Southeast Asia, and the Indian Ocean Region to fully monitor the waters on their shores and, in turn, to uphold a free and open Indo-Pacific. Quad countries are committed to contributing to the region’s maritime domain awareness—a fundamental requirement for peace, stability, and prosperity—through an investment in IPMDA over five years."
"...IPMDA will build a faster, wider, and more accurate maritime picture of near-real-time activities in partners’ waters. This common operating picture will integrate three critical regions—the Pacific Islands, Southeast Asia, and the Indian Ocean Region—in the Indo-Pacific. The benefits of this picture are vast: it will allow tracking of “dark shipping” and other tactical-level activities, such as rendezvous at sea, as well as improve partners’ ability to respond to climate and humanitarian events and to protect their fisheries, which are vital to many Indo-Pacific economies."
Details regarding how they plan to do is contained in the Fact Sheet:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/05/23/fact-sheet-quad-leaders-tokyo-summit-2022/
Also, the beginnings of a "Counter-BRI" initiative appear to be taking root finally:
"We are committed to working closely with partners and the region to drive public and private investment to bridge gaps. To achieve this, Quad will seek to extend more than 50 billion USD of infrastructure assistance and investment in the Indo-Pacific, over the next five years."
More here in the full Joint Statement:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/05/24/quad-joint-leaders-statement/
I'd imagine most of that amount would be aimed at dissuading South East Asian nations from Chinese debt-trap loans under BRI, however I would also think the Pacific Islands would also become a priority - as its already among the 3 critical regions identified for the IPMDA.
The job of countering China cannot be a simple matter of building military capabilities, while that is important, its also important to appreciate that China is no Russia - the CCP is capable of bringing tremendous economic leverage to the table which can have the effect of tilting the balance in their favour in many regions without ever firing a shot. A multi-domain approach is necessary to counter this.
Cheers
Hi Gessler
I've turned your comments of May 27, 2022, 2:55:00 AM above, into an article:
"QUAD Issues Expanding at Tokyo Summit, May 2022" of May 27, 2022
at https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2022/05/quad-issues-expanding-at-tokyo-summit.html
Regards Pete
Hi Anonymous [at May 26, 2022, 5:34:00 PM]
I'm still a bit nervous that the broad "church" that is the Labor Party, from Right, Centre to Left, might develop a less enthusiastic view of the AUKUS Submarine Project.
This may ride less on traditional Australian anti-nuclear feelings than a clash with Labor's high concern for civilian cost of living alternative spending.
The new Labor Government has inherited a debt/deficit approaching A$1 Trillion dollars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_government_debt
This wouldn't be a problem in a US sized economy. Instead Australia's debt approaches half our yearly GDP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)#Table
The multi decade AUKUS Submarine Project might "merely" cost A$200 Billion in 2022's uninflated dollars
But as inflation is now hitting Australia for the first time in years even a 6% inflation rate year-on-year could increase the AUKUS Submarine Project cost to half a Trillion dollars.
This would not be a good look for a Labor Government whose policy promises are heavily in health, education and welfare.
Justifying the high cost AUKUS Submarine Project lies squarely on China Threat. If we grow accustomed to China's new place in the Indo-Pacific it will be difficult to justify the AUKUS Submarine Project.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Another undoer of the AUKUS Submarine Project is the current bet that Trump will win the 2024 Presidential Election - noting https://www.sportsbet.com.au/betting/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2024-5479667
Trumps erratic transactional Deal making approach to alliances (he might see AUKUS as "Biden's Deal") might even bring in a massive cost increase in the US reactor technology that is in the UK's Astute submarines.
In short a President Trump 2.0 could kill AUKUS.
Regards Pete
Pete
Those are undeniable concerns but I would respond (optimistically) as follows:
1. No question defence spending is going to face a review when Labor does its force posture review. Projects that Labor has made no promises about, are not Labors’ idea, involve no local employment, or cannot be linked easily to strategy will be vulnerable. On all those grounds projects like the new tanks are at high risk IMO. Sea 1000 was a Rudd idea, so should be safer. But cuts in scope and cost have to be a real risk. This is no time for Defence to trot out its wish list of high priced sub options.
2. Despite all the rhetoric about economics, in my experience both Labor and Liberal always find money for projects they care about, even if very costly (think Labor and NBN; Liberals and F35s). In my experience Liberals fund projects their big donors like. Labor fund projects their big unions like. In this case, if the subs are built at ASC a big union (CFMEU) benefits with 3000+ members. That would keep Labor interested. If Defence try to shift the project to a foreign build, that could be fatal.
3. The cost is high but not out of the question. Assuming 8 SSNs cost $90 billion, but built over 25-30 years, that is around $3 billion per year. The Commonwealth budget is $660 billion; Defence is $48 billion per annum.
4. It will be significant if Richard Marles is made Defence Minister. He is from the Labor Right faction and is on the record as supporting AUKUS SSNs. If Defence goes to someone from the Labor Left the SSN program will be in big trouble and we might revert to SSKs.
5. Trump 2.0 is another real risk. For that reason I have never understood the leisurely 18 month timeframe Defence have allowed to make a decision. If Defence are smart, they will sign a contract to be approved by Biden quickly, that documents the work US firms will supply to the project. That would be hard for Trump to back out of. Otherwise Biden could lose his Congress majority this November and become a “lame duck” POTUS. Nothing is guaranteed after that. In that case BAE might win by default, since the nuclear technology transfer has been agreed, but not the RAN getting permission to build all the new gizmos in Virginias. That technology transfer has NOT yet been agreed AFAIK.
Thanks Anonymous [at May 27, 2022, 8:36:00 PM]
You've made some very insightful comments that I'll turn into an article next week.
2. Especially 2. "... Labor fund projects their big unions like. In this case, if the subs are built at ASC a big union (CFMEU) benefits with 3000+ members. That would keep Labor interested. If Defence try to shift the project to a foreign build, that could be fatal."
When added to Labor winning all (but one) Federal seats in Adelaide at the May 21, 2022 Election Labor dare not rock that pro-Labor boat by NOT building a substantial portion of the SSNs in Adelaide.
As the Astutes displace approx 7,400 tonnes surfaced - so even the bow halves of 12 SSNs will be a large building project for shipbuilding unions. The stern reactor-propulsion halves may need to be an overseas build.
3. Yes its important to keep SSN program costs in perspective compared to the Australian Government's A$667.3 billion 2020-21 Annual budget, Page 159 of https://archive.budget.gov.au/2021-22/bp1/download/bp1_2021-22.pdf
with Defence A$34.5 Billion 2020-21 Estimate, Page 161 of above doc
The A$90 Billion figure related to the Attack class SSK Program costs. A$170 Billion has been informally quoted for an Aus SSN Program, although rounding it up to A$200 Billion might prove more accurate in 2023.
Cheers Pete
Thanks Pete. I think our views are closely aligned. Building the front half of a class of RAN SSNs at Osborne would still be a good outcome, as long as we actually get some in the water. At this point I would go for whichever of Astutes or Virginias is the least risk. The last thing the RAN can afford is another five years wasted.
Happy to be proven wrong about the Virginias but my understanding is that the US Congress has to sign off (in addition to Biden) on Australia getting the specific technology in the Virginia design, as well as the reactor. This relates to their Act on naval shipbuilding.
I take your point on costs but I'll wait and see. When I constructed a project cost spreadsheet, benchmarking against both RN and USN costs, there are a lot of upfront SSN system establishment costs to be incurred, perhaps over $10 billion before we start building SSN 1. However after that the build cost assuming a two or three year drumbeat is under $3 billion per year.
Defence needs to be a careful cost manager here and should remember the lessons of Collins Class construction. I say again they should appoint Electric Boat as a delivery manager, not Defence itself. That cost UK MoD 200 million pounds over 2003 to 2011. MoD recovered that cost in savings on the second Astute build alone.
Hi Anonymous [at May 28, 2022, 5:56:00 PM]
When thinking about the rear half of the sub needing to be built overseas
and the front half in Adelaide
I almost forget 2 major details that may come to haunt all 3 layers (Local, State and Federal) Aus Governments:
A. Each Aus SSN's reactor can only be fully tested (from running Critical to Full Power)
after the 2 halves are joined in Adelaide.
Only fully joined allows testing with reactor remote operation and monitoring equipement in the front half sub and of course much closer in reactor operation and monitoring equipement in the rear reactor half.
See necessary testing of a complete sub at the UK submarine building Barrow-in-Furness shipyard https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2022/04/hms-astutes-dockside-testing-out-to-sea.html containing https://youtu.be/pf6QRofXQWU in particular 43:40 in https://youtu.be/pf6QRofXQWU?t=43m40s
ALL THIS MEANS THAT THE REACTOR WILL NOT REACH AUSTRALIA AS A SEALED, BY IMPLICATION FULLY TESTED, UNIT. THIS IS A FEDERAL GOVERNMENT VOICED ILLUSION.
and it gets more potentially disturbing for surrounding city folk:
B. That is the need for emergency alarm/mobile phone warnings and iodine tablet destribution in whatever cities Aus SSNs are built and based. This is a standard Government Safety duty of care.
See https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2022/04/hms-astutes-dockside-testing-out-to-sea.html containing https://youtu.be/pf6QRofXQWU in particular 35 minutes in at https://youtu.be/pf6QRofXQWU?t=35m
The good burghers of Northwest Adelaide/Osborne, far south Perth/Rockingham and presumably Port Kembla (if it wins East Coast Submarine Base) will need to become accustomed to regular nuclear safety preparations and alarm drills.
Pete
The reactor itself will be supplied as a sealed unit. To do otherwise would break Australia’s non nuclear weapons agreements (as in Australia could re-allocate the fuel for other uses - despite the fact that Australia already has the means & knowledge to build nuclear weapons without doing so.). You don’t test a reactor by firing it up & then fitting it to a submarine afterwards. You test the system & then supply a unit identical to an actual tested system & fire it up after. You are unlikely to find a team of workmen prepared to weld in an actually working reactor. No-one anywhere does this other than major disaster (eg France making one submarine out of two after a non nuclear accident). This was a non trivial exercise.
I would also note that Adelaide is not where SSN’s will be based. Also Sydney already has a nuclear reactor. Australia is not completely blind. Yes there are difficulties & procedures to follow. As someone who has had a ‘behind the scenes’ tour of Lucas Heights (not the public tour), this is doable. Australia actually has some world class nuclear engineers & scientists.
Hi Anonymous [at May 29, 2022, 10:42:00 PM]
Glad that you've had special access to Lucas Heights.
1. Re your first para, both our comments are correct:
Yes developmental and basic testing on reactor functioning would occur in the UK or US, whoever wins.
In Australia once the two submarine halves are joined literally hundreds of systems on each completed sub are tested.
This would include the front end and rear end electrical controls that instruct the reactor to warm up "(from running Critical to Full Power)" and testing of the internal sensors that they are correctly monitoring reactor function.
2. I didn't say the SSNs would be based in Adelaide. As everyone knows the front and maybe more of the SSNs are meant to be BUILT in Adelaide.
Basing would be at HMAS Stirling (Fleet Base West) and somewhere, not yet selected, on the East Coast. I've also written about the reactor at Lucas Heights, eg. https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2022/02/trying-to-price-ssns-for-foreign.html
At https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2022/05/australias-post-election-nuclear.html I posed the possibility of a SSN training reactor being built at Lucas.
I notice you didn't address something else I wrote at May 29, 2022, 8:04:00 PM:
"That is the need for emergency alarm/mobile phone warnings and iodine tablet destribution in whatever cities Aus SSNs are built and based. This is a standard Government Safety duty of care."
That is a duty of care somewhat contradicting Government assurances that there's no reason to worry about reactor safety.
Regards Pete
Pete
General Iodine tablet distribution would be a waste of time. If something happened, nobody would be able to find where they put them 10 years before & people shift around all the time. Having a government stockpile nearby (if considered needed) is not a great cost in the scheme of things. Mobile phone warning system is already in place (thanks to floods & bushfires). Some further disaster planning will of course be done. Basing wise, a nuclear power station run by a profit centred power company is likely more dangerous.
Thanks Anonymous [at Jun 1, 2022, 8:58:00 PM]
Iodine Tablets are very much in the LUCAS HEIGHTS EMERGENCY SUBPLAN, June 2019
at https://www.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-04/emergency-management-subplan-lucas-heights.pdf
See my new article on that "Lucas Heights Emergency Subplan: East Coast Base" of June 2, 2022
at https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2022/06/lucas-heights-emergency-subplan-east.html
Regards Pete
Post a Comment