Chris Barrett and Karuni Rompies for Australia's WAtoday July 29, 2022 report:
"Singapore: Indonesia warns that the sharing of nuclear technology to power submarines could heighten the risk of new types of weapons of mass destruction emerging.
In a submission to next week’s United Nations nuclear non-proliferation review conference, Indonesia said the use of highly enriched uranium for naval propulsion was of growing concern.
...While the submission does not reference the AUKUS deal, Indonesia, as well as Malaysia, have voiced anxiety about Australia’s desire to acquire nuclear-powered vessels after the pact with the US and UK was announced last September, worrying it could trigger an arms race...."
SEE WHOLE EXCELLENT WAtoday ARTICLE HERE.
Pete
ReplyDeleteThis is another ABC article where Indonesia repeats some of China’s talking points on AUKUS, SSNs and nuclear weapons proliferation. The actual risk of nuclear weapons proliferation directly from Australian SSNs with sealed reactors has been acknowledged even by critics as very low, so this must be interpreted as a political position.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-07-29/indonesia-aukus-deal-criticism-at-united-nations/101282786
I am fairly sanguine about this for two reasons:
- Indonesia recently signed a deal with China so the statement may be merely a quid pro quo in return for Jakarta getting what it wants.
- If China are worried about AUKUS SSNs then it means China believes RAN SSNs will actually happen.
I don’t think ASEAN nations are particularly worried about Australia in this regard. Australia is not building the reactors or making the fuel. Australia is to receive a sealed reactor which is then handed back at the end, still sealed. They are already aware that Australia knows how to make bomb grade Uranium without the use of breeder reactors. Besides which, if Australia were to crack one open & use the fuel to make a couple of gravity bomb nukes, we would end up with a very very expensive dud submarine & no more submarine reactors.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is it may encourage others to attempt to follow suit, but on their own or with outside help. That exemption in the non proliferation treaty for HEU for naval propulsion reactors, means that anyone building such a reactor can claim that is what the HEU is for. Even if that is true, more HEU in more places increases the risk of some ending up somewhere it shouldn’t or a change of government down the track could change the picture. No nation in ASEAN can do this at present - the same cannot be said of S.Korea, Japan or Taiwan.
It looks like those 2 complainers are stirring an empty pot while thinking it is full of rich broth.
ReplyDeleteEmpty noise it is.
Hi Pete (and others reading this)
ReplyDeleteI'm not really aware of the security & diplomatic equations between Australia & ASEAN, so for my sake please entertain this line of thought:
Perhaps certain ASEAN countries (Indonesia in particular) view Australia as a potential future adversary? And if they do, then its obvious that they would prepare not for what the adversary says he will do, but rather for what he is capable of doing. Perhaps Indonesia fears that with RAN operating nuclear submarines, Australia will attain a massive unassailable lead in military terms vis-a-vis Indonesia?
Allow me to tell you why I'm thinking in this way...back in the 60s & 70s, the relationship between Indonesia and my country (India) wasn't very good. At one point, the Indonesians had laid claim to the Nicobar island chain (the southern part of Andaman & Nicobar), and were carrying out military intrusions & illegal patrols, not unlike what China is doing in the SCS today. They were also openly on the side of Pakistan during the 1965 war, including providing material assistance. The article below sums up a lot of that history (along with an overview of Indonesia's subsurface naval history):
https://www.theweek.in/news/india/2021/04/26/when-indian-navy-worried-indonesia-would-send-submarines-to-aid-pakistan-in-1965.html
Later though, things took a positive turn and all disputes were abandoned...though I'd wager India's nuclear weapons testing in 1974 had a lot to do with it, along with the fact that the power dynamic between the two countries shifted vastly into India's favour over the decades, especially on the naval front, making the pursuit of a refreshed dispute a not-so-wise decision.
Do you suppose Indonesia fears a similar thing happening vis-a-vis their equation with Australia? Getting potentially "boxed in" by nuclear powers (or at least, nuclear navies) to their north & south, all the while getting needled by the Chinese, can't be an enviable position as far as geopolitics go.
I still think that if push comes to shove, Indonesia will throw its lot in with the QUAD/Western alliance rather than with China...but I can't help but see this as the sort of thing that could change if the political dispensation in Jakarta changes. Note that I do not follow Indonesian politics, just saying that political re-alignment always remains a distinct possibility in a time of global instability like the current.
Cheers
Thanks Gessler
ReplyDeleteI'll turn your words into an article later in the week.
Including parts of https://www.theweek.in/news/india/2021/04/26/when-indian-navy-worried-indonesia-would-send-submarines-to-aid-pakistan-in-1965.html
which is really eye opening - in part how extraordinary was the huge fleet the Soviet Union donated or sold? to Indonesia in the 1950s/60s.
https://www.theweek.in/news/india/2021/04/26/when-indian-navy-worried-indonesia-would-send-submarines-to-aid-pakistan-in-1965.html recounts
"In his book Transition to Triumph: Indian Navy 1965-1975, retired Indian Navy vice admiral G.M. Hiranandani traced the dizzying growth of the Indonesian Navy.
"Between 1959 and 1964, the Indonesian Navy had acquired... enormous fleet from Russia. It comprised one heavy cruiser, eighteen destroyers and frigates, twelve submarines, sixty-seven corvettes and motor torpedo boats, twelve missile boats, twenty-one minesweepers, eleven landing ships, six landing craft, four transport ships and four oilers.""
It may be that the above 156 substantial naval vessels the Soviets sent to Indonesia may have exceeded the number of experienced senior NCOs and Officers in the whole Indonesian Navy to man them. I'd say most of the vessels rusted away, unused?
Cheers Pete