Guarding Our Future: A Defence Strategy for an Independent Australia

Strategic Comparison: AUKUS vs. The Pivot to Asia Plan

Why We Must Change Course Now

Australia is facing a unique geopolitical dilemma:

• Our largest defence ally (the U.S.) is imposing tariffs on Australian steel and aluminium, harming our domestic industry.
• Our largest trading partner (China) is conducting live-fire naval exercises near ANZ, posing a direct threat to our sovereignty.

This highlights the fundamental flaw in our strategic position- we are dependent on a defence ally that undermines our economy and a trade partner that threatens our security. The only solution is self-reliance through trade, defence independence, and industrial sovereignty.

Revisiting the AUKUS Submarine Deal: A Smarter Approach

Australia is not rejecting nuclear submarines, but we should be negotiating a far better deal. Instead of committing $368B+ for eight submarines, we could negotiate a strategic basing agreement with the U.S. that allows us to host, co-crew, and operate Virginia-class submarines from Australian bases while acquiring additional submarines at a realistic price.

?? AUKUS Cost (Full Build & Lifecycle): $368B for 8 submarines (est. ~$40B each, including workforce, infrastructure, and operational costs).

???Buying Directly from the U.S.:?$5B per Virginia-class submarine?→ If we properly negotiate, we could buy?12 for the same price?instead of paying for 8 at AUKUS rates.

?? Hosting U.S. Submarines Instead: $5B–$10B in basing costs, with no long-term build burden → Instant deterrence without financial drain.

Alternative Proposal: A Strategic Deal That Works

1. Base four Virginia-class submarines in Australia at U.S. expense → Host them in Perth/Sydney with full Australian operational integration.
2. Co-crew the submarines with Australian officers → RAN officers train with U.S. crews and gradually take over operations.
3. Buy 4–6 additional Virginia-class submarines at a true negotiated cost (~$5B each)?→?much cheaper than $40B per submarine under AUKUS.
4. Reallocate savings to the Pivot to Asia Plan → More funding for missile defence, fighter jets, and energy independence.

? Same deterrence effect, far less cost

? No delay-we get subs immediately, not post-2040

? Reduces long-term U.S. dependency while maintaining strategic alignment

? Saves Australia over $250B+ for reinvestment in defence, energy, and infrastructure

The Goal:

We are not rejecting nuclear submarines; we are?circumventing the issue by securing a more pragmatic, cost-effective solution that delivers immediate defence readiness.

1?? Strategic Readiness: Immediate Capability vs. Delayed Delivery

• AUKUS: Australia won’t have its own nuclear submarines until the early 2040s. By 2035, we’ll have only three second-hand Virginia-class subs from the U.S., which may be outdated and require extensive maintenance.
• Pivot to Asia Plan:?Twelve to fifteen advanced diesel-electric submarines, sourced from?Japan (Taigei-class) and South Korea (KSS-III class),?could be fully operational within a decade. They would provide?immediate deterrence?while still maintaining long-range strike capabilities.?KSS-III submarines feature vertical launch system (VLS) capability, allowing for the deployment of cruise missiles and future hypersonic weapons, significantly enhancing Australia's strike options.

? Verdict: The alternative plan gives Australia a real naval force now, rather than gambling on delayed nuclear subs.

2?? Cost Efficiency: $65B + $5B p.a vs $268B- $368B

• AUKUS: Estimated $268B–$368B cost through the 2050s, draining defence resources with uncertain delivery timelines.
• Pivot to Asia Plan: $54B for initial procurement and approximately $4B per year for a comprehensive defence package, including:
• ?? 12-15 advanced diesel-electric submarines (KSS-III/Taigei-class) → $18B-$22B
• ?? 50 next-generation fighter jets (F-35s or equivalent) → $8B-$10B
• ??500 long-range strike drones (including production facilities and integration into industrial capability) → $5B
• ?? 300 long-range cruise missiles → $3B
• ?? 1,000 short-to-medium range deterrence missiles → $4B
• ?? Cyber & Space investments (including R&D and technology development) → $5B
• ?? Land Forces Upgrades (armoured vehicles, artillery, logistics support) → $6B
• ?? Industrial & Trade Infrastructure Development → $5B
• ?? Energy Security & Fuel Independence Investments → $5B

? Verdict: Australia could be fully defended to 2050 at around 50% of the AUKUS cost, leaving room for other priorities like energy and industry.

3?? Geopolitical & Sovereign Control

• AUKUS:?Australia remains?highly dependent on the U.S.?and the?UK, which means our military readiness is?tied to their strategic priorities.
• Pivot to Asia Plan: Strengthens partnerships with Japan and South Korea, ensuring more regional control over defence procurement and operations. We still have fully integrated defence systems with the US, including F35s.
• China Factor: Our largest trading partner is also perceived by the U.S. as its greatest strategic threat. A Pivot to Asia allows Australia to maintain strong regional partnerships without being caught in the middle of a U.S.-China rivalry.

? Verdict: The alternative plan enhances Australia’s sovereignty and independence in defence policy while reducing strategic risk.

4?? Trade, Energy, & Economic Expansion: High-Value Exports Over Raw Commodities

• AUKUS: No economic or industrial development beyond naval bases.
• Pivot to Asia Plan: Instead of shipping raw materials overseas, Australia should add value domestically and export finished high-value products to Asia. This includes:
• ?? Advanced manufacturing – Processing lithium batteries, steel, and rare earths locally before export.
• ?? Defence exports – Partnering with Japan and South Korea for co-production of key defence assets.
• ?? Agricultural value-add – Processing food and raw materials before export, rather than allowing others to dominate the supply chain.
• ?? Energy independence – Developing coal-to-fuel, nuclear baseload power, and regional SMRs to eliminate reliance on imported energy sources.

? Verdict: Australia secures its economic future by becoming a high-value regional trade partner rather than a raw commodity supplier.

5?? Operational Fit: Nuclear vs. Diesel-Electric Subs

• AUKUS:?Nuclear-powered submarines are?designed for global operations, not necessarily optimised for?Australia’s immediate regional defence needs. They can effectively operate in shallow water.
• Pivot to Asia Plan: Diesel-electric subs operate effectively in Australia’s shallow coastal waters while still providing long-range deterrence.

? Verdict: Unless Australia plans global naval dominance (which it doesn’t), diesel-electric subs are more practical for regional defence.

Conclusion: A Self-Sufficient Australia in the Indo-Pacific

Australia has a choice:?commit to outdated Cold War thinking under AUKUS or take control of its future with a Pivot to Asia.

The current plan locks us into?long-term strategic dependence on the U.S. and the UK, with nuclear submarines that serve more to project?Washington’s power?than to defend Australian waters. A true?national security strategy?isn’t just about acquiring hardware; it’s about building?resilience through sovereign capability, trade, and energy independence.

What This Plan Achieves:

? Defends Australia, not someone else’s interests → 12-15 operational submarines, advanced missile systems, and next-gen air and drone capabilities within a decade.

? Energy & Fuel Sovereignty → Secure domestic energy sources, reducing reliance on unstable foreign suppliers.

? Economic Strength Through Regional Partnerships → Expanding trade with Japan, South Korea, and Indonesia to diversify beyond China.

? A Future-Proofed Industrial Base → Strengthening manufacturing, advanced technology, and infrastructure for long-term resilience.

? Trade & Energy Transformation → Moving from a raw materials exporter to a high-value regional trade and energy powerhouse, ensuring Australia’s economic resilience for decades to come.

? Reduced Strategic Risk → Ensuring Australia’s economic and military security without escalating tensions between our largest trading partner and our closest ally.

?? Now is the time for action. Policymakers, industry leaders, and defence experts must commit to a strategy that delivers real results-not just promises.

Australia must step beyond being a Western garrison state and take its place as a self-sufficient, strategically independent leader in the Indo-Pacific.

This is how Australia secures its future on our terms.

#AUKUS #Geopolitics #DefenceStrategy #NationalSecurity #IndoPacific