The intervention by two former prime ministers in the submarine debate is good in that it has broadened the conversation. Both Malcolm Turnbull and Paul Keating are right to say the discourse has been hijacked by the China hawks to such an extent criticism smacks of heresy.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
While the program seems a workable way to acquire nuclear submarines it includes many assumptions and unknowns.
There are legitimate questions about where the skilled workforce to build the AUKUS-designed boats will come from and if it will be possible to man up to eight vessels.
And, taking a broader view, it is remarkable such a seismic shift in our defence, foreign and industrial policies took place without being debated in Parliament.
The only people questioning AUKUS last May were the Greens and some independents. It was sprung upon the public as a bi-partisan fait accompli.
Key sticking points are the cost, already expected to be far in excess of what was first mooted, the deployment of foreign crew members on Australian vessels, and the use of HMAS Stirling by British and American submarines.
While it is unfortunate the manner of Paul Keating's delivery detracted badly from what he had to say on Wednesday, he made some important points.
His observation that: "A contemporary Labor government is shunning security in Asia for security in and within the Anglosphere" is pertinent. Is fear of "the yellow peril" still entrenched in the psyche of our leaders?
Mr Keating deserves a hearing given he predicted 40 years ago Australia's full potential would only be realised by accepting we are a part of Asia.
He was right. China, India and the South East Asian nations are expected to dominate global economic growth for decades to come.
Nailing our flag to the UK's broken mast in a long term national security strategy dependent on the solvency of all parties could be akin to entering into wedlock with a corpse.
Britain has the lowest rate of growth of any developed nation, almost the highest rate of inflation in the OECD, and is still to experience the full economic impact of Brexit.
Mr Turnbull believes that because of this, the recruitment challenge, the lack of a skilled workforce and the level of group think there is a "very high risk" of failure nobody would discuss.
"We've been caught up in this hoopla where anyone that expresses any concerns about it is being accused of ... lacking in patriotism," he said.
The prospect of a recession in the US before the end of the year, and the possibility of a Trump victory next year, are also wild cards.
READ MORE:
Of even greater concern is the failure of the Morrison and Albanese governments to explain just how putting so many eggs into the nuclear submarine basket is going to enhance Australian security.
Those who say there is a greater risk of Australia being dragged into a US-led war with China over Taiwan than of being invaded by China if we adopt the pragmatic approach to that nation we do to India, Saudi Arabia and Israel have a point.
While Mr Keating's apologia for China's poor human rights record is impossible to support why is it that we reserve our fiercest criticisms for Beijing alone?
While, as many have said, the die appears to be cast that is not necessarily so. Australia has already torn up one costly submarine contract.
A future government may have to do so again if it can't explain the need to a majority of voters.
The public will need to be convinced AUKUS is worth the cost.
Send a letter to the editor
- Letters to the editor should be kept to 250 or fewer words. To the Point letters should not exceed 50 words. Reference to The Canberra Times reports should include a date and page number. Provide a phone number and address (only your suburb will be published). Responsibility for election comment is taken by John-Paul Moloney of 121 Marcus Clarke Street, Canberra. Published by Federal Capital Press of Australia Pty Ltd.
