In the tumultuous waters of Australian politics, the Aukus nuclear agreement has become a lightning rod for controversy, and the Labor Party's sensitivity to the debate is growing. This week, Vice Adm Mark Hammond, the chief of the navy, found himself in the eye of the storm, revealing that he had been 'directed' to speak at an Aukus conference, an event that has sparked further scrutiny and debate. The annual conference, organised by Christopher Pyne, a former minister now lobbying on the $368 billion agreement, has raised questions about the transparency and motives of those involved.
Hammond, who is set to become chief of defence next month, clarified that his address was 'approved' by the office of the defence minister, Richard Marles. This revelation has sparked a deeper discussion about the cost and reliability of the Aukus pact, and the need for Labor to better explain its national interest. The sensitivity around the phrase 'secondhand' submarines, which Australia will now acquire, highlights the challenges of selling a deal that has faced entrenched scepticism within the ALP caucus.
The issue is further complicated by the renewed debate about Australia's ties with an increasingly unpredictable partner, Donald Trump's America. The announcement by Marles that Australia would receive three secondhand Virginia-class submarines, instead of two in-service and one new vessel, has raised concerns about the deal's cost-effectiveness and reliability. The Pentagon cited cost efficiencies in workforce, maintenance, and supply chains, but the message was not easily sold to Labor, which has been sensitive about the 'secondhand' label.
Former cabinet minister Ed Husic, who was dumped from the frontbench in a factional deal orchestrated by Marles, spoke up at the ALP caucus meeting, arguing that a material change in the deal should prompt reconsideration of the merits of Aukus, especially noting the 'transactional' way Trump makes decisions. Husic's comments were quickly dismissed by Labor ministers, who pointed out that he is just one MP within the caucus. However, Husic's position raises a deeper question about the deal's long-term viability and the potential impact of Trump's erratic behaviour on Australia's defence strategy.
The community-led inquiry launched this week, with former environment minister Peter Garrett as the lead commissioner, will test confidence in the government over the coming months. The inquiry, organised by Aukus sceptics and opponents, has received significant public support, with more than $85,000 in donations and 100 written submissions. Other allies and partners around the world are watching, too, as countries relying on Australia to exert authority as a middle power in the Indo-Pacific region note some political uncertainty related to Aukus. The inquiry will likely be a mild irritant for the government, but it highlights the need for transparency and accountability in the deal's implementation.
In conclusion, the Aukus debate is far from over, and the Labor Party's sensitivity to the issue is a reflection of the challenges of navigating a complex geopolitical landscape. As the inquiry unfolds and the deal's long-term viability is tested, the government will need to demonstrate its commitment to transparency and accountability, and to address the concerns of the public and its allies. The future of the deal, and the peace and stability of the Indo-Pacific region, may depend on it.
