Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

On July 12-13, Australian Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister, Richard Marles visited the United Kingdom, to meet with the newly appointed UK Secretary of State for Defence, the Rt. Hon John Healet MP. The visit was official but the contents have not been divulgated. The main topic was the development and expansion of AUKUS.

Anti-China, anti-North Korea, anti-India

We should not be surprised: the AUKUS Treaty was signed on 15 September 2021 between the United Kingdom, the United States of America and Australia with the aim of enhancing the three countries’ military defence. The trilateral agreement focused on the development of nuclear-powered submarines and an increased presence in the Pacific, but also on the development of tools for hybrid warfare, with a focus on artificial intelligence, cyber warfare and long-range missiles, in tandem with the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing alliance that also includes New Zealand and Canada.

Why increase military engagement in the Pacific? The answer is simple. Consistent with classical maritime doctrine, the UK-U.S. bloc must dominate the seas to maintain its thalassocratic power. Anglo-American imperialism is entirely maritime. The Pacific is the sea ‘to the west’ of the U.S. and is the one that touches the Asian continent, interacting with the continental bloc of China and other tellurocratic countries. When the British Empire began its expansion, establishing control over the East Indies, it was clear from the outset that without the Pacific it would not be possible to maintain oceanic balance. After WWII, the U.S. also entered the game, positioning numerous military bases scattered among the islands of the Pacific Ocean, so as to create a ‘nuclear belt’ off China and South-East Asia, but also off South America, controlling the routes beyond the fire belt and those to Antarctica.

From a strategic point of view, the nuclear build-up is clearly aimed firstly at countering China, which is the most ‘dangerous’ power for Anglo-American interests in the Pacific – even though it is not a sea power and has never made maritime conquests; secondly, it becomes an instrument of restraint towards India, consistent with the need to control Rimland and prevent the strengthening of Eurasian alliances – and India, after all, has long been a British colony, so there is a desire for colonial revenge -; thirdly, but no less importantly, it is a provocation (or deterrence strategy) against North Korea, which has no declared maritime interests, but remains an atomic power that defines the North Pacific balance of power, with eyes on Japan and the U.S. continuously.

The AUKUS, then, in an anti-China, anti-India and anti-Korea key. This is the real purpose of the military alliance.

Remote deterrence as a strategic rationale.

The technology-sharing agreement with the United Kingdom and the United States will see eight nuclear-powered submarines (SSNs) in Australian service by 2050, an agreement that is in Australia’s interest because it enhances the country’s ability to deter war through nuclear deterrence. The Defence Strategic Review of 2023 explicitly assigns the Australian Defence Force a relatively new international role. The main reason for the acquisition and construction of SSNs in Australia is their powerful strategic effect, as they can provide the Australian Defence Force (ADF) with a superior regional capability. The AUKUS for Australia is the best offer: the benefits potentially – or so they say – outweigh the costs.

One wonders if the perception of constant threats from China, which itself is not militarily threatening to any adversary or enemy, is rather a political imposition – a real psy-op – by the Anglo-American establishment, with the aim of motivating Australia’s strategic engagement, opening up the possibility of another front for another proxy war.

The Commonwealth obeys

The Commonwealth countries can do nothing but obey and do what they were colonised to do, which is to serve the British crown indiscriminately. Marles’ trip to the UK is a mandatory stop to receive orders and agree on operational strategies.

It is clear that this is a division of labour with NATO: the Atlantic Alliance manages its ocean, the AUKUS takes the other.

In the meantime of the visit of Marles, there was a visit to the Clyde naval base in Scotland, where the Astute class submarine was demonstrated. The first three Australian officers completed their training on the nuclear reactor training course; also a report by the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) on the possible expansion of AUKUS was published.

As Marles stated, “The United Kingdom is one of our closest and most enduring partners. I look forward to working with Secretary Healey to progress initiatives which will serve to deepen our defence partnership now and into the future […] In an increasingly complex strategic environment, the United Kingdom remains a critical partner supporting the rules-based global order which benefits us all”.

The Federal Government is not keeping tabs on whether Australians are heading overseas to fight for foreign militaries, including for Russia, in what experts say could be a risk to national security. The Home Affairs Department and Australian Border Force have revealed they ‘do not track individuals travelling overseas intending to serve in foreign military services’, including the Russian defence force, in response to questions on notice from the last round of senate estimates. They said that while they were not aware of any Australian residents leaving to join the Russian military, they believed four had travelled to serve the Israeli Defence Force since October 7, but did not have an exact figure.

Australians have a long history of fighting for foreign militaries, and while it has never been tracked and is not illegal, one expert said not knowing who is engaging with militaries of countries such as Russia could pose security risks.

Making a projective analysis, it is not hard to imagine that Australia could become the next Ukraine for China. The American and British military presence in the region has significantly increased, the AUKUS is being strengthened, and simulations of conflict are likely to grow. It’s about creating a threat to China by using Australia, in the same way the U.S. used Ukraine against Russia.

Staying on the psychological level, it is probable that the undersea balance determines Australia’s psychological freedom. Or perhaps it’s just yet another deception.

Australia’s freedom of movement would be the first casualty of unrestricted submarine warfare, as happened in the Atlantic and the Pacific during the Second World War. But it would be wrong to think of this threat only in terms of the damage it could inflict on Australia’s navy in wartime. In some ways, the bigger risk is that this hypothetical threat deters Australia today from even contemplating the sorts of actions it would consider to be in the national interest. In a regional war, the balance would probably be determined not so much by Australia’s actual war power, but by American support, geographically closer than British support, but to do this it would have to make the Indo-Pacific contingency prevail, to the detriment of the European contingency, necessarily involving Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Guam and the other small states under its influence.

Here another question arises: UK-U.S. are now only capable of provoking conflicts by involving strategic partners. On their own, they no longer have the real strategic, economic and political power to succeed.

With the current inappropriate foreign interference of the UK and the U.S. in Australia’s politics, it is likely that the country will be elected as the new sacrificial lamb in the macabre geopolitical ritual of the collective West.