AUKUS, Technology and Militarising Australia

AUKUS, Technology and Militarising Australia

Illustrative Image

Written by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

Thinktanks across Australia, tanked with cash from US sources and keen to think in furious agreement, are all showing how delighted they are with the AUKUS security pact and what potential it has for local, if subordinated industry.  The United States Studies Centre, a loudspeaker for Washington’s opinions based at the University of Sydney, has added its bit to the militarising fun with a report on what AUKUS will be able to do.

The author of the report, non-resident fellow of the US Centre’s Foreign Policy and Defence program Jennifer Jackett gushes about the “more consequential” nature of various “technological developments in quantum, cyber, artificial intelligence, undersea, hypersonics and electronic warfare” than nuclear-powered submarines. The latter are, after all, slated to appear much later on the horizon.  In the meantime, warring potential could be harnessed in other realms.

Jackett stresses the urgency of appreciating these fields, given that Australia faces “a more hostile Indo-Pacific”.  No ironic reflection follows that such hostility has been aided, in no small part, by the AUKUS security pact that has put countries in the region, with China being the primary target, on military notice.

In dealing with such threats, the AUKUS partners – the US, UK and Australia – had to “understand areas of comparative advantage, complementarity, and potential gaps or overlaps, between the three industrial bases.”

Reading, at points, like an intelligence comb through of local assets and wealth resources by a future colonising power, the report is revealing about what Vince Scappatura called that “loose networks of elites and institutional relationships” that nourish Australia’s umbilical cord to Freedom Land.

Australia’s population is described in glowing terms, with some nose-turning suggestions for improvement for the happily compliant subjects.  “Australia stands out for the quality of its educational institutions and skilled workforce.  Australian scientists are renowned for the global impact of their research in fields such as quantum physics and artificial intelligence.”  There is, however, a belated admission that Australia’s STEM workforce, with 16 per cent of qualifications in the field, come behind that of the United States, “where around 23 per cent of the total workforce has a university-level or below STEM qualification.”

Then comes a mild rebuke in terms of Australian approaches to venture capital.  One can see Jackett shaking her head in disapproval in writing this: “Australia remains an attractive destination for foreign direct investment, but the venture capital industry – the sort of financial entities willing to make riskier investments on unproven technology – remains small, less than half of the OECD average.”  (Come on Aussies, whole frontiers of lethal technology await your dosh.)

This is not a meditation about peace, about miracle responses to climate change, poverty or wretched disease.  It has nothing to do with harnessing the technological potential to aid good causes.  This is the paid-up chit-chat of imperial militarisation, and how “innovation” aids it.

Similar remarks have been made by Admiral Mike Rogers, former chief of the US National Security Agency, who has given a stirring performance on his visit to Australia in praising his hosts. “I applaud Australia’s willingness to make that sort of commitment [to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines] and to speak about it so frankly,” he told Australia’s premier Murdoch rag, The Australian.

What troubles Rogers, as with those at the US Studies Centre and similar groupies, is a concern about what to do before those white elephants of the sea make their ponderous appearance.  He cites various other weapons capabilities as “alternatives in the interim”.  There are, for instance, options in “autonomous vehicles, robotics, sensors, situational awareness technologies”.  AUKUS was, and here, the warning is clear to us all, “much more than submarines”.  AUKUS needed to be used “to drive change.”

The disconcerting blindness to local security elites in turning Australia into something even more of a fortress for foreign military operations is palpable.  Its corollary is the idea that the United States does not get into the empire business.  The mechanism of kitting out Canberra as yet another appendage of US strategic operations and interests was already well underway with such fora as the Australian American Leadership Dialogue, which makes it very clear who the leaders are.

As things stand, the current makeup of the AALD features appropriately qualified vassals for the US mission.  There is Tony Smith, former Speaker of the Australian House of Representatives, who is the CEO of the group.  On being appointed to the position, he claimed it would “enable me to continue my service to our democracy and our nation in this vitally important, unique, bipartisan, private sector diplomatic endeavour”.  Grovelling journalists wondered if Smith got along with his future masters.  “Pretty good, I think,” came his response.

The newly appointed Secretary of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, Glyn Davis, also appears as a prominent member on the advisory board, linking one of the most important civil service roles in Canberra to the US administration.  The grouping is secretive and observes non-disclosure rules that would make any official in Beijing proud.

From the Australian Strategic Policy Institute to the US Studies Centre, we are meant to celebrate the prospect of Australia as a military annexe to US power in the Asia-Pacific, its sovereignty status subsumed under the ghastly guff of freedom lovers supposedly facing oriental barbarians.  The analysis is then crowned by the praise of former US defence and security officials who ingratiatingly speak of Australian potential as they would mineral deposits.  The lie, packaged and ribboned, is duly sold for public consumption.  Australian sovereign capability becomes the supreme fiction, while its subservience is hidden, only to be exposed by heretics.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He currently lectures at RMIT University.  Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
12 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
JJ345

“Thinktanks” that get funding from military-industrial complex supporting the military-industrial complex actions.

I’m so surprised, how could that happened.

Side note, Australia is the “main” base in a war against China, a few years ago…I believe two years ago the USA planned/funded a fuel storage facility in N-Austalia.

hash
hashed
JJ345

“By September 2023, the East Arm fuel storage facility is expected to be able to store 300 million litres of military jet fuel to support American defence activities in the Northern Territory and Indo-Pacific region.”

Klaus Schwab's Severed Head

Hope those tanks get buried deep.

Tommy Jensen

The British Common Wealth is rotten to the core. How are they able to live in their own sewage?

hash
hashed
FOSSILS RULE BANKS JUST DROOL

By cleaning out septics and their pro lgbtq/nazi stink tanks would be a a good start.

Michael Oakes

Seems to me an important benefit for Australia of acquiring nuclear powered submarines is to help start a local nuclear power industry. Australia has the largest known uranium reserves in the world and is a major exporter but. due to policies enacted by stupid Labor governments, have been bans on place om using it ourselves. Meanwhile they promote so called renewables, wind and solar which can only deliver a limited proportion of total power and output is intermittent and unreliable. For base load, needs construction of some nuclear power stations. Even if only to reduce digging up of good farmland and /or possible damage to underground water resources by coal mines.

hash
hashed
FOSSILS RULE BANKS JUST DROOL

Coal mines are generally clean+safe,compared to pentagon bio labs,the onus is power at reasonable costs,not elon musk batterys that do date only proven to lacketh yet cost certain states triple fees!

William White

China will take Australia in about 8 minutes if they decide to. Better to make friends with them than the Far away USA.

hash
hashed
Antitrolltroller

Hear hear! And we did many years have a good trading relationship with China but the US MIC and USG war hawks most have bribed or extorted our stupid politicians or simply lied to them. I wish the US Empire would just collapse. The world would do better without it.

t s

They have to act very fast, as the Covid-19 VAX rate is almost 100% in the ASSIE military. I give them 4 years, then VAIDS will decimate the country.

hash
hashed
Mimi

Australia at any time has two to three weeks oil/petrol storage for the whole country. All supplies come by sea. China simply has to block those tankers and Australia is done. The whole place will come to a standstill.

hash
hashed
Antitrolltroller

Funding scientists to research and develop more lethal weapons to kill people with? Yup that’s gonna be a crowd pleaser (sarcasm) with the average Aussie who despises been the USA’s lapdog and despises their politicians even more. The Yankee doodle pansies come skipping into town waving wads of cash in our faces trying to entice our scientists to make weapons that kill and destroy families and lives. Fark off out of Australia and take yer stinking blood money with you war mongering, red neck, hill Billy, in-bred, obscenely obese, koolaid addicted, narcissistic, dumbed down, backwards degenerates.

hash
failed