AUKUS five years on: $368b Australia US UK submarine deal faces fresh questions over sovereignty and delays

Debate continues to rage over the contentious AUKUS security deal as it marks its five-year anniversary with opponents claiming the multibillion-dollar agreement will not deliver its intended objectives.

Experts remain divided on the future of the pact, signed between Australia, the US and UK five years ago on Wednesday.

Australia is set to acquire nuclear-powered - but conventionally armed - submarines in a $368 billion pathway announced in March 2023.

Critics point to lagging submarine production in the US, warning Australia might not be sold the boats, which have to be signed off by the American president of the day.

Key Pentagon strategist Elbridge Colby reviewed the nuclear-submarine deal and sought clarification from allies to make clear their commitments in the event of potential conflicts.

It would be negligent of the federal government if it was not considering a plan B if there were problems with the agreement, according to security affairs expert Emma Shortis.

“I don’t think it’s ever too late to change a dangerous policy, to rethink a relationship that has gone toxic,” says the Australia Institute’s International and Security Affairs program director.

“In a democracy, we need to have an open, honest, broad conversation about what the defence of Australia means and what security would look like ... under a recalibrated relationship with the United States.”

The second of the two “pillars” of the agreement focuses on sharing military technology and developing capabilities.

At least three Virginia-class submarines have been promised from the US in the early 2030s before a new fleet of boats is built for delivery from the 2040s.

A British House of Commons defence committee found “shortfalls or delays in funding” could threaten the delivery of the fleet.

Both AUKUS pillars appear to be “on track”, Australian Strategic Policy Institute senior analyst Malcolm Davis says.

“Most naval analysts see nuclear-powered submarines as the apex predator of naval warfare.

“They give Australia a vast advantage ... so overall, in terms of our approach to a strategy of deterrence, they are far more effective than would be the case if we went down the path of conventional boats.”

The three-nation deal was sealed in 2021 under former prime minister Scott Morrison and the Biden administration.

Labor, under the leadership of Anthony Albanese, has backed in the pact despite opposition from the party’s rank and file members.

There is also unrest over the presence of the US on Australian naval bases.

Submarine ­Rotational Force West will begin in 2027 and allow the rotation of US submarines at HMAS Stirling in Western Australia.

The US has also set up Naval Support Activity Stirling, which establishes the services the Americans use to designate many of their overseas bases.

The Albanese government has rejected the argument that an increased US presence in WA constitutes an American base.

Australia originally was supposed to buy one Virginia-class boat off the production line in the late 2030s.

However it emerged earlier in 2026 that the nation will get another in-service submarine after two used models arrive earlier that decade.

Dr Davis says the submarines still have a good 20 years of operational life left in them.

But Dr Shortis warns people should remain “very sceptical” about the government’s insistence Australia will maintain sovereignty over the boats.

“The claim the United States would give up control over some of the crown jewels in its navy doesn’t align with the historical evidence we have about the behaviour of the United States,” she says.

Asked about concerns over compromised sovereignty, Dr Davis says it’s “nonsense”.

“They will be sovereign Australian boats and they will be controlled through the Australian Navy,” he says.

An independent public Inquiry examining the AUKUS partnership heard the first of two days of presentations in Canberra last week.

Of note, retired Rear Admiral Peter Briggs told the forum Australia should’ve stuck with a previously agreed French submarine deal.

A common concern expressed at the inquiry has been a perceived over-reliance on the United States at a time when its foreign policy has become increasingly erratic.

“Unless we become full alliance partners, full integration, we will in fact have given away our sovereignty away for reasons that I think history will ill-judge,” former Home Affairs secretary Mike Pezzullo said.