Next Phase AUKUS Prime For Anglophone Expansion

Latest stories

Moody's warns US, China it's time to change their ways

'Crazy rich' Chinese making headaches for Singapore

Israel-Palestine truce must be made meaningful – for the long term

Defense One says an AUKUS innovation challenge will invite companies from all three countries to compete in developing specific technologies, starting with electronic warfare. An AUKUS industry forum will also be established to guide policy.

The report mentions that the US is investing in its industrial base to support AUKUS, including a proposed US$3 billion transfer from Australia to upgrade the US submarine industry, but faces legislative hurdles.

The report says that the US State Department plans a US$2 billion foreign military sale to Australia for training related to Pillar One. It notes that the sale aims to advance submarine capabilities, incorporating technologies from all AUKUS partners, and will include training for Australian naval crews and civilians.

The shared history, language, culture and political values between Australia, the US, and the UK sets AUKUS apart from other defense arrangements. That high level of trust enables the sharing of sensitive technology that could only occur within the tightest of alliances.

Each AUKUS member also has its own interests in the arrangement, however. For Canberra, AUKUS integrates Australia's strategic defense even closer to the US.

For London, AUKUS also enables the UK to project a more significant footprint abroad as part of its“Global Britain” ambitions. For Washington, AUKUS is a long-term investment in its strongest alliances to counter an increasingly assertive China in the Pacific.

However, AUKUS has been criticized as having no substance beyond deterring China and, at best, is a modern manifestation of Anglophone hegemony.

Nevertheless, techno-centrism is one of the alliance's main defining features, with Pillar Two notably moving beyond nuclear propulsion, a very politically sensitive technology.

AUKUS's current membership, however, notably skips over two other potential Anglophone partners – Canada and New Zealand.

In a May 2023 article for the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Christopher Hernandez-Roy and other writers argue why Canada should join AUKUS.

Hernandez-Roy and others mention that Canada was not considered for AUKUS membership primarily due to cost, as AUKUS comes with a US$ 179 to US$245 billion annual price tag, running over 30 years in the case of Australia.

They point out that Canada would struggle to spend at that level, as it has struggled to maintain its military since the end of the Cold War.

The writers refer to leaked documents saying Canada will never be able to match NATO's required 2% of GDP defense allocation. They note Canada's lack of credible commitments to build up its defense may result in it being left behind on critical issues such as maritime security, integrated deterrence and defense-industrial cooperation.

Hernandez-Roy and others argue that AUKUS membership would bring multiple benefits to Canada without the controversy associated with nuclear submarines.

Those would include becoming a technological accelerator for Canada's role in the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and under NATO command, encouraging greater collaboration between member states' defense industries, and promoting strategic convergence against China in the Pacific and Russia in the Arctic.

In the case of New Zealand, Robert Patman mentions in an August 2023 article for The Conversation that in March the US invited the former to join AUKUS Pillar Two. Still, he notes that the New Zealand government has yet to decide.

However, Tim Fish notes in an October 2023 article for Breaking Defense that the chances of New Zealand joining AUKUS Pillar Two dramatically increased following its general elections that month.