Opposition Leader Peter Dutton's decision to divulge sensitive discussions with the United States on acquiring nuclear-powered submarines has sparked concern that he may have jeopardised plans for a joint agreement by year's end.
The former defence minister — and now Opposition Leader — used an opinion piece in The Australian newspaper on Thursday to assert that he was confident of securing two American Viriginia-class nuclear submarines by 2030.
Under the AUKUS partnership unveiled in September last year, Australia is working with the United Kingdom and the United States to build a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines to replace this country's ageing Collins-class boats.
Mr Dutton later insisted that, if the Coalition had remained in office, it could have been "in a position to make an announcement around July-August" and he was now concerned that Labor was contemplating just building more conventionally powered submarines instead.
"I really worry that Labor is now walking away from AUKUS, from the submarine deal, and that is clearly not in our national interest," he told Sydney Radio 2GB.
Several figures connected to the AUKUS partnership have privately expressed alarm at Mr Dutton's disclosure of defence advice, which included his fears that the Collins-class "diesel-electric submarines would not be able to compete against the Chinese in the South China Sea beyond 2035".
A Coalition adviser who worked on AUKUS said it was unwise for Mr Dutton to discuss how Australia's ageing submarines could soon be detected by emerging radar technologies because they need to come to the surface to "snort" (recharge their batteries).
Another figure, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Mr Dutton's editorial had "buggered" plans for a joint announcement by the end of the year between Australia, the UK and the US.
"The United States can't even do what Mr Dutton is claiming they can, that is provide two nuclear boats out of the Connecticut production line," the official added.
Chair of defence studies at the University of Western Australia, Dr Peter Dean, has echoed the concerns about Mr Dutton's comments.
"I'm sure that the UK wouldn't be happy to learn from a newspaper article that, potentially, their submarine is not an option and I'm sure there's plenty of people in the US Congress, the Pentagon and other parts of the US who were very interested to read these possible developments," Dr Dean said.
"These are sensitive negotiations and I think the great concern here is that Peter Dutton has basically worked against the national interest in an attempt for some domestic political point-scoring".
Mr Dutton told Channel Nine his comments were nothing beyond what was already public knowledge.
"What I've said is only what's available publicly, and in addition to that, what my thoughts would be on the way forward," he said.
"And if Labor is going to butcher that, and they don't have the money to pay for it, they should be upfront and say it.
"Because that's the path they're taking us down at the moment. And as I say, that is not in our national interest."
On Wednesday, the new Defence Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles attacked his predecessor's "loose" comments, saying they undermined the tripartite security agreement between the UK, US and Australia.
"This is rank politics and is completely inconsistent with everything Peter Dutton was doing and saying in government," Mr Marles said.
"The government has made no decision on the preferred submarine. All options remain on the table.
"The Coalition's ability to talk tough and beat their chest without delivering is only being highlighted whilst they're in Opposition."
Meanwhile, the US Embassy in Canberra declined to comment on the controversy, and the Department of Defence did not respond to questions from the ABC.
