Nic Maclellan writes: In response to “A huckster’s dream or a visionary moment? Albo launches ScoMo-class subs”, despite claims that AUKUS will bolster Australian sovereignty, a briefing from a “senior White House administration official” says clearly that US and UK submarines operating out of the new SRF-West base in Western Australia “will operate as sovereign assets of their respective countries under the command of respectively American and British commanders”.
So it’s nonsense to suggest a US submarine commander operating out of WA will take orders from Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, even if there are some Australian submariners on board.
Meanwhile, the US is the only major weapons state that has refused to sign the three protocols to the Treaty of Rarotonga for a South Pacific nuclear-free zone — unlike the UK, France, Russia and even China.
Richard Creswick writes: I find it beyond outrageous that at a time when, reportedly, 500,000 Australian children don’t have enough to eat, we are considering this commitment. JobSeeker should be immediately doubled and indexed. I agree with the need for more social housing. Nuclear submarines, despite their abilities to travel further, remain submerged for longer, and will nevertheless be made obsolete by new technologies including, among other things, underwater drone technology being developed in Australia with navy support and at a fraction of the cost of nuclear submarines that are nothing but a provocation to China.
Erik Kulakauskas writes: If only we had a better idea of the costs we could give better alternative spending plans. I have read much material on this project and listened to much discussion and I am none the wiser on what it is expected to cost and absolutely ignorant about how it will, in defence terminology, be “rolled out”. Most commentators appear to have differing opinions of cost, sourcing of the submarines, timing of delivery and, most importantly, their real purpose.
All key proponents of the AUKUS accord (Albanese, UK PM Rishi Sunak and US President Joe Biden) appear delighted with the outcome. That tells me the deal is deeply flawed. Time will tell but rest assured the mushroom cloud will be widespread.
I imagine the fearful Chinese will be having a banquet and a quiet chuckle.
Yvonne Parker writes: I know how I’d spend it (“AUKU$: Australia will spend up to $368b on nuclear subs. Here’s how we’d spend it instead”). I’d blow the lot on fixing the problems of the northern Geelong area, and happily wear the pork-barrelling badge.
Submarines are useless for the social wars that rage in Richard Marles’ Victorian electorate of Corio. The once industrial area is filled to the gills with multi-generational unemployment, drugs and the problems associated with them: stabbings and domestic violence, mental health problems. Twenty thousand people could well be employed building electric vehicles at the old Ford factory, solar panels, building technical schools and training and paying teachers for them.
Eric Sankey writes: I love the film Dave where the pseudo-president Dave cuts the government’s budget to fund a children’s welfare organisation.
If you’re pleased, peed off or piqued, get it off your chest by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.
