In 1938, wharfies at Port Kembla, south of Sydney refused to load smelted iron ore bound for military production in Japan for its war against China.
Some locals, including Alexander Brown from Wollongong Against War and Nukes, says the peaceful legacy is reason for the town not to become a defence base for Australia's new nuclear submarines.
"We're a city of peace, and we're a city of renewable and sustainable employment. We don't want to turn into a defence industry town," he told 7.30.
"If nuclear submarines are based here in Port Kembla, we're looking at accident risks for us, for sea life, for the ecosystem that we all depend upon."
Port Kembla is being considered as a potential $10 billion east coast nuclear submarine base location, along with Newcastle and Brisbane.
Debra Murphy from Illawarra Regional Development Australia said the town should embrace the opportunity.
"If we had four submarines, we believe that we would get 7,000 jobs, and the majority of those would be high-value jobs, high paying jobs," she told 7.30.
"The word 'nuclear' creates fear. However, we know that the potential issues around nuclear can be managed really effectively, like it is, for example, in Lucas Heights where the (ANSTO) nuclear reactor is."
Along with the base proposal, the historic AUKUS deal to deliver eight nuclear-powered submarines remains a work in progress during its initial 18-month consultation period.
On Monday, Defence Minister Peter Dutton announced $381 million to upgrade the periscopes of the existing Collins Class fleet and keep them relevant amid the current strategic environment.
But he wouldn't be drawn on when the new nuclear submarines would be built and go into service, or the amount of construction work that would happen in Australia.
Under the previous French submarine deal, there was a public pledge to spend 60 per cent of the contract value in Australia.
"I hope that it'll be higher than 60 per cent… we haven't yet chosen what boat (UK or US nuclear design) we're going with… I think you'll be pleasantly surprised," Mr Dutton said.
"We will see more not less being built here in Australia and I'm very confident with the discussions we've had with the US and the UK that I just think there is more blue sky here than what people realise."
Concerns subs may be built overseas
South Australian Independent Senator and former submariner Rex Patrick said the language around a local build was too vague.
"The government keeps squeezing on the schedule and that means that they have to reduce risk wherever they possibly can.
"The Australian Strategic Policy Institute has predicted that this project will cost about $170 billion. An overseas build is the exporting of $170 billion of taxpayers' money and thousands of Australian jobs to foreign shipyards."
Labor: 'We'll do everything we possibly can' to build locally
Shadow Defence Minister Brendan O'Connor told 7.30 that if elected, Labor would need to be fully briefed about the AUKUS deal before making any decisions or giving a guarantee.
"We will do everything we possibly can to make sure that those assets are built in Australia," he said.
"We need to deliver assets, first and foremost, but we need to do that by increasing local defence industry.
"There are some things we can't build here today, so we need to plan forward to ensure that we can build those assets in the future."
Ben Mitchell from Adelaide company K-TIG said it was keen to invest in a high-tech welding facility to get a slice of the action on nuclear submarines, but only if there was certainty from the next government.
"If we found out that the subs were going to be built here, then ... we have an industry, we have a technology capability, and we have a willingness to invest," Mr Mitchell said.
"The numbers would be in the vicinity of 20 to 40 jobs that could be created out of a commitment such as that."
Expert says subs should be built overseas
Defence researcher Clive Williams from Australian National University said considering the complexity of a nuclear submarine, taxpayers would get better value for money if the boats were constructed in the US or UK.
"I think building at Osborne in South Australia is fraught with danger and could well be another defence procurement disaster. I'm sure that it'll wind up in cost overruns, changes to design, fiddling around with it, and so on," he told 7.30.
"I think a much safer bet is to go with an overseas purchase."
He said the smaller UK Astute Class nuclear submarine would be a good fit for Australia's navy, and said the boats couldn't come quickly enough amid tensions in the Indo-Pacific.
"The last two Astute submarines are being built at the moment in the UK. So clearly, it'd be a good idea if we're going to have a follow-on order to get that in as soon as possible so that the production line remains in place," Mr Williams said.
"If we leased submarines, of course, we might be able to get them in a much shorter time frame ... it's possible, of course, that we might be able to work on something like integrated crews, having perhaps a number of our people on board American submarines or British submarines as a transition process."
Mr Dutton said there was no doubt there would be enhanced cooperation between Australia, the US, UK and Japan moving forward.
"As the threat environment escalates here in the Indo Pacific ... we will see more, not less, being built here in Australia," he said.
The government is pursuing the nuclear option after cancelling a contract last September with the French to build 12 diesel-electric submarines, a move that is likely to cost up to $5.5 billion in compensation to the companies involved, including Naval Group.
Mr Dutton said negotiations were ongoing and the settlement would be made public when finalised.
Watch this story tonight on 7.30 on ABC TV and ABC iview.
