3 ms·
>1- US probably predicts that China is gonna breakthrough the first island chain in the next 10 years. I think the nuke boats / unicorn tech transfer is sweetn
by dirtyid 5y ago
>1- US probably predicts that China is gonna breakthrough the first island chain in the next 10 years.
I think the nuke boats / unicorn tech transfer is sweetner for AU hosting more US assets. Starting ASAP. Just announced more US bombers will be stationed down under. With bombers come ABM, and with ABM, might as well as throw in IRBMs. IMO, it's foot in door for improve US positioning in AU, who has already sunk cost too much into US orbit that the only thing left is to double down. PineGap, Geraldton, Exmouth communication hubs, US is absurdly dependent on AU facilities for Indo-Pac operations. Aforementioned facilities will be targeted by PRC if US containment efforts become kinetic. Ditto with IRBMs, every other country in region has rejected to host because sigifnicant US assets paints target for PRC, but AU is on the hitlist due to existing assets by default.
E: To complete thought, these subs are distraction until they leave the drydock. Chance of smooth aquisition process is 0. At least 8, i.e. only 2-3 deployable at a time. Realistically won't be ready by 2050s if ever since AU has no indigenous nuke industry and struggled with the Collins sub construction. PRC shipyards is primed to launch 2 SSNs per year once design finalized. 6:1 disparity in hulls + host of unmanned systems. A few nuke subs won't shift strategic landscape that much in 30-40 years, but immediate US basing will.
- fspeech 5y agoBut Australia is 5000 miles away from China, only slightly less than Hawaii. Sure Australia is lower cost with vast land but don't see how that is immediate game changer.
- dirtyid 5y agoBases in West Australia where US assets will be deployed are 1/2 distance from to maritime choke points vs Hawaii. Opens up more options.
- fspeech 5y agoWill they try to choke Australia exports to China? Joke aside still don't see a lot of value add over Singapore in terms of blockade. Unless we are talking about posturing?
- dirtyid 5y agoSinagpore and ASEAN signalled neutrality, US tried to get them to host IRBM that can reach within SCS within 1st island chain., No takers. QUAD drama means no military alliance, especially India. Leaves JP, US, AU. JP too close to PRC to be relied on if things turn hot. Leaves just US, AU. Add UK who has spare capacity for SSN with US tech. It's pretty much the only option left. The TLDR is there aren't any credible partners who will commit to PRC containment in region except AU whose far enough that protection can be guaranteed by US. Not in terms of security commitment, but just reality. US simply not in position to challenge PRC within SCS especially in 30 years. It's economic suicide pact for everyone else if regional war over TW breaks out. EU Indo-Pac policy also diluted. Arguably UK isn't fully on board but needs the business. AU is just whose left. It's solid position near relevant 1st island chain SLOC choke points, but also signals how weak US posture in region actually is after lobbying under Trump + Biden. US sharing SSN secrets and pissing off France + timing of EU indo-pac strategy announcement should really raise eye brows. But again, west AU is solid location for now.
- r00fus 5y agoThe area in question is the south china sea, and further areas from China. Probably related to the defense of entire chain of US reliant countries like South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Vietnam as well as Australia. Ultimately, it has to do with commerce as power influences commercial interests as well.
- fspeech 5y agoThat sounds super vague. Taiwan is economically integrated with China, so are South Korea and to a lesser extent, Japan. Vietnam is dependent on Chinese imports and they share a land border. Most of Australia exports go to China. At peace time this is just posturing. In time of war no one ever doubted Australia would be on the side of the US.