IN 1965, Queen Elizabeth appointed Robert Menzies Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports, an ancient and prestigious ceremonial office whose obsolete jurisdictional function, from the 1100s, centered on provisioning ships for coastal defence, well before the founding of the Royal Navy. Sir Robert succeeded Winston Churchill in the role. Those left of wing and Anglophobic of persuasion always delighted in ridiculing the sinecure and the sailor’s uniform that went with it. Yesterday, Anthony Albanese deplaned on arrival back in Australia wearing Aviators gifted to him by President Biden. Not quite the same cachet but this too was a gesture of gratitude to a subject pretending to defend a seafaring realm. It was a day of historical parallels, trite gratuities and illogical alliances thanks to a Press Club performance by Paul Keating that may outlive in folklore the AUKUS plan the PM had been in San Diego to unveil with his Ray-Ban bestie and Rishi Sunak. More halting in delivery in his 80th year, his patois, analytical skills and insults – the most brutal directed at Albanese and Foreign Minister Penny Wong – were still more compelling than the pansy tiptoeing on eggshells that is now the lingua franca of all political discussion in Australia. “Hopping into Penny” deserves to live on as an idiom for reluctant chastisement of an ally but, sadly, is unlikely to be understood by anyone within a generation. More importantly, he was right.
Right, I mean, about the foolishness of acquiring nuclear submarines from the United States in the 2030s before building our own Holden Specials from the 2040s (with assistance from the British). The chances of this coming to fruition on time and on budget, needless to say, are zero. A hallmark of contemporary propaganda is the elephantine irrationality people ignore out of pride, obtuseness or fear of being ostracised. The supposed consensus determinedly sold over the past 18 months by commentators is that subs we won’t have for decades are vital for next week’s conflict with China. The same tactic was used during the pandemic: brazenness backed up by abuse to ‘nudge’ a nation to see past the ridiculous lie and stay faithful to the cause. By the 2040s, the boats described by Mr Keating as “clunkers” will almost certainly be obsolete. They will cost a lot more than 368 billion dollars and – unless a future government makes a clean, let’s-just-be-friends break – will lock us into a military-industrial complex that will diminish our nationhood and embolden a generation of America-haters whose over-corrections will be ruinous.
He was right about several other things: China has no designs or capacity to invade Australia and/or America; it has no logical interest in blocking delivery of its own supplies; gigantic nuclear submarines are not suited to the continental defence of Australia but to forward projection; we will never go to war against China except as a tag-along to the United States; America will superintend the deployment of Australian submarines and control their maintenance; the insistence that Canberra will be perfectly free to choose sovereignty over loyal Musketeering is risible. The concern that AUKUS was rushed and – given the scale of the proposal – afforded only peremptory draftsmanship happens to be historically correct. Born in fear and scandal following the humiliation of Afghanistan, it had a ‘get back on the horse’ quality to it from the start.
At the end of the failed War on Terrorism, and in the middle of a pandemic in which governments had betrayed democracy and the rule of law, the West’s top priority should have been healing. Not a kumbaya ideas summit overseen by Kevin Rudd or a synod on synodality chaired by the pope but punitive accountability for politicians and officials, the re-building of economies and the complete recapitulation of liberty. What we got instead – from a US President mired in high crimes and two (now ex) prime ministers desperate to seem indispensable – was the harebrained heaping of Pelion upon Ossa: extravagant gallivanting into a European proxy war, more economic disaster for newly irrelevant citizens and an asinine panic about “imminent” war. Covid has ushered in a dark era of permanent imminence whose utility to leaders is forestalling liability and a firing squad. Dismally, conservatives fall for it every time. Sky News anchors and opinionists, for example, spend a goodly part of their time castigating Messrs Albanese and Biden as tendentious, intellectually fourth-rate, witless, demented and immoral. But the Dear Leaders are admirable and infallible when it comes to nuclear submarines and World War III. The China-like universality of anti-Keating reaction is more worrying than anything the former prime minister said.
What Keating got wrong is best discussed by the rational – which excludes all those who were too mawkish, inept or lazy to refute the actual arguments he made yesterday (in between excoriating journalists). Last month’s op-ed brawl between Keating and Greg Sheridan was a useful preview of how and where he goes terribly awry. Keating was right to dismiss Sheridan as a “little American” and Sheridan was right to describe Keating’s China policy as “eccentric.” Both men were right and wrong in equal measure and both are living in the past. The Foreign Editor of The Australian is in denial about the decline of an America that is no longer the arsenal of civilisation it was between Eisenhower and Reagan. If the curtains in Kabul haven’t convinced him to reassess the suzerainty of a post-moral hyperpower, nothing ever will. For his part, Keating’s delusions are older than Ike. He still loathes Britain, wants to avenge Jack Lang and believes that he personally discovered Asia. This largely explains his one-or-the-other view of hemispherical alliances, his pre-tech obsession with proximity as destiny and a tendency to trivialise Chinese espionage. The result is that he often sounds like a hybrid of Doc Evatt and the Duke of Windsor.
Today – both as a corollary of his own casualness and as an easy alternative to substantive rebuttal – his critics seized on Mr Keating’s indifference to the fate of the Uyghurs and other victims of the CCP. His Don Rickles victims at the Press Club didn’t ask about Chinese Catholics – which would have been a more pointed question to ask one of the latter’s co-religionists. Make of that what you will. I make of it that Australian journalists and Beijing aren’t miles apart on that subject. In fact, Australia is not buying submarines to rescue Uyghurs. We’re not even buying submarines because Taiwan is a sister democracy. The AUKUS trio refuses to even recognise it as a nation. Mr Keating’s biggest error was denouncing the subs deal as the worst decision by a Labor government since Billy Hughes’ 1916 conscription plebiscite without seeing the opportunity to emulate the man who sank it. As of yesterday, he and Archbishop Daniel Mannix have much in common: disciples who loved their mockeries; both accused of treachery; both opposed by the establishment and media; both insisted nations at enmity shared a portion of blame. The difference is that Mannix was a man of objective moral judgement. To him, however guilty all the begetters of the Great War, his side – however unworthily – possessed the larger share of righteousness. Defending that share abroad and the truth at home were not mutually exclusive.
A perfect analysis C.L.
Keating’s hero has always been Jack Lang (my parents heard Jack speak back in about 1970). Lang, just like Keating, is a polarising figure. I can still recall the fumes emanating from my grandfather when he learnt my parents had attended a talk where Lang spoke. Just like the old curmudgeon Lang, Keating isn’t measured in his analysis. As for his performance two days ago, he had some worthwhile things to say but because he can’t and won’t stop engaging in nasty personal barbs, those worthwhile points were trivialised.
Meanwhile, the US is flying droves over the Black Sea. I know my geography pretty well and I’m not aware the US borders any part of the Black Sea. Imagine if the Wussians sent a drove over the Caribbean and US jets intercepted it?
There is a good chance Keating will destroy the Albanese government, his ego knows no bounds and although he makes some salient points, he’s fundamentally wrong about Chinese intentions and faithfulness.
SBS has created a 10 best points version of Keating speech, this and the other slavish adulation from the left stream media for Keating is the drug he’s been craving since losing badly to Howard, now he’s had a taste, he’ll be back again and again.
Almost every time Keating speaks, it’s all about him. He has a pathological need to have a point of view that differentiates him and proves him right. This means he will find some kind of twisted logic to meet those parameters and get his hit of attention. He doesn’t care who he hurts, even his own team.
That Australia does not have a navy capable of protecting our sea lanes (like the old RN) is a travesty, possible only because of the US navy. It isn’t so much about invasion, but projection to protect our markets. At present the big one is China, but that really only happened over the last two decades, who will it be after the next two?
While there is much to agree with in this article, Unlike CL, I believe full integration with the USN is actually highly desirable, with compatible doctrine and interchangeable gear, an increase in port facilities for USN etc. We can still have our own uniforms, as long as they are made at least a bit competitive on the style front.
And it is true that these subs won’t be available for a decade. But neither would have those French farce boats. The price seems to have thrown everything in, including the kitchen sink and giving SA something to do paid for by everyone else, to
politically produce a Really Big Number.
Of course, we need a variety of other deterrents like them (because yes they can project, but a HK is for taking out other subs and convoys) to make us prickly as an echidna in the short term, but also in the long term. Multiple swags of missiles for example. A heap of littoral ships for patrolling our shores. We could easily build those on the gold coast or Tasmania. A population that knows how to defend itself would be helpful too. No doubt there are a lot of other options. But they don’t need to exclusive of the SSNs.
All the subs are are the longer spines on the echidna.
What Keating didn’t say but everyone should know.
The Chinese are using small islands and a big navy to project power and control over the busiest shipping trade routes in the world.
We are utterly dependant on these ocean highways for our prosperity. To protect our interests we need to project military power away from our shores in order to counter acts of coercion through blockade by a hostile power.
Keating’s not stupid so he must be complicit.
AUKUS, which was derided as an epic blunder when introduced by Morrison, is suddenly an act of visionary statesmanship now that it’s being inked by Albanese. Generally the mood reminds me of the ‘Country’s going to war’ number in the Marx Brothers’ Duck Soup.
“… and believes he personally discovered Asia”
He does believe this, ardently, which is curious
When we decided in our infinite wisdom to close oil refinery in this country, we became beholden to import of fuel from Singapore, the closure of shipping lanes in that part of the world would stop our economy dead much more quickly than most other nations, simply due to the vast distances goods travel. Importing from the other side of the world involves much larger distances with even greater opportunity for a committed enemy to attack vital supply lines.
Thinking that we would not want to protect those supply lines in a conflict seems a bit short sighted.
And thank you – excellent column
Yes. Keatingesque, and truer – lingua franca in the superlative.
If and when they decide they want our resources, they may not need a conventional military invasion. They already have over a million of them living here.
Buccaneer says:
17 March, 2023 at 7:47 am
When we decided in our infinite wisdom to close oil refinery in this country, we became beholden to import of fuel from Singapore, the closure of shipping lanes in that part of the world would stop our economy dead much more quickly than most other nations, simply due to the vast distances goods travel. Importing from the other side of the world involves much larger distances with even greater opportunity for a committed enemy to attack vital supply lines.
Thinking that we would not want to protect those supply lines in a conflict seems a bit short sighted.
But dahling, we can just fly our supplies of caviar and Moet in. Trixie can bring the pate’ in on her private jet when she next goes shopping in Gay Paree. Dahling. Tarquin can pick it up in the Tesla. It runs on electricity. Dahling.
So, do you want to be onboard a sub in the future in the South China Sea?
Just think of how shallow for sub work that sea is.
Just think about all the smart mines, the acoustic detection devices linked to all those man made nearby bases with quick attack response times.
For Gods sake, think of the underwater drone packs. One drone for a multi billion sub and human crew. The 5G undersea drone packs alone make this idea madness.
Looks like the naval brass love fighting the next war with the last wars gear.
Cracker, carbon offset too, I bet. Just like the good old days of offset alpine..
I am pretty sure Turnbull got off the plane waving a piece of paper promising oil supply guarantees. “Oil in our time!”
Keating’s critics should have kept their powder dry for, oh, 24 hours…
Defence expert warns $368bn AUKUS submarines will be over budget, late, obsolete.
AUKUS under attack for ‘Frankenstein’ submarine plan.
Erin Molan backs them, though, so there’s that.
Opportunity lost.
Killed off by mendicant South Australia.
One can live in hope …
Trumble strikes again. Has anyone made him an adjunct professor in wrongology yet? He’ll probably pop his head up and tell us we should have stuck with the Frenchies.
clown show
Remember that the unctuous worriers for the Uyghurs are perfectly comfortable with Christian school principals and medicos being arrested in Australia.
Noted, Baba at 10.05
I though the Soryu class – with next gen. lithium batteries, iirc-
was a great short term option. We would have several in service already.
I have always been very suspicious that Abbott was very close to doing a deal for the Soryus. to the extent of a boat visiting Sydney – didn’t the Chinese have a
unseemly close look at it?- and then suddenly Abbott is gone, sinophile Turnbull is PM and a crazy $ contract for far, far off Kickback class subs is signed.
Quo Bono indeed.
I might add, there are two things here people are confusing, the Aukus pact and the submarines deal. The latter is only one part of a broader arrangement. The far left hate it all simply because they hate america and england. Dutton would be wise to stoke that conflict because most Australians don’t share that hatred.
Those kickbacks must have been incredibly compelling, one might have thought the perfessor of wrongology would have dropped his obsession with frenchies by now but no it seems to never wane.
There are various other goodies and goals that have been slated for AUKUS but the submarines are obviously the Jupiter-sized centerpiece.
Dutton’s top priorities should be to walk away from the Liberal Party’s net zero treachery and stand up for the Constitution. Alliance posing is easy. Try doing something hard.
Isn’t it obvious that drones are the best way to protect ourselves? Those Iranian ones in the Ukraine are doing a devastating job of destroying the tanks. These eight submarines are quite expensive. Some of that money would have been better spent on building our own oil refineries (again), buying Abrams tanks and novel drone technology. Critics can tell me where the subs will be located, given two will be in for routine servicing. Protecting our coastline, monitoring the South China Sea, the Malacca Strait?
That’s some world class stating of the bleeding obvious.
As for Keato, I couldn’t give a rodent’s backside what he says about anything.
My uneducated guess would be that Drone tech is more reliable and easier to recover if there is a manned presence on the battlefield. If the battlefield is the middle of the pacific, great southern or indian oceans or the tasman or coral seas, then a competent presence means long range subs. This makes it doubly insane that we didn’t pick up a couple of Soryu class subs from japan at least as an interim option.
A diesel sub is not very useful as a Bluewater deterrent compared with an SSN.
Too slow and too noisy getting into harm’s way, and no good at all getting out of it.
They are the best at lying in wait if you know for sure the enemy is coming to you, but don’t expect to escape.
Source: a lot of armchair reading.
The three US built subs should be as far as we go. Effort should then turn to building armed submarine drones, with subs 2 to 3 as their motherships.
So does that make the Collins class subs a little like having a romantic encounter with young britknee in a swimming pool? You’ll be placing your sea men in a floating coffin?
Subs 1 to3 …
Silly phone keyboard.