Any fears that a recent US Congress research report into AUKUS alternatives would mean Australia would not get its nuclear submarines – and instead have to borrow them – have been quashed, for now.

Since AUKUS was announced in 2021, it has been clear the future of Australia’s submarine program depended largely on the US following through with its part of the deal – the sale of three to five Virginia class nuclear-powered attack submarines (SSNs) to Australia.

But last week, the US Congress was handed an alternative to the AUKUS plan in a report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS).

The CRS is a non-partisan public policy research service for the US Congress, and works at the direction of congress members, committees and staff.

One alternative

Instead of selling SSNs to Australia, the report suggested the US could retain ownership of the vessels and operate them out of Australia along with the five US and UK SSNs already planned to be operated locally.

The CRS also suggested Australia could invest in other military capabilities instead of SSNs, such as missiles, drones, and bombers, to be able to perform “missions for both Australia and the United States”.

Although the US government has shown no sign of pursuing the alternative, the suggestion to abandon the AUKUS SSN deal has raised the ire of those who saw the report on social media.

If the US simply gave up on the sale of SSNs to Australia, it would “dangerously” destabilise the bilateral security relationship between the countries, Australian National University professor of international security and intelligence studies John Blaxland told The New Daily.

He said the people who put the idea forward in the report likely did not consider how important SSNs were to Australia’s defence future – or how much leverage Australia had on the US in the deal.

“[America] needs Australia now, arguably, as much as Australia needs America,” Blaxland said.

No sign of change

The suggestion from the CRS is unlikely to affect broad bilateral support of the current AUKUS deal in the US Congress.

The Australian Institute’s International & Security Affairs Program director Allan Behm said the CRS was akin to Australia’s Parliamentary Library.

“The critical issue that this particular report looks at is, how is the United States Navy … going to meet its target numbers and at the same time include provision for the … AUKUS submarines?” he said.

“And the answer that the congressional committee report gives is ‘It will be difficult to do that’. They’re not saying … ‘No, we shouldn’t do it’.’’

United States Studies Centre director of foreign policy and defence Peter Dean said Australia would never accept a deal where it would not have sovereign ownership of the SSNs.

“The current AUKUS arrangement as it stands is about Australia developing a sovereign capability to own, operate, sustain, maintain and build its own SSN capability,” said Dean, who co-authored Australia’s 2023 Defence Strategic Review.

“We are not borrowing [or] leasing … these boats.”

He said the outcome of the US presidential election, which will lead to Kamala Harris or Donald Trump emerging as the winner, was also unlikely to bring a cancellation of the AUKUS submarine deal.

The first official sale of an SSN to Australia is scheduled to happen about 2032, meaning it will not be up to the next US president to give final approval of the sale, but the one after.

“Congress … is the biggest supporter of AUKUS and the best shield,” Dean said.

“[The deal is] deeply embedded now in the US bureaucracy.”

What leverage does Australia have on the US?

The US stands to lose too much if it backs out of the AUKUS deal with Australia, Blaxland said.

It needs to maintain access to key pieces of Australian military infrastructure, including the Pine Gap joint US-Australia intelligence facility in the Northern Territory, submarine bases in areas like Fremantle, and air bases like RAAF base Tindal.

“The more powerful US allies are, the more powerful the United States and its allies are,” Dean said.

But Behm said it was still important for Australia to be vocal, considering the assumption by some in American politics that Australia should automatically support US military operations.

An argument against selling SSNs to Australia in the Congressional Research Service report was that Australian officials had indicated the AUKUS deal did not mean Australia would be at the US’ beck and call to go to war.

“I think it’s really very important at all times that Australian governments, and it doesn’t matter what political complexion they’ve got, make their own fundamental strategic objectives very clear,” Behm said.

“To ensure that nobody … makes assumptions that we either will or that we won’t do things in the future.

“You can’t just assume that because Australia has bought … Virginia class submarines that we will operate those submarines automatically with the US fleet.”

Why does Australia need new submarines?

Australia’s current fleet of Collins class submarines run on diesel-electric power.

Blaxland said the vessels’ frequent need to refuel, even when just travelling around Australia, impaired their ability to travel undetected – a crucial function of military submarines.

“With almost saturation of low-Earth orbit satellites, coupled with pattern analysis … artificial intelligence and … armed drones, you can’t hide and you can’t survive except if you stay underwater.

“It’s not an option any more to just go with diesel-electrics. So we either don’t have subs, or we get nuclear ones.”

After scrapping its submarine deal with France in 2021, Australia does not have many supplier options left.

“There is no supermarket full of submarines where you can just go in and purchase some,” Blaxland said.

“[The AUKUS deal falling through] would require us to build an interim conventional class of submarines which we don’t have a design for.

“The other conventional submarines that exist in the world do not meet Australia’s strategic needs.”

Production challenges

The US is struggling to meet its own SSN needs, let alone Australia’s.

Between the 2011 and 2024 financial years, the US government ordered two SSNs annually, but production fell short of demand.

Since additional workforce and supply chain challenges came into play in 2022, only about 1.2 to 1.4 SSNs have been produced per year.

Work is being done to increase the annual SSN production rate to 2 by 2028, and then to 2.33 in order to meet demand and replace vessels sold to Australia.

Adding to supply pressures is the fact 16 SSNs, which account for 33 per cent of America’s SSN force, are in maintenance or awaiting maintenance.

To reduce these numbers, the US Navy has increased naval shipyard staffing and in 2018 began a multibillion-dollar plan to modernise facilities.

Behm also questioned whether Australia has the capability to build its own SSNs, as planned in collaboration with the UK and US.