Chinese experts call AUKUS nuclear submarines the "worst investment."

Reference News Network reported on April 28 According to the British "Daily Mail" website on April 24, the Trump administration has signed the first nuclear submarine contract under the Australia-UK-US alliance (AUKUS), funded by a substantial taxpayer grant from the Albanese government of Australia.

The U.S. Department of Defense confirmed on the 24th that the U.S. will transfer nuclear-powered submarine-related capabilities to Australia. According to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, the contract is valued at AUD 276 million (approximately USD 197 million) and will be paid from the Labor government's total initial payment of AUD 4.2 billion (approximately USD 3 billion).

The AUKUS agreement signed in 2021 involves Australia acquiring Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines from the U.S. before 2032.

However, the alliance relies on the U.S. building enough defense vessels before some of them can be handed over to Australia.

Mark Bison, an international political expert and critic of the AUKUS alliance, stated that this contract reflects Australia's dependence on U.S. productivity.

In an interview with a reporter from the Daily Mail, he said, “We have been paying for submarines that I’m sure I won’t live to see. I don’t know if young people will ever see them delivered. This is because the Americans can’t produce the quantity they want. These submarines won’t have excess capacity.”

According to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, the U.S. Navy has set a goal to nearly double its construction numbers to 2.33 submarines per year to expand its submarine fleet.

However, during a series of congressional hearings this week, data showed that due to construction delays, the actual production rate has dropped to 1.1 submarines per year.

Bison did not hide his concerns about the trilateral agreement between Australia, the U.S., and the UK. He said, “I think this could be the worst investment Australia has ever made, especially in terms of defense materials. This is doubling down on something that was a bad idea from the start.”

“The only way to make the AUKUS alliance look more credible is to continue giving the Americans, and eventually the British, heaps of money to rebuild shipyards and increase the production lines for these submarines.”

“If the submarines ever do arrive, they will undoubtedly be outdated and replaced by cheap and practical anti-submarine drone technology. If we build this base, it will undoubtedly become a primary nuclear strike target because who wouldn’t want to take out a few American nuclear submarines?” he added.

Just hours before this statement was released, opposition spokesperson for industrial affairs and former special forces officer Andrew Hastie stated that Australia has paid a “strategic cost” for doubling down on its alliance with Washington.

Hastie said on the 23rd at the Robert Menzies Institute in Melbourne, “We have forgotten the painful lessons of war and outsourced our security affairs to the U.S. This has cost us the loss of sovereign capabilities, such as a strong defense industry, and the strategic freedom of action that we are only now realizing.”

Hastie stated that the fuel crisis triggered by conflicts in the Middle East and Australia’s deindustrialization are examples of the country’s excessive reliance on U.S. dominance.

He warned that if the security alliance with the U.S. continues for another 75 years (from the signing of the Australia, New Zealand, and United States Security Treaty in 1951 to now), Australia will need to urgently invest in its own industrial base and defense capabilities. (Translated by Lu Di)