Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[StevoJH]

Luckily the decision on whether to transfer or not will not be up to Trump, but likely his successor.

As long as the US Congress keep voting to increase submarine numbers, I guess we will just have to wait and see.

Has the US Congress approved the technology sharing from UK to Australia yet? If so, the AUKUS class can go ahead with or without the Virginia’s being transferred.

 

[MARKMILES77]

Luckily the decision on whether to transfer or not will not be up to Trump, but likely his successor.

As long as the US Congress keep voting to increase submarine numbers, I guess we will just have to wait and see.

Has the US Congress approved the technology sharing from UK to Australia yet? If so, the AUKUS class can go ahead with or without the Virginia’s being transferred.

Might be decided by Trump if he is still in Office in 2032!

Please avoid politics.

 

[the road runner]

My view.... Trump has been Trumpeting the cause for Country's to spend more on defense.
Along comes Australia who is willing to spend $350 odd billion on Subs and use American/UK defense company"s to help in the project.
We have spent money on upgrading US ship yards

A politician could look pretty silly by cancelling such a deal....
You Have Australia spending big on a number of US missiles, Tanks. Helicopters and Drones like Ghost Bat and Ghost shark ...the list goes on and on!

AUKUS is not just about subs
Honestly i think the Sub deal is all said and done !
Please avoid politics.

 

[devo99]

Might be decided by Trump if he is still in Office in 2032!

He's an old bloke now. By 2032 he's 86. Let's all hope for better.
But the rest of the world could look equally different by then anyway.
Please avoid politics.

 

[StevoJH]

Might be decided by Trump if he is still in Office in 2032!

Term limits.

I can’t see them being amended to allow him to stay in office for another term.
Please avoid politics.

 

[MARKMILES77]

My view.... Trump has been Trumpeting the cause for Country's to spend more on defense.
Along comes Australia who is willing to spend $350 odd billion on Subs and use American/UK defense company"s to help in the project.
We have spent money on upgrading US ship yards

A politician could look pretty silly by cancelling such a deal....
You Have Australia spending big on a number of US missiles, Tanks. Helicopters and Drones like Ghost Bat and Ghost shark ...the list goes on and on!

AUKUS is not just about subs
Honestly i think the Sub deal is all said and done !

What you are trying to do is use logic to determine what Trump will do.
Sure, it makes no sense for any "normal" U.S. president to cancel AUKUS.
But Trump is not a normal President.
He could turn around and say that any deal signed by Biden is by definition a "BAD" deal.
If things with China heat up, he might say that the U.S. can't afford to give submarines to Australia.
He is so unpredictable that it is impossible to say with any certainty that he will do A or he will do B.

 

[GregorZ]

Stop with the politics it’s so boring and not relevant. Let’s get back on topic.

 

[MARKMILES77]

Term limits.

I can’t see them being amended to allow him to stay in office for another term.

Potentially doesn't need an alteration to term limits, to be President for a third time, due to the vagaries of the U.S. Constitution and the make-up of the Supreme Court.
Please avoid politics.

 

[MARKMILES77]

Stop with the politics it’s so boring and not relevant. Let’s get back on topic.

Directly relevant to whether Australia gets U.S. nuclear subs.
Clearly the single most important determinant is U.S. Politics.
Please avoid politics. I understand the relevance, but this is taking over this thread and we are now ankle deep in Trump personal details. We can talk about decisions that directly link to the RAN but please avoid mentioning any specific politician or their age, colour, hair, etc. We don't need this becoming Reddit/Facebook.

 

[GregorZ]

Directly relevant to whether Australia gets U.S. nuclear subs.
Clearly the single most important determinant is U.S. Politics.

No problems if it abides by the forum rules below:

“Discussion of politics is prohibited apart from that which is directly involved with or impacts defense matters, like procurement and budgetary decisions.”

“Do not post off-topic. The DefenceTalk.com, its moderators, and members of this community reserve the right to delete posts we determine are irrelevant to the discussion in which they're posted”

“Do not start inflammatory threads with purpose of degrading/defaming another country, its leaders or its people”

“DefenceTalk exists to discuss current, historical and potential future defense matters, it is not the appropriate venue to discuss fantasy, sci-fi or conspiracy topics”

“There is both an expectation and requirement that members will put some effort into what they post with research, providing facts and links where appropriate and associated posting behaviors, to maintain the quality and level of discussion on DefenceTalk”


However there’s a number of posts that may be viewed as fantasy, guessing, bold assumptions, general dislike of a politician or just talking crap that doesn’t contribute to the discussion or hold relevance.

 

[Todjaeger]

However there’s a number of posts that may be viewed as fantasy, guessing, bold assumptions, general dislike of a politician or just talking crap that doesn’t contribute to the discussion or hold relevance.

Unfortunately though, the current reality we live in is that what would have been considered the historically 'normal' US behavior regarding defence, as well as US relations with friends and allies, is something which can no longer be relied up with the current US administration. Yes, I used the term administration because whilst the POTUS is indeed a potential problem, he is by no means the only one which could cause issues for or with traditional US allies.

 

[GregorZ]

Unfortunately though, the current reality we live in is that what would have been considered the historically 'normal' US behavior regarding defence, as well as US relations with friends and allies, is something which can no longer be relied up with the current US administration. Yes, I used the term administration because whilst the POTUS is indeed a potential problem, he is by no means the only one which could cause issues for or with traditional US allies.

Has there been any specific mention of the alliance or agreements with Australia that are in the spotlight and will or most likely to be changed? I must have missed all those reports and interviews? Otherwise it could be viewed as fact less and fantasising?

 

[Todjaeger]

Has there been any specific mention of the alliance or agreements with Australia that are in the spotlight and will or most likely to be changed? I must have missed all those reports and interviews? Otherwise it could be viewed as fact less and fantasising?

There have been announcements (by US SecDef IIRC) that the US DOD is seeking to reduce the US defence budget (to roughly half) over the next decade or so. A reduction this significant in size would have a number or ripple effects impacting both the US and allies. Changes in US policy and/or posture can effect Australia, regardless of any alliances or agreements in place, or whether Australia is specifically mentioned or not.

 

[iambuzzard]

There have been announcements (by US SecDef IIRC) that the US DOD is seeking to reduce the US defence budget (to roughly half) over the next decade or so. A reduction this significant in size would have a number or ripple effects impacting both the US and allies. Changes in US policy and/or posture can effect Australia, regardless of any alliances or agreements in place, or whether Australia is specifically mentioned or not.

Geez, a 50% reduction? If that happens we'll need a lot more than 3 Hobarts, 6 Hunters and 11 GPFs. Try doubling or tripling that.

 

[Aardvark144]

There have been announcements (by US SecDef IIRC) that the US DOD is seeking to reduce the US defence budget (to roughly half) over the next decade or so. A reduction this significant in size would have a number or ripple effects impacting both the US and allies. Changes in US policy and/or posture can effect Australia, regardless of any alliances or agreements in place, or whether Australia is specifically mentioned or not.

Whilst the US DoD is proposing 'cuts' of $50B per year in each of the next 5 years, 17 areas have been prioritised one of which is Submarines. So whilst there may be ripple effects perhaps not so much with Submarines. Who knows?

 

[GregorZ]

There have been announcements (by US SecDef IIRC) that the US DOD is seeking to reduce the US defence budget (to roughly half) over the next decade or so. A reduction this significant in size would have a number or ripple effects impacting both the US and allies. Changes in US policy and/or posture can effect Australia, regardless of any alliances or agreements in place, or whether Australia is specifically mentioned or not.

Do you have a link to such announcements? 50% would be unprecedented! The only info I can see is proposals to re-invest 50billion from cut backs in areas to be re-invested into other priorities?

maybe this?

“At some point, when things settle down, I’m going to meet with China and I’m going to meet with Russia, in particular those two, and I’m going to say there’s no reason for us to be spending almost $1 trillion on the military ... and I’m going to say we can spend this on other things,” Trump said.

Doesn’t state when or how much?

 

[Aardvark144]

Do you have a link to such announcements? 50% would be unprecedented! The only info I can see is proposals to re-invest 50billion from cut backs in areas to be re-invested into other priorities?

maybe this?

“At some point, when things settle down, I’m going to meet with China and I’m going to meet with Russia, in particular those two, and I’m going to say there’s no reason for us to be spending almost $1 trillion on the military ... and I’m going to say we can spend this on other things,” Trump said.

Doesn’t state when or how much?

Heaps of articles just Google - US Defence Budgets Cuts

 

[GregorZ]

Heaps of articles just Google - US Defence Budgets Cuts

Here are some facts,

Pentagon Launches Sweeping Defense Spending Review - Defense Security Monitor

The Pentagon is undertaking a sweeping review of military spending that could potentially realign tens of billions of dollars per year to higher-priority programs. The effort, spearheaded by Defense Secretary …

dsm.forecastinternational.com

The Pentagon is undertaking a sweeping review of military spending that could potentially realign tens of billions of dollars per year to higher-priority programs. The effort, spearheaded by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, seeks to find reductions totaling approximately 8% of the Pentagon’s budget annually over the next five years. The intention is not to necessarily reduce the overall size of the defense budget. Instead, the review aims to cut spending on bureaucracy and lower-priority programs to reinvest in capabilities seen by the current administration as critical for future conflicts.

statement from Acting Deputy Defense Secretary Robert Salesses confirmed the initiative would reallocate $50 billion in fiscal year 2026. Technically that figure represents closer to 6% of the $876.8 billion defense budget projected under the Biden administration. The exact target may shift from year-to-year, but the review could aim to reprogram between $250 billion and $350 billion over the next five years



So I read that as not cuts. It’s re-allocation of current budget into higher priorities as seen by current administration.

 

[Todjaeger]

Geez, a 50% reduction? If that happens we'll need a lot more than 3 Hobarts, 6 Hunters and 11 GPFs. Try doubling or tripling that.

It has also been reported as targeting cuts of 8% per year for five years, there have been announcements about several different plans or possible plans. One of the most comprehensive would be from the CBO. This one indicates plans for a 17% reduction in the number of active duty personnel by 2034

Of course it is also distinctly possible that the administration will not be able to carry out such reductions, because the Executive branch is not the one that decides on the budget.

What should be absolutely clear and without question though is that the current administration is making changes and will try and make big ones if possible, which could leave the US unwilling, unable, or possibly both, to respond if an erstwhile US ally needs assistance.

The administration itself has, via DOGE, already demonstrated what I would consider rather amateur hour-type behavior in compromising US nat'l security in three specific instances that I am aware of, and there are likely other instances that we are as yet unaware of. This in turn suggests previous behavioral norms can no longer be relied upon.

There was also 13 Feb. proposal by POTUS for the US to cut defense spending by 50% along with Russia, as reported here and elsewhere...

In the end, things might continue on just as they have been the US and Australia since WWII, OTOH they also might be drastically different, and Australia needs to adjust plans to account for that, just in case.

 

[Stampede]

What you are trying to do is use logic to determine what Trump will do.
Sure, it makes no sense for any "normal" U.S. president to cancel AUKUS.
But Trump is not a normal President.
He could turn around and say that any deal signed by Biden is by definition a "BAD" deal.
If things with China heat up, he might say that the U.S. can't afford to give submarines to Australia.
He is so unpredictable that it is impossible to say with any certainty that he will do A or he will do B.

For myself too many mixed messages re spending on defence in the USA.
On the one hand all chest out and wanting to be strong with a military shift that prioritises the Asia Pacific over Europe.
The other is wanting to dramatically cut government spending with defence not exempt from budget savings.
Domestic budget cuts I believe will “trump” defence expenditure and also suggest US military intervention going forward.
Military isolationism will feature under Trumps watch.
Whatever the words re North Asia , I don’t see boots on the ground.
Watch this space!

I can envisage Trump going ,”well you know we have peace in the Middle East and Europe and really that China country is not to bad.”
“We all like Chinese food and the Taiwanese also eat Chinese food so really they should be one big happy country”.
You know just like they use to be !!!!!!!! ??????
So in a Trumpian way , no war , no need for such large defence expenditure .
So what can we cut back or dispense with.

Virginia Class subs offer many options for and against in this Trumpian Space,
Now that someone has explained what AUKUS is what would a business man do?

This is the space Australia and the RAN sits

A void of predictability.

Cheers S