Imagine walking into a car dealership, trading in your reliable sedan for a promised sports car, then watching helplessly as the dealership struggles to deliver what they promised. That’s essentially what happened to Australia on a massive scale, except instead of cars, we’re talking about submarines that could determine the nation’s security for decades.
In 2021, Australia made what seemed like a bold strategic move, canceling a €56 billion submarine deal with France to join the AUKUS pact with the United States and United Kingdom. The promise was simple: get better, nuclear-powered submarines that could patrol farther and stay underwater longer. But now, four years later, that gamble is looking increasingly risky.
The reality hitting defense circles in Canberra is stark. Washington is quietly questioning whether it can actually deliver the AUKUS submarines it promised, leaving Australia potentially facing the worst of all worlds: no French submarines, no American submarines, and a dangerous gap in naval defense just as tensions in the Indo-Pacific reach boiling point.
How Australia Burned Bridges with France
The French weren’t just upset when Australia walked away from their submarine deal – they were furious. And honestly, who could blame them? Back in 2016, France’s Naval Group had won what they called the “contract of the century,” a massive agreement to build 12 conventionally powered submarines for Australia.
This wasn’t just about money, though the €56 billion price tag certainly mattered. The deal promised technology transfers, thousands of Australian jobs, and a decades-long partnership that would have cemented France’s role as a major defense partner in the Pacific.
“The French had every right to feel betrayed,” says a former Australian defense official who worked on the original contract. “We didn’t just cancel a deal – we torpedoed a relationship that took years to build.”
When Australia suddenly announced it was joining AUKUS instead, the diplomatic fallout was immediate and severe. France recalled its ambassador, canceled trade meetings, and publicly accused Australia of lying and backstabbing. The relationship between the two countries, once strong allies, turned ice-cold overnight.
The AUKUS Promise That’s Looking Shaky
The AUKUS submarines deal was supposed to be Australia’s ticket to naval superiority in the region. The plan seemed straightforward enough, broken into three phases that would gradually build Australia’s nuclear submarine capability.
Here’s what Australia was promised:
- Phase 1: US and UK submarines would rotate through Australian ports, training local crews and building infrastructure
- Phase 2: America would sell Australia 3-5 Virginia-class nuclear attack submarines starting in the 2030s
- Phase 3: Australia and the UK would jointly design and build a new class of nuclear submarines called SSN-AUKUS
The total cost? A staggering €208 billion over 30 years, making it one of the largest defense investments in Australian history. But money was never supposed to be the main issue – the real question was whether the plan could actually work.
| Deal Comparison | French Submarines | AUKUS Submarines |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | €56 billion | €208 billion |
| Power Source | Diesel-electric | Nuclear |
| Number of Subs | 12 | 8+ (planned) |
| Delivery Timeline | From 2030 | From 2030s |
| Range | Limited | Extended |
Why the American Promise Is Falling Apart
The problem with the AUKUS submarines isn’t just about building new boats – it’s about America’s own submarine shortage. The US Navy is struggling to maintain its current fleet, let alone build extra submarines for allies.
American shipyards are already stretched thin, working overtime to replace aging submarines and meet the Navy’s own requirements. The Virginia-class submarines that Australia wants are the same ones the US desperately needs for its own operations in the Pacific.
“The Americans made promises they’re not sure they can keep,” explains a defense analyst familiar with AUKUS negotiations. “Their industrial base is maxed out, and Congress is asking tough questions about sending submarines overseas when the Navy needs them at home.”
The timeline is getting worse, not better. What was supposed to be submarine deliveries in the early 2030s is now looking more like the late 2030s or even 2040s. For Australia, that’s a decade-plus gap in naval capability that could prove catastrophic if tensions with China escalate.
Meanwhile, the technical challenges of the SSN-AUKUS program – the jointly designed submarines that represent Phase 3 – are proving more complex than anyone anticipated. Building nuclear submarines isn’t like assembling cars; it requires specialized infrastructure, trained workers, and nuclear expertise that takes decades to develop.
What This Means for Australia’s Defense
The potential collapse of the AUKUS submarine program would leave Australia in an incredibly vulnerable position. The country’s current submarine fleet is aging rapidly, with some boats already reaching the end of their operational lives.
Without new submarines, Australia would lose its ability to project power across the vast Pacific Ocean. In a region where China is rapidly expanding its naval presence, this isn’t just about military capability – it’s about Australia’s ability to defend its trade routes and maintain its influence in regional affairs.
“Australia could find itself with the worst of both worlds,” warns a former naval officer. “No submarines from France, no submarines from America, and a glaring hole in our defenses just when we need them most.”
The economic implications are equally serious. Australia has already spent billions preparing for the AUKUS program, building facilities and training workers for nuclear submarine technology. If the deal falls through, much of that investment becomes worthless.
Regional allies are watching closely too. If Australia can’t secure reliable submarine capabilities, it undermines the broader Western strategy of containing Chinese expansion in the Pacific. Countries like Japan and South Korea may start questioning whether they can rely on Western defense partnerships.
Could Australia Go Back to France?
Some defense experts are quietly suggesting that Australia might need to swallow its pride and return to France for submarines. The French deal, while canceled, wasn’t completely dead – Naval Group kept some of the design work and could potentially restart the program.
But the diplomatic damage runs deep. France has moved on, signing new submarine deals with other countries and focusing on different markets. Even if they were willing to restart talks with Australia, the cost would likely be much higher, and the timeline even longer.
“The French aren’t going to make this easy,” says a European defense analyst. “Australia burned that bridge pretty thoroughly, and rebuilding trust will take time and money that Australia might not have.”
There’s also the question of whether conventional submarines would still meet Australia’s strategic needs. The security situation in the Pacific has deteriorated significantly since 2016, and the advantages of nuclear-powered submarines have only become more apparent.
FAQs
Why did Australia cancel the French submarine deal?
Australia wanted nuclear-powered submarines that could travel farther and stay underwater longer, which the French conventional submarines couldn’t provide.
How much would the AUKUS submarines cost Australia?
The total program is estimated at around €208 billion over 30 years, including construction, training, and maintenance.
When was Australia supposed to get its first AUKUS submarine?
Originally planned for the early 2030s, but the timeline is now looking more like the late 2030s or 2040s.
Could Australia still get French submarines instead?
Potentially, but it would require rebuilding the damaged relationship with France and would likely cost more and take longer than the original deal.
What happens if Australia gets no new submarines at all?
Australia would face a critical gap in naval defense capabilities just as regional tensions are increasing, potentially undermining its ability to defend its interests in the Pacific.
Are other countries having similar problems with submarine programs?
Yes, many countries are struggling with submarine construction delays and cost overruns due to the technical complexity and limited global shipbuilding capacity.
