US turning Australia into military base
“Over more than a decade, the United States has been preparing the capacity for high-tempo warfighting operations with China, springboarding from Australia. From a Chinese perspective, Australia is not so much hosting US bases on its territory, it’s a US base in its own right… Australia is a serious piece of real estate in the US warfighting machine.”
Wed, 09 Sep 2026 , https://www.sott.net/article/508329-US-turning-Australia-into-military-base-Guardian
USA • Australia military eventThe US is turning Australia into a forward base for potential military operations in the Pacific, with American forces and defense contractors controlling or having access to roughly two-thirds of the country’s military facilities,The Guardian reported on Sunday.
Citing data compiled by the Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainability, the newspaper identified 110 facilities across Australia with some form of US military or corporate presence out of 168 surveyed.
The US military directly controls 17 facilities, including the Pine Gap intelligence complex in central Australia, which plays a major role in US surveillance and military operations. The facility tracks missile launches, intercepts communications and provides targeting information for American forces around the world.
Other installations include a naval communications station in Western Australia used to communicate with submerged US submarines and RAAF Base Tindal in the north, which is being expanded to accommodate nuclear-capableB-52 Stratofortress bombers.
The Guardian wrote:
“These aircraft are able to land on Australian soil carrying nuclear weapons. The US government won’t tell Australia if and when they are. The Australian government won’t ask.”
Beyond the facilities it directly controls, the US military has access to dozens of Australian installations, while American defense contractors, including Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, operate at others. According to the Nautilus data, 41 of the 168 facilities surveyed have no significant US presence, while the status of another 17 remains unresolved.
The American footprint is also expanding. In June, AFP reported that the US was preparing to establish a permanent stockpile of battle-ready weapons, ammunition, and equipment for the Marine Corps in Australia, with the facility expected to reach full capacity by 2028.
An honorary professorial fellow at the University of Melbourne, Richard Tanter, the author of the Nautilus database, told The Guardian:
“Over more than a decade, the United States has been preparing the capacity for high-tempo warfighting operations with China, springboarding from Australia. From a Chinese perspective, Australia is not so much hosting US bases on its territory, it’s a US base in its own right… Australia is a serious piece of real estate in the US warfighting machine.”
Canberra maintains that the growing American presence strengthens Australia’s security.Defense Minister Richard Marles said in June that the expanding US footprint was important both for building the country’s military capabilities and for its national security.
Marles also argued that the US presence helped counter what he described as China’s “very significant military buildup” in the region.
Former Australian Defense Minister Christopher Pyne has similarly said the 2021 AUKUS pact between Australia, the US, and UK goes beyond Canberra’s acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines. He described the arrangement as establishing “a new United States submarine base in the Indian Ocean” that would provide Washington with a “massive strategic advantage.”
Tanter criticized Canberra’s approach, calling it:
“A massive institutional failure in Australia, a kind of learned incapacity at a political, parliamentary and bureaucratic level.”
Comment: Tanter is right: Trust and comfort never convey the total picture, nor be they the appropriate guardians of sovereign control.
First nuclear-capable B-52s deploy to Australia
By Bill Gertz – The Washington Times – Thursday, September 10, 2026
A task force of nuclear-capable B-52 bombers has deployed for the first time to Australia in a show of regional force located to the south of China.
The bombers arrived last week at an upgraded Royal Australian Air Force Base Tindal. Local reports called it a new era in Australia’s military alliance with the U.S.
A Pacific Air Forces spokesman confirmed to Inside the Ring that the bomber task force is underway Down Under………….
The exact number of the strategic bombers from the 2nd Bomber Wing at Barksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana, was not disclosed. Most task forces include up to six B-52s.
An Air Force photo of the deployment stated in a caption that the bombers arrived Sept. 1. “Operating from RAAF Base Tindal marks our ability to project, sustain, and regenerate decisive airpower across an expanding extended network,” the caption stated.
The long-range bombers can deliver nuclear bombs or conventional precision-guided weapons.
The Tindal base has been upgraded with new hangars and ramps for the bombers. It is located in northern Australia about 200 miles south of the northernmost coastal city of Darwin and about 2,000 miles from the tense South China Sea.
The base also hosts Australian F-35 stealth jets and MQ-4C Triton surveillance drones.
Currently, U.S. Marines are based in Darwin and a submarine rotational force was set up near Perth, with about 1,000 Navy personnel set to deploy in support of Virginia-class submarine deployment. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2026/sep/10/first-nuclear-capable-b-52s-deploy-australia/
Australia’s continued enmeshment with the US could make it a nuclear target, former Labor minister warns
“This makes Australia a priority nuclear target for any adversary of the United States,”
“An adversary would target Australia before targeting the US directly since to do so would invite immediate retaliation.”
Former Labor minister Melissa Parke has warned that Australia’s close military ties to the United States make it a priority nuclear target that adversaries would likely strike before attacking the US directly.
By Tegan George, Tue 8 Sep 2026 , https://thepoint.com.au/new/260908-australias-continued-enmeshment-with-the-us-could-make-it-a-nuclear-target-former-labor-minister-warns
Former Labor minister Melissa Parke has warned that Australia’s close military ties to the United States make it a priority nuclear target that adversaries would likely strike before attacking the US directly.
Speaking on the Australia Institute’s After America podcast, Ms Parke said Australia’s increasing enmeshment with the US was even more reason for it to join the “groundbreaking” Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW).
“It’s the first treaty to comprehensively and categorically prohibit nuclear weapons and anything to do with them: developing, possessing, testing, using, threatening to use, sharing, deploying, et cetera,” she said.
Ms Parke, now executive director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), said more than half the world’s countries had joined as states parties or signatories, including almost all of Australia’s neighbours in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific.
While Labor has committed in its national platform to joining the treaty since 2018, the Albanese government is yet to sign on the dotted line.
The commitment was moved by Anthony Albanese and seconded by Richard Marles, now Prime Minister and Defence Minister.
Defence Minister Richard Marles recently travelled to the US to meet his counterpart, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, as the countries marked the 75th anniversary of the ANZUS alliance.
Following the meeting, they agreed to “accelerate force posture initiatives” at Australian bases but didn’t say whether that would mean more American troops heading down under.
The growing US military presence includes the rotation of nuclear-powered submarines through HMAS Stirling and nuclear-capable B-52 bombers at RAAF Base Tindal in the Northern Territory, alongside existing joint facilities such as Pine Gap.
“This makes Australia a priority nuclear target for any adversary of the United States,” said Ms Parke.
“An adversary would target Australia before targeting the US directly since to do so would invite immediate retaliation.”
She argued other countries in the region had joined the treaty without damaging their US relationship, pointing to Palau, New Zealand, the Philippines and Thailand.
Ms Parke said she understood the Albanese government was concerned about “upsetting” the US but cited former prime minister Paul Keating’s remark that “we couldn’t get rid of the Americans even if we wanted to”.
“Our own former foreign minister, Gareth Evans, says that reliance on US nuclear deterrence is both dangerous because it makes us a nuclear target and absurd because the US would never sacrifice one of its cities for ours.”
She said the treaty also provided victim assistance and remediation of affected environments.
“There’s a bit of a myth out there that nuclear weapons have only ever been used twice in Hiroshima and Nagasaki,” she told the podcast.
“But in fact, nuclear weapons have been exploded more than 2000 times around the world, mostly on colonised Indigenous and vulnerable communities.”
That includes Australia, where the British conducted 12 major nuclear detonations and hundreds of radiological trials in Western and South Australia between 1952 and 1963.
The tests caused severe radioactive contamination and prompted a royal commission into their lasting health and environmental impacts.
The treaty’s first review conference is due to be held in New York from 30 November to 4 December, but Ms Parke said some affected communities would not attend because they “don’t feel safe” under the Trump administration.
Ms Parke accused the US of doing “enormous damage” to international institutions and appearing willing to violate and discard any rule or norm of international law.
“When we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness,” she said.
“We accept what’s offered. We compete with each other to be the most accommodating. This is not sovereignty. It’s the performance of sovereignty while accepting subordination.”
SUBMISSION: AUKUS PUBLIC INQUIRY – Friends of Port River
Many in our community feel that too much is being asked of our small Peninsula and that local residents will bear the costs with few benefits. I’d encourage you to highlight the current
environmental harms and further risks, with these heightened by the declaration of the
Osborne SDA.
Friends of Port River (FPR), and its predecessor the Estuary Care Foundation (ECF), have been
concerned about the fate of the Port River and Barker Inlet Estuary and advocating for its care
for ten years. Our concerns have included the surrounding area and community, given
- The significant demands on land, the River and services, from industrial development
especially the AUKUS development - The Estuary is home to the Adelaide Dolphin Sanctuary, is the southern end of the Adelaide
International Bird Sanctuary, is crucial as breeding grounds for prawns and fish, contributes
carbon abatement via blue carbon and provides numerous other ecosystem services. - The nature of the SA planning system which deals individually with each new project,
without due regard for the cumulative impact. - The well documented risks of sea level rise, storm surges and flooding commencing with
the 2005 Port Adelaide Seawater Stormwater Flooding Study1 - The low levels of stormwater protection on the Peninsula, including vulnerable areas east
of Victoria Road opposite AdBri, and heavy reliance on pumping stormwater to the Port
River, which could be more challenging as we experience more ‘unprecedented’ weather
events - The lack of open space in many areas of the Peninsula, which limits community amenity
and the potential to divert stormwater - State Government’s urban infill strategy which seems to pay no regard to risks such as
stormwater protection and exposure to AdBri’s emissions, nor to the quality of life for new
and existing residents. The most recent residential developments facilitated by Renewal SA
around the Port River have very limited open space and almost no community facilities for
thousands of new residents.
Current environmental harm
Over the last ten years ECF/FPR have witnessed significant environmental harm, and/or failure
to minimise harm in the Estuary and Peninsula, by the SA Government including
- Poor regulation of the Dry Creek Saltfields and failure to prevent the operator pumping
hypersaline brine into some cracked ponds, leading to the loss of over 24 hectares of vegetation (mangroves and saltmarsh) and with the catastrophic impact continuing - unchecked.
- Failure to maintain the seawall at Mutton Cove, (now situated within the AUKUS footprint),
which led to the seawall failing in May 2016 and the banks progressively eroding. Mutton
Cove abuts the northern end of the ASC, Mersey Road, and the southern end of the
extended AUKUS development. Despite ANI, Flinders Ports, the City of Port Adelaide
Enfield, and the Department of Environment, contributing $20K each towards an analysis of
coastal risks and identification of adaptation options, the 2021 report of that study has not
been provided to the funding partners and the State Government has continued to allow
the seawall and banks to fail. - Failure to remove from the Peninsula, on both sides of the Port River, extensive areas of
Penrice waste, which the State Government allowed Penrice to dump on Government land
prior to the company’s liquidation in 2014. - Failure to develop strategies to protect the community from harm from sea level rise, storm
surges and flooding, despite numerous studies and apparently ongoing work, by the City of
Port Adelaide Enfield and the Coast Protection Board. - Loss of TEC saltmarsh and risks to wetlands at Gillman from a recent State Government
development at Gillman. Compounding the risks Renewal SA has faulty tidal gates, that
cannot be shut to limit high tide impacts from the Estuary to the wetlands, or impede
stormwater discharges. - Trucks will take spoil 24×7 from the Torrens to Darlington road works to Gillman from Q3,
2026 to 2031 and while this is currently impacting local roads there’s been no known notice
to local residents. - Contact with Commonwealth and State agencies
- About eight years ago ANI reached out to Port Adelaide Residents Environment Protection
- Group (PAREPG) and FPR, as part of their efforts to secure their social licence in the
- community, and we met regularly with them around their infrastructure plans, the future of
- Mutton Cove etc.
- From December 2023, we met with ASA representatives and from May 2024 those meetings
- became monthly with ANI and ASA reps.
- In February 2025, representatives of the Office of AUKUS, Department of Premier and Cabinet
- joined the meetings, and we were advised of State Government planned to develop a Lefevre
- Masterplan, with consultants engaged to develop the Plan. So that the community could be
- consulted we arranged for the consultants to address a Port Adelaide Environment Forum
- meeting and feedback was submitted from the Forum to the DP&C. We understood that the
- draft Lefevre Masterplan would be presented at another Forum meeting this year, but that has
- now been superseded by the Osborne State Development Area process (see below).
Some of the key themes that were raised at the Forum consultation included:
- Locals’ aspirations for the Peninsula including holistic approach, greening, restoration of
and access to the River, fostering social connections - Opposition to AUKUS and/or reservations about its impact on our community
- Negative impacts already on environment and community including Harmful Algal Bloom,
poor canopy cover, AdBri and traffic emissions, - How the local community might benefit since for example only a small proportion of
residents (17.2%) both live and work2
locally - Lack of infrastructure including water, stormwater, electricity
- Major problems currently with transport and lack of infrastructure to deal with the
proposed workforce growth and other demands - Suggestions for social infrastructure and housing developments
- Suggestions for environmental improvements including protection of Biodiversity Park and
implementation of the ECF Vision for the Estuary.
Assessment of the AUKUS development
The Friends of Port River was able to directly compare the application of Commonwealth and
State development assessment processes when ANI submitted an EIS to the State
Government for the AUKUS development and ASA provided a Strategic Impact Assessment
Report (SIAR) to the Commonwealth Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment
and Water (DCCEEW). (Radiation matters were separate to this process).
As outlined in this blog FPR made written submissions to both. The experience confirmed
FPR’s perception of the many weaknesses in State development assessment processes,
including the failure to include mitigation or best practice measures, proposed by
environmental consultants, to address identified potential risks and the lack of public
reporting e.g. as to whether environmental monitoring has occurred, whether any required
safeguards are applied.
Commonwealth approvals confirm that the community will lose public access to Mutton
Cove, which after losing Falie Reserve, means “a reduction of approximately 50 percent of
accessible public open space within the northern end of the Lefevre Peninsula”. Three and a
half (3.5) hectares of seagrass will be removed.
FPR acknowledges that the Commonwealth approval processes (unlike the State) set
Environmental Outcomes that are to be met throughout the life of the Sub Yard.
There is also much greater visibility and accountability through Commonwealth requirements.
ASA must, within 3 months, develop an Assurance Plan (including as to how the Outcomes will
be met). Biennial reports to DCEEW and independent audits are to be conducted, and
submitted, to DCEEW every six years. Importantly the Assurance Plan, biennial reports and
independent audits are to be made publicly available.
State use of special legislation
Community concern about the State Government’s lack of regard for the natural world, and
our environmental assets, has been heightened by its recent actions in the Adelaide Parklands
and by the declaration of the State’s first State Development Area (SDA) across the Peninsula
and Gillman. In both instances, special legislation has been passed to expedite development.
In the Adelaide Parklands this has meant hundreds of trees being removed, for LIV golf, with
more at risk for a motorcycle grand prix circuit, the State Government ignoring its own
‘significant tree’ safeguards and not referring its proposed actions to the Commonwealth re
EPBC provisions. Adelaide City Council and community concerns have been ignored, despite
more than 50,00 signatures on a public petition.
The Osborne SDA is the first SDA in SA under the State Development Coordination and
Facilitation Act 2025 (SDCF Act). While the Coordinator General explained at a recent
workshop for City of Port Adelaide Enfield Councillors, that his office wouldn’t necessarily step
into the decision making-role of other agencies, the threat is clearly there that he could do so if
presumably time frames for decisions, or the decisions themselves, do not meet political
imperatives. This could be disastrous for the Estuary in relation to the roles of the EPA, the
Coast Protection Board and the Department of Environment (as landowner and guardian of the
Adelaide Dolphin Sanctuary).
While community consultation is ‘open’ about the proposed boundaries for the Osborne SDA,
the Coordinator-General (CG) advised that the SDA would look at all the State’s existing land
holdings and seek their most productive use.
Since the proposed boundaries include Mutton Cove, Biodiversity Park, the local golf club, the
Royal SA Yacht Squadron, the Port Adelaide Rowing Club, the Girl Guides etc the CG’s
statements are naturally alarming community members about the fate of Biodiversity Park and
Mutton Cove and troubling organisations that lease State land.
Given the State’s focus is on “Shaping the future of one of South Australia’s premier industrial
regions” and there are no stated Objectives for the SDA, the community want to know what
regard will be given to public safety (e.g. access to and from the Peninsula) and quality of life
and health and well-being of residents (e.g. traffic pollution, loss of further open space) and
the prevention of further degradation of the natural environment.
Many in our community feel that too much is being asked of our small Peninsula and that local
residents will bear the costs with few benefits. I’d encourage you to highlight the current
environmental harms and further risks, with these heightened by the declaration of the
Osborne SDA.
Catherine McMahon
Convenor
Friends of Port River
Submission to AUKUS Public Inquiry – Eileen Whitehead
When we look in detail at the Pillar II advanced capabilities involved with AUKUS, however, it becomes clear that these will have profound consequences not only for the Australian military, but for the whole of the Australian people in their everyday lives.
698 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Zp9kXdUp0AV2B8U5sIhNKFROKGRnr_dG/view
Originally we were searching for submarines whose primary role was to protect Australia’s
coastline, which had been the Collins’ role. A tender process between German, Japanese and
French contenders resulted in the French Attack class (renamed from Barracuda class) submarine
being chosen. The original design of this class was for it to be nuclear powered, but the design
allowed for it to be conventionally powered by diesel-electric – but convertible to nuclear power
should future owners so desire. At A$50 billion, this was Australia’s biggest ever defence
contract
When we look in detail at the Pillar II advanced capabilities involved with AUKUS, however, it
becomes clear that these will have profound consequences not only for the Australian military,
but for the whole of the Australian people in their everyday lives.
These consequences include the privatisation (by stealth) of the Australian Defence Forces, the
growth of a significant local military industrial complex in Australia, to add to the domination of
the Australian economy by US and European arms manufacturers, giving away Australian
research, data and capital to the US and UK military forces, a further integration of the
Australian military into United States military operations around the globe, and the diversion of
Australian know-how, research and creativity to assist the continued growth of the US military –
industrial complex, rather than in the service of useful and sustainable industries in Australia.
Detail of plans for the development of AUKUS Pillar II is sketchy and hidden from public gaze.
Expansion of the military-industrial complex into Australia
The “military industrial complex” was identified as a real threat to democratic control of
government decisions by US President Eisenhower in 1961 – “This conjunction of an immense
military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. . . .Yet we
must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. . . . In the councils of government, we must
guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the
military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and
will persist.” This threat is even more serious in the US today.
1
In Australia, researchers such as Michelle Fahy have identified the same process growing here – with a “revolving door” of people swapping between weapons corporations, Defence Department positions and political positions. AUKUS development will make this threat of undue influence far worse in Australia.
. AUKUS emphasis is on “dual use technology development” – in other words companies that develop commercially useful applications that also are useful in defence industry. For example,
Australian national security information will be stored in Amazon’s “High Security” cloud.3
In spite of huge private capital needed, significant government investment is also projected to
develop PII industries. For example the $3.6 billion earmarked for the new Advanced Strategic
Capabilities Accelerator.
4 Australian capital and research will be given to US military
4 Australian capital and research will be given to US military
The Pillar II focus on sharing technologies between partners means in practice a mostly one-way
sharing towards the US – that Australian research and IP and Australian government capital will
be provided to build up the US defence industry. AI training of algorithms requires vast amounts
of data sourced from the high tech corporations such as Google and Amazon. Data from
Australians will be swept up in these data collections without any consent – effectively ceding
sovereignty to US tech and military firms.
5 Australian defence industry will continue to be dominated by US defence corporations,
Comments by Richard Marles show that “Our ultimate goal is to supplement and strengthen U.S.
industry and supply chains, not compete with them.”
6. Australian Defence Force will become a US defence contractor
“Interchangeability” means that weapons can be used interchangeably – in practice that means
Australian weapons will be an adjunct to the US weapons arsenal, except that their enormous
price tag will be paid for by Australian taxpayers!
7. Australian people and data they generate will be used to train AI algorithms to help US
become dominant in AI – instead of building AI as a useful tool at the service of all countries.
8. Australian industry is in effect integrated into the US military industrial complex –
serving needs of US government and US military rather than Australia.
AUKUS involves:
● Increased porting, involving servicing and maintenance, of US and UK nuclear
submarines at HMAS Stirling.
● Australia’s purchase of 3-5 second hand Virginia class nuclear subs from the US in the
2030s.
● Building of up to 5 AUKUS nuclear submarines of UK design but eventual construction
at Osborne Shipyard, deliverable from the 2040s.
● The above at a projected cost of A$ 368 billion, (which is already at least double that).
● AUKUS pillar II involving advanced technologies in electronic and maritime warfare.
● AUKUS pillar II involving advanced technologies in electronic and maritime warfare.
SUBMISSION to AUKUS Public Inquiry – Slava Volin
Were the public told the truth? Is Australia getting what was promised? Should any
government commit this country to a nominal cost approaching AU$900 billion,
including a multi-generational nuclear waste liability that it refuses to disclose, without a
single independent public audit?
30 June 2026
RE: AUKUS: Moving Beyond Procurement Accountability to the Structural Case for
Contractual Renegotiation or Cancellation
THE DECISION WINDOW: BEYOND THE PROCUREMENT TRAP
Mainstream public analysis regarding AUKUS has focused systematically on delivery
timelines, transparency lapses, and the recent transition to an exclusively second-hand
Virginia-class fleet [1.1].
Other than a hot war, AUKUS is the single most important strategic, fiscal, and
welfare issue in the history of the Commonwealth of Australia.
The underlying metrics and statutory frameworks reveal a deeper structural failure.
AUKUS is not a delayed procurement; it is a fundamentally flawed, legally asymmetrical
pact that subordinates Australian fiscal and operational sovereignty to the statutory
vetoes of United States domestic law [1.1, 1.4]. The fundamental architecture of the
deal compromises Australia’s national independence, cannibalises existing naval
capability, invites strategic aggression, and permanently erodes the tax base and
essential public services of our citizens, completely independent of the final delivery
schedule [1.4].
This submission provides this independent Public Inquiry with the specific financial and
statutory metrics required to expand the terms of national debate. It demonstrates that
the current framework leaves the Commonwealth exposed to absolute foreign vetoes,
multi-generational uncosted liabilities, and a permanent reduction in independent
strategic decision-making [1.4].
THE FRAMING THAT MUST CHANGE: ELEVATING THE CRITIQUE
Focusing civic and parliamentary scrutiny strictly on delivery schedules and cost
updates risks engaging in a narrow project management debate that the Executive can
easily neutralise with revised timelines or minor disclosures. To establish an
unassailable framework for the final Inquiry report, the critique must shift from
procurement tracking to structural capture, targeting how the legal and financial terms of
the pact compromise Australian independence regardless of the physical delivery date.
THE MULTI-FACETED CASE: STRUCTURAL ENTRAPMENT
- FISCAL REALITY: Uncosted liabilities push the true nominal cost past AU$917
billion…………………………………………………………………………………………………… - WELFARE IMPLICATIONS: Structural Opportunity Costs and Public Service
Erosion………………………………………………………………………………………… - 3. LEGAL ASYMMETRY: Structural Vetoes Under United States Law……………………………………………………………………………………….
- STRATEGIC DISPLACEMENT: The Wrong Weapon for the Wrong War………………………………………
- OPERATIONAL HOLLOWING: The Maritime Workforce Crisis……………………………………………….
- SOVEREIGN EXPOSURE: Industrial and Engineering Dependence…………………………………………
- INDUSTRIAL FRAGILITY: The Vulnerable British Supply Pipeline……………………………………………..
ACTIONABLE STRATEGY FOR THE INQUIRY FINAL REPORT
Based on the statutory asymmetries, fiscal overruns, and industrial constraints compiled
in this evidence baseline, the Inquiry is urged to adopt the following three-tiered
framework as primary recommendations in its final report on 30 October 2026 [P3]:
Recommendation 1: Order an Immediate Forensic Audit and Formal Suspension……….
Recommendation 2: Execute the 12-Month Notice Provision to Cancel the
Submarine Component………………………………………………………………………
Recommendation 3: Brief the Executive on Preliminary Findings to Facilitate a
Managed Strategic Off-Ramp
The Inquiry Commissioners should formally engage the Prime Minister and the Minister
for Defence with a confidential briefing of these evidence-backed preliminary findings
prior to the publication of the final report on 30 October 2026 [P1, P3]. This private
briefing should be executed as a collaborative intervention to assist the government in
managing a rational strategic pivot, utilizing a distinct three-part psychological and
political framing:………………………………………………………………………………….
CROSS-EXAMINATION TRIGGERS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARINGS…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
THE 2028 QUESTION
Were the public told the truth? Is Australia getting what was promised? Should any
government commit this country to a nominal cost approaching AU$900 billion,
including a multi-generational nuclear waste liability that it refuses to disclose, without a
single independent public audit?
This Independent Public Inquiry possesses the unique civic mandate and strategic
separation from major-party factional consensus to ask these questions plainly,
providing an unassailable, evidence-backed reference framework for the future of the
nation.
THE AUKUS MASTER CITATION INDEX (74 VERIFIED SOURCES)…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BLukBDqSKjRkp3YNaneLAM8rSG9B3Nus/view
AUKUS makes Australia a nuclear target, top experts warn
Rob Harris, September 3, 2026 —https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/aukus-makes-australia-a-nuclear-target-top-experts-warn-20260902-p60tnk.html
Australia is significantly more likely to be dragged into a destructive conflict with China — and potentially targeted with nuclear weapons — under the AUKUS security pact, two former senior national security figures have warned.
Michael Keating, a former Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet secretary, and former public servant Jon Stanford argue that the federal government’s current defence posture has “sacrificed considerable sovereignty” to the United States while leaving the country uniquely vulnerable without a guaranteed security safety net.
The pair will front a crowd-funded public inquiry into the AUKUS submarine pact on Thursday, urging the federal government to immediately redesign its national strategy, cancel plans to acquire American Virginia-class and British-designed SSN AUKUS nuclear-powered attack submarines, and pivot to low-enriched uranium vessels sourced from France or South Korea.
Keating, the most senior public servant during the Hawke-Keating era, spent 11 years on the Secretaries Committee on National Security – including five years as chairman – while Stanford has extensive background in submarine research and defence policy.
“Under AUKUS, Australia’s security is under greater threat while it has become increasingly clear that we cannot rely on the US for our defence,” they write in their submission. “We are now in a situation where, because of the AUKUS strategy of integrated deterrence in defence of US regional primacy, Australia is more likely to be attacked, potentially with nuclear weapons”.
They cite prescient warnings from former French foreign minister Jean-Yves Le Drian, who noted in 2021 that Australia had made a choice “to the detriment of sovereignty” and predicted it would discover later it had sacrificed both security and self-determination.
According to the submission, the policy of “integrated deterrence” and “pooled sovereignty” effectively converts Australian military facilities into forward operating locations for US forces without giving Canberra oversight or veto power.
They point out that unlike allies such as Japan, South Korea, and the Philippines, Australia lacks a formal US security guarantee, such as NATO’s Article V.
Yet, by developing command and basing infrastructure – such as the US submarine squadron facilities at HMAS Stirling in Western Australia – Australia becomes a prime military target.
“If there is a war between the US and China, Australia will inevitably be involved … even if we do not provide military support,” the submission states, adding that escalating hostilities could leave Australia open to nuclear strikes.
Fronting the first day of the hearings in Canberra on Wednesday, former home affairs secretary Mike Pezzullo called for a deeper military integration with the US, agreeing that Australia could surrender sovereignty under the current AUKUS without gaining a meaningful say in decisions that could draw it into a war with China.
Pezzullo, a national security hawk and former senior public servant under the Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison governments, was sacked by Labor in 2023 after confidential messages between him and Liberal Party powerbroker Scott Briggs were leaked to this masthead. The Australian Public Service Commission subsequently found he had breached the public service code of conduct on 14 occasions.
“If I was a Chinese war planner,” Pezzullo said, “I would flatten every single potential facility that might be used overnight by Americans flying in.”
He said facilities including Tindal, Stirling, North West Cape and Pine Gap could be targeted in such a conflict.
But Pezzullo said AUKUS’s nuclear-powered submarine program would transform Australia’s military options, giving the navy greater speed, endurance and reach while opening the way for a new generation of autonomous underwater systems.
Undersea warfare would be critical in any future conflict, from anti-submarine operations to intelligence gathering, he said.
At the same time, Pezzullo said Australia should not commit to fighting alongside the US in every future conflict.
“Alliances are political documents first and foremost,” he said, arguing that countries must retain the ability to make sovereign decisions when a conflict actually occurs.
But he said those political alliances needed military planning and preparation underneath them.
Australia, he said, could either try to remain outside a future US-China conflict and accept the consequences if Washington lost, or strengthen its alliance with the US in the hope that the combined deterrent would prevent war.
“The only choice would be whether we want to sit it out and hope for the best,” Pezzullo said. “I think that’s not plausible.”
The choice was whether to remain on the sidelines and accept the consequences if Washington lost, or deepen the alliance in the hope that Australian involvement would strengthen deterrence.
“I prefer that latter approach,” Pezzullo said. “The war machine is the thing that prevents the war.”
Inquiry into AUKUS – final public hearing today
3 September 2026 AIMN Editorial, https://theaimn.net/inquiry-into-aukus-final-public-hearing-today/
Australia’s independent, crowdfunded Public Inquiry into AUKUS concludes its public hearings today in Canberra, with presentations from Andrew Wilkie, the Hon Kim Beazley AC, Dr Michael Keating, Jon Stanford and Dr Emma Shortis amongst many others.
A huge number of Australians – including a Prime Minister, Foreign Affairs and Defence Ministers, senior academics and military experts, community groups and citizens – have presented to the Inquiry across 10 day-long hearings in 8 cities around Australia over the last 12 weeks.
Up to 1,500 people a day have watched the live-streams of proceedings.
Over 800 written submissions have been received.
$200,000 has been raised by crowdfunding, from other individual donors and from civil society organisations, in order to hold the inquiry.
AUKUS Public Inquiry Lead Commissioner Peter Garrett said today that the public hearings have been an extraordinary exercise in real world democracy.
“Everyone associated with the Inquiry has found this process of community outreach and participatory democracy genuinely inspiring.
“It has been many years since Australia has seen something like this.
“The inquiry has asked many questions that the public desperately need answers to, particularly the most pressing one: will AUKUS actually keep us safe and at what cost?”
The Commissioners will draft a comprehensive report which will be presented at the National Press Club in early November.
Livestream of today’s proceeding here
Hospitals to stock anti-nuclear pills near AUKUS base
Carla Hildebrandt, August 26, 2026 —https://www.watoday.com.au/national/western-australia/the-plan-to-stock-anti-nuclear-pills-at-hospitals-in-perth-s-southern-aukus-suburbs-20260825-p60re6.html
Hospitals in Perth’s southern suburbs could distribute iodine tablets to the community in the “extremely low” chance of a radiation spill, as WA prepares for the arrival of nuclear-powered submarines under the AUKUS partnership.
It comes as the first US and UK submarine rotations are due to begin next year through Garden Island’s naval base, HMAS Stirling, under Submarine Rotational Force-West (SRF-West).
The plans emerged earlier this year after Legalise Cannabis WA MP Dr Brian Walker questioned the health minister in parliament about the government’s emergency preparedness ahead of the incoming visits.
During question time, Walker asked whether the state government would supply the anti-nuclear pills to locals, “as a treatment against radiation poisoning in the event of a nuclear leak or spill”.
An emergency guide released by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, which leads the national response to a nuclear emergency, describes taking potassium iodide – or KI pills – as a “short-term” measure that blocks radioactive iodine from being absorbed by the thyroid.
The health minister wrote a response to parliament stating the WA Department of Health “has established plans and exercised processes to pre-position and distribute supplies of stable iodine to local hospitals, as required, based on needs and relevant circumstances”, but did not reveal which hospitals would hold the tablets or how many would be available.
Walker said the state government lacked “a clear emergency plan” for communities like Rockingham, Cockburn and Kwinana.
He pointed to France, where iodine tablets have been distributed to communities near nuclear facilities, but warned the pills were only one part of preparing for a potential emergency,
Why are we militarising Space?
Falling in behind the US, Australia signed the Trump Administration’s 2020 Artemis Accords which were designed to nullify the Moon Treaty and give the green light to US-led colonisation of the Moon for the purpose of commercial mining of its surface.
The US aims to dominate space militarily, and Australia is its willing accomplice.
20 August 2026 AIMN Editorial, https://theaimn.net/why-are-we-militarising-space/
By Michael Williss
The Australian Defence Force (ADF) released its 2026 Defence Strategy earlier this year, and an accompanying fact sheet said that “The ADF must be integrated across all five domains – maritime, land, air, space and cyber – as well as with international partners.”[1]
The reference to the “five domains” is important. Prior to 2020, there was only reference to the traditional warfare domains of the land, seas and air. As of January 2022, however, a new command force operating across the three traditional domains was created, now known as Space Command.[2]
The official embrace of Space as a war-fighting domain runs counter to the spirit, if not the letter, of two international Treaties signed by Australia: the UN Outer Space Treaty (OST) and the Moon Treaty.
The OST was a response by the world community to US and Soviet nuclear weapons tests in Space from 1958 to 1962. The largest US test occurred 400kms above and 1450kms south-west of Hawaii. It was 90 times the size of the blast at Hiroshima. It caused significant electrical damage in Hawaii, but also resulted, in the months that followed, in killing eight of the 24 satellites that were then in orbit around the Earth including the UK’s Telstar.[3]
This led to the ratification by UN member states of the OST in 1967. Amongst the provisions of the Treaty were:
outer space shall be free for exploration and use by all States;- outer space is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means;
- States shall not place nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit or on celestial bodies or station them in outer space in any other manner.
However, there is a very large loophole between a nuclear weapon and a WMD through which any manner of weapons based on new technologies could be fired.
The 1979 Moon Treaty reiterated the points above and strengthened several of them. Australia signed it in 1986, but to date on 17 countries have done so. Opposition to it has been led by the US which refused to accept its restriction on “any military use of celestial bodies.”[4]
Falling in behind the US, Australia signed the Trump Administration’s 2020 Artemis Accords which were designed to nullify the Moon Treaty and give the green light to US-led colonisation of the Moon for the purpose of commercial mining of its surface.
Anywhere that the US dollar treads, the men with guns are there to protect it. As on Earth, so in Space. In 1985, under Ronald Reagan, the US created its Space Command. It lapsed after a while but was recreated under Trump in 2019 with a reemphasized focus on space as a warfighting domain. It established its own fighting force for Space, known as Guardians.
Col. Kyle Pumroy (Ret.) writing in the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies’ paper “Military Human Spaceflight: A Key Component to US Space Superiority,” said “now is the time to begin placing Guardians in space to develop the skills, tools, and concepts to build a future capacity to defend core US interests…”[5]
The US aims to dominate space militarily, and Australia is its willing accomplice.
The latest comments came on August 12 2026 at the US Army Space and Missile Defense Symposium in Alabama.[6]
US Space Command (SPACECOM) head Gen. Stephen Whiting, told attendees that SPACECOM’s top two priorities for fiscal 2029 through to 2033 are “integrated space fires” and capabilities to counter large constellations of satellites in low Earth orbit (LEO) in order to establish space superiority.
“We’re a combatant command and we fight to win wars. To win, we need credible, acknowledged, kinetic and non-kinetic fires. They are a key component of how we establish space superiority and restore credible deterrence,” he said.
Kinetic refers to the movement of a physical body such as a missile for the purpose of the destruction of an adversary’s material assets; non-kinetic refers to such movement as use of radio waves for jamming an adversary’s communications systems.
Whiting’s deputy, Lt. Gen. Rick Zellmann, on Tuesday told the symposium that the US military now has “policy” approval for three basic types of space fires: ground-to-space fires that “we’ve been doing for years” with “communications jamming systems;” space-to-space attacks known as “orbital warfare;” and, given that the Trump administration plans to build space-based interceptors for the US Golden Dome missile shield, space-to-ground.
Responsibility for ground to space fires is shared with the Army, the Air Force and Marines, but orbital warfare and space to ground fires are the preserve of SPACECOM.
Australian company EOS claimed that Australia is one of just two countries with the capabilities to neutralise large numbers of satellites passing over its territory.[7] EOS spokesperson Dr Ben Greene said Australian Space Domain Awareness (SDA) covered around one sixth of the sky, delivered by, among others, EOS with its laser tracking facility in Canberra, the RAAF’s space telescope in WA and the new US-owned LeoLabs Australia space radar, also in WA. “We could intercept and interdict the satellite operations of any country on earth, if we chose to. That’s a really powerful platform for us,” he said. “It’s quite feasible now to talk about taking out hundreds of satellites a day if that was necessary.”
An ASPI (aka Australian Serving Predatory Imperialism) spokesperson supported EOS’s vision for the military use of Space, saying: “We need a much more ambitious approach to how we think about defence and space. It can’t just be for communications provision. It’s got to be about space control. It’s got to be how we respond to a contested space domain when China is rapidly developing counter-space capabilities and fully intends to use them in the next war. Space will quickly become a warfighting environment, not because of our own actions but because of decisions in Beijing.”
No doubt Russia and China are developing military space technologies similar to those of the US. But we are not their appendages in the same way as we are in relation to the US.
We must do what we can to stop the militarisation of Space, including support for or participation in US space war plans.
Australia must call for the strengthening of the OST to include all weapons in Space, and for the banning of Earth to Space, Space to Space, and Space to Earth military activity.
Australia must join those nations that have pledged to a no first use (NFU) policy on placing weapons in Space and call on the US, Russia and China to do the same.
Australia must ensure any developments in Space are done for purposes other than “colonization” by any state or nation on earth. The exploration and use of Space for peaceful cooperation among nations should be our goal.
That is the only way we can contribute to humanity and not be a burden on it.
[1] 2026 National Defence Strategy Factsheet
[2] Space Command (Australia) – Wikipedia
[3] The Space Review: Remembering Starfish Prime
[5] Guardians_in_Space_Policy_Paper_65-Final.pdf
[6] Joint force needs kinetic and non-kinetic weapons for space war: Whiting – Breaking Defense
The Quiet Surrender of our Nation’s Sovereignty
28 July 2026 Dr Andrew Klein, https://theaimn.net/the-quiet-surrender-of-our-nations-sovereignty/
It is our melancholy duty to inform Australians of the quiet surrender of our nation’s sovereignty
I. Introduction: The Mask and the Man
What they see is a Prime Minister. What I see is a party animal – trapped in a role he was never prepared to play. He knows how to win power. He doesn’t know how to wield it. And when he fails, he blames everyone but himself.
The Albanese government has presided over a quiet but systematic surrender of Australian sovereignty. Through AUKUS, through the integration of Australian forces into American military structures, through secret arms deals, and through a failure to interrogate the strategic consequences of our alliance commitments, Australia is being transformed from an independent nation into a junior partner – a vassal state without voting rights.
This is not a deepening of alliance. This is a strategic surrender.
II. AUKUS: The $368 Billion Abdication
The AUKUS nuclear submarine deal is the clearest example of this failure. Australia will commit $368 billion to acquire nuclear-powered submarines – equivalent to more than $30 million per day across three decades.
But the deal is plagued by problems:
- Deliverability: The United States shipyards cannot meet production targets, averaging only 1.1 to 1.2 Virginia-class submarines per year, far below the required 2.33.
- Cost blowouts: Australia will commit nearly $10 billion to subsidise US and UK naval shipyards.
- Strategic uncertainty: Former foreign minister Gareth Evans has warned that AUKUS will place Australia’s sovereignty at “serious risk,” with submarines effectively becoming “an extension of U.S. military power.”
- A “junior partner” trap: Former Defence Department analyst Dr Andrew Gaczol told a public inquiry that Australia will become a “junior” partner to the United States and lose its strategic independence. According to Dr Gaczol, “The Australian political class and defence policy community still think it’s our melancholy duty to support the military commitments of our great and powerful friends, even if they conflict with Australian interests.”
III. The US-Israel Military Merger: Australia’s Involuntary Integration
In July 2026, the US House of Representatives passed a $1.15 trillion National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) by a vote of 216 to 212.
Section 219 of the Act establishes a “United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative,” requiring the Pentagon to appoint an executive agent to “expand and accelerate bilateral defense technology research.” The provision “would all but fuse the two countries’ armed forces together” across multiple domains, including biotechnology, autonomous systems, artificial intelligence, and cyberwarfare.
Representative Jennifer McClellan condemned the provision as one that “undermines our sovereignty and lacks any form of oversight.”
Why does this matter to Australia?
The Australian Defence Force has long achieved interoperability with the US military. Israel has achieved interoperability with the US since 1981. If the US and Israel move from interoperability to integration, the two degrees of separation between the ADF and the IDF are reduced to one.
Australia is being integrated into Israel’s military system through the American link. We are being drawn into a conflict not of our choosing, through a chain of obligations we never consciously accepted.
IV. Australia’s De Facto Participation in the Iran War
The evidence of Australia’s entanglement is already clear.
A. Intelligence Sharing
In March 2026, Australia deployed an E-7A Wedgetail surveillance aircraft and 85 ADF personnel to the UAE. The aircraft provides “long-range reconnaissance capability” to “secure the airspace above the Gulf.” Defence officials have confirmed that reconnaissance information obtained by the Wedgetail is also provided to US allies including Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Qatar.
While the government insists the role is “defensive,” the intelligence is fed into the Joint Air Operations Center (CAOC), which is under the command of US Central Command – and the US is waging an offensive war against Iran.
B. Embedded Troops
As of June 2026, 729 ADF personnel are embedded with US and UK armed forces. Some Australian personnel were aboard a US submarine that sank an Iranian frigate in the Indian Ocean. The Defence Chief defended this involvement as “in our national interest to have our people on board US Virginia Class submarines training, learning and understanding.”
C. Arms Supplies
Australia has been supplying Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAMs) to the UAE. The government has also issued 322 defence export permits to Israel since 1 January 2017. As Greens Senator David Shoebridge noted, Australia has “one of the most secretive and unaccountable weapons export systems in the world.”
V. The Logic of Sovereignty Concession
The chain of sovereignty loss is clear:
- US-Israel Integration (NDAA Section 219) →
- Australia-US Integration (AUKUS, interoperability agreements) →
- Australia’s de facto military integration with Israel through the US →
- Australia’s strategic autonomy is diluted, and military decision-making is influenced by external forces.
Each link in this chain was forged without parliamentary debate. As the AUKUS inquiry has noted, the Federal Parliament “never held a thorough debate on the agreement,” exposing “a clear democratic deficit” in Australia’s largest strategic commitment.
VI. The Political Class: Incompetence or Complicity?
The Albanese government’s approach to national security is defined by caution, message control, and risk aversion – not by strategic vision.
- On AUKUS: The government has refused to interrogate the $368 billion deal, despite “substantial reservations” that have “not abated.”
- On the Iran war: The government insists Australia is not involved in “offensive operations,” but our assets are providing intelligence that enables offensive operations.
- On arms exports: The government has fought to keep arms exports to Israel secret, only being forced to disclose information by Federal Court order.
- On the NDAA: The government has remained silent on Section 219 – a provision that directly compromises Australian strategic autonomy.
Incompetent people, once in power, are more dangerous than bad people because:
- Bad people can be brought down.
- An incompetent person will remain there, constantly causing destruction, yet appearing “unblamed” after each failure.
- VII. Conclusion: The Cost of Silence
- Australia’s political class and defence policy community still believe it is their “melancholy duty to support the military commitments of our great and powerful friends, even if they conflict with Australian interests.”
But a new world order is coming. Australia has a choice: position itself for that new order, or desperately cling to a slipping world order.
Through AUKUS, through Section 219, through secret arms deals and uncritical alliance commitments, we are choosing the latter.
The chain of sovereignty concession is tightening. And the Australian people are being told nothing.
The question is not whether Australia will be dragged into a war not of its choosing. The question is: when that war comes, will we have any say in whether we fight?
Dedicated to my beloved wife and confidante – who taught me to see the person behind the mask, and to trust what I see.
Close that Facility: The 2026 Pine Gap Protests
Dr Binoy Kampmark, 21 July 2026, https://theaimn.net/close-that-facility-the-2026-pine-gap-protests/
It remains a prickly reminder that Australia remains an embarrassed vassal of power, annexed to the security interests of another state basking in imperial and fast diminishing splendour. Pine Gap, known more technically as the Joint Defence Facility Pine Gap (JDFPG), is a largely US-operated effort in Alice Springs, Central Australia. As the late scholar of strategic studies Desmond Ball pithily remarked in 1988, it is “an espionage operation.
Euphemisms should not be allowed to obscure this essential point.” It grew out of a desire on the part of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in 1965 to establish a remote Australian-sited ground control station intended for signals intelligence satellites. Land belonging to the Central Arrernte people was accordingly excised the following year for the site. The decision, in typically rough fashion, was made without consultation and discussion with local residents or elders, a secret place that became what Trevor Paglen would describe as a “blank space on the map … erased from the public record.”
The facility staffs some 800 personnel from the US National Security Agency (NSA), CIA, the US National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) and such Australian agencies as the Australian Signals Directorate and Australian Federal Police. Over the years, the base has become increasingly corporatised with a heavy American accent: Raytheon, Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics, IBM and Hewlett Packard. A mere 10% of the constituted personnel are said to be Australian government employees.
The base periodically attracts its keen and principled protesters, aghast at the base’s role in furnishing targeting data for US and allied drone and missile strikes across the Middle East and Africa. This year, the Close Pine Gap-Sacred Land Back convergence featured three days (July 18-20) of activities, with hundreds of participants gathered in Alice Springs to demand the closure of the facility through a series of workshops, panels and woven “threads of anti-militarism and decolonial movements.”
On July 20, a rally of 300 individuals gathered close to the front of the spy base, the largest since 1987, sporting signs and flags and chanting the stock phrases: “shut it down”, “close Pine Gap”, and “always was, always will be Aboriginal land.” New South Wales Greens Senator David Shoebridge was present, expressing his concern about a “foreign military base set up for the interests of a foreign military” in the service of “right wing politics” and disrespectful of international law. The base was also a potential target for any adversaries the US might be willing to antagonise, thereby bringing “danger into the heart of our country.”
Arrernte Apmereke-artweye traditional custodians Felicity, Wyonna and Jacquita Hayes offer sound if disturbing logic, as reported by the Australian Associated Press: Pine Gap sits on a sacred site that not only profanes tradition but acts as vehicle for the waging of foreign wars and the conduct of genocide. “We don’t want to be feeling guilty all the time when bad things are happening overseas to little ones. We’re not the ones controlling that facility, but we feel guilty that it’s coming to our land.”
The custodians wished for the facility to be closed “so the generation coming can be safe. We want to be compensated so we can get houses at Whitegate community.” It is also with some astonishment that the residents of Whitegate, to this day, are deprived of rudimentary services, including decent housing and running water. The water has to be brought in by truck. There is no sewerage.
Richard Tanter of the Nautilus Institute, one of Pine Gap’s most astute and flawlessly detailed critics, proved ever reliable in remarking that, “Unless the Australian direct and indirect military relationship to Israeli activities in the Gaza Strip are closely reviewed … it is not possible for the Australian government to assure parliament and the Australian public that Australia is no complicit in acts of genocide.” The good professor has been able to shed much light on the facility’s broader purposes and is dismissive of critics who fault claims that the site is being used to feed such military efforts as those of Israel. (He can point to at least three satellites having the Gaza Strip within their reach.) In October 1973, for instance, satellite intelligence from Pine Gap was passed on to Israel during the Yom Kippur War, a contribution that aided Israel’s breakthrough of the Egyptian lines.
This is of little concern to the clubland militarists in Canberra and such think tanks as the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. Former intelligence officer Patrick White, writing for ASPI’s The Strategist, laments the diminished secrecy and security of the site, worrying that trends in signals technology have no longer made the base “irreplaceable”. The advent of extensive encryption means that satellite download feeds can be protected “almost anywhere. The remoteness that once hid the site from view no longer hides much at all.” He is sentimental about the ties with Washington. “We have shared in intelligence and expertise far beyond anything our own resources could produce. We have no satellites of this kind.” Precisely why Canberra is blood-crusted in its complicity, less an authoritative host than a butler eager to please.
Pine Gap acts, then, as a symbol of highly distilled, triple strength colonisation: a garrison outpost dominated by the US imperium and its personnel (a poke in the eye of Australian sovereignty), located on native land it defiles (a poke in the eye of the First Nations peoples), and also responsible for aiding the predations of Washington’s allies – more recently the Israeli Defense Forces in its cleansing conflict against the Palestinians. “I understand the genocide in Gaza against my people is made possible by intelligence flowing from the heart of this colony in Alice Springs directly to the Israeli occupation forces,” stated Palestinian activist Remah Naji of Justice for Palestine Magan-djin with potency. Shoebridge agreed: “We’re letting them use our land, this key real estate, I think [to] commit some of the worst atrocities we’ve seen.”
As the AUKUS Public Inquiry continues its various hearings on that ghastly, doomed security pact between Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States, the Close Pine Gap campaign should be commended as a linked, worthy extension. The former’s proceedings have been mostly savaging the wisdom of a pact that has shown Australia to be embarrassingly disadvantaged, its politicians largely deluded, and its strategic establishment impressionable and bankrupt. (That establishment seeks to bankrupt the Australian treasury to the princely sum of AU$368 billion over promised nuclear-powered submarines that may never arrive.) The Close Pine Gap protests, while receiving less in the way of coverage, is no less pertinent and urgent in its aims.
‘Extreme risk’: AUKUS warnings as Garrett’s inquiry docks in Adelaide
“Extreme” economic risk and nuclear waste disposal concerns for the $368 billion AUKUS submarine project are being heard at an independent inquiry in Adelaide today.
The risk associated with the Federal Government’s $368 billion AUKUS nuclear submarine project are being criticised by former federal senator and self-described ‘transparency warrior’ Rex Patrick this morning at an independent inquiry held in Adelaide today.
And transparency warnings were raised over the government’s plans for nuclear waste from submarines built at Osborne in South Australia, Patrick saying he was fighting in the Federal Court for information to be made public.
Meanwhile, former South Australian Liberal MP Christopher Pyne, who was Minister for Defence from 2018 until his retirement in 2019, said he “thought twice about appearing” at the inquiry led by famed Australian musician and former federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett.
Pyne said he bit the bullet because he believed in the “battle of ideas”.
The independent inquiry into the defence agreement between Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States was established earlier this year to scrutinise the deal.
It is being led by former Labor MP and Midnight Oil front man Peter Garrett, with public hearings taking place across the country, including in Adelaide today and tomorrow.
Other commissioners included First Nations leader Karina Lester, former West Australian Premier Carmen Lawrence, former Chief of the Australian Defence Force Chris Barrie and co-CEO of the Australia Institute Leanne Minshull. A final report was expected on October 30.
“Adelaide is at the epicentre of the AUKUS project,” Garrett told reporters at a press conference before the inquiry started.
“Whether it’s questions on the safe, long-term storage of radioactive waste, whether it’s the impact on communities in Adelaide and around Osborne, whether it’s the question of opportunity cost for the Adelaide economy.
“It is a matter of some regret that the AUKUS decision – the biggest-ever decision by any Australian government to spend public money on submarines, some not even built – was made with minimal public debate.”
The inquiry has been supported by trade unions and non-profit organisations to address questions over whether risks – economic and political – were being managed appropriately, Patrick telling the inquiry the country was taking on a “hugely risky program”.
“From an absolute cost perspective, it is unaffordable and it is bankrupting,” he said.
“There’s also an opportunity cost. You know – $360 billion – if you think about what you can spend with that amount of money… we wouldn’t be worrying about fuel security, we wouldn’t be worrying about industrial resilience.”
He added that nuclear waste storage was “a problem that needs to be solved”, noting he was fighting in the Federal Court for the release of documents around where the government was planning to store waste from the nuclear submarines.
“I’m not asking for the release of documents that relate to how fast a submarine might go, how many weapons it might have… I’m asking for information that is incidental to this project but really important to it: Where are you going to put the waste associated with this?” Patrick said.
Pyne gave evidence ahead of Patrick, and emphasised the importance of the AUKUS project in terms of national defence against China, saying the uplift in defence capability would be imperative “if we find ourselves on our own in the worst case scenario”.
He described AUKUS as “unstoppable” and said it would deliver a permanent boost for defence spending, an upgrade to Australia’s bases and facilities, an investment in STEM and trade skills, and would be a permanent change to Australia’s national security.
The inquiry was set to continue until this evening, with other speakers including anti-nuclear campaigner David Noonan and SA Greens MLC Melanie Selwood.
The Greens today released new findings from a survey of 343 South Australians, showing 83.7 per cent of respondents were “mostly concerned” about AUKUS.
Seventy-one per cent said AUKUS would make Australia less secure, and 74.5 per cent said they did not see “clear benefits” from the defence pact.
AUKUS was set to be a boon for the South Australian economy and jobs creation, with the nuclear submarine shipbuilding yard set to be constructed at Osborne at a cost of at least $30 billion.
Both the state and federal governments said they hoped the project would create 10,000 jobs in design and construction as well as up to 1000 apprentices per year at an on-site training facility, with the first newly built submarines expected to be delivered to the Australian Navy in the 2040s.
Enough steel to make 17 Eiffel Towers as well as 710,000 cubic metres of structural concrete will be used in the construction of the 420-metre-long fabrication hall.
However it has already weathered several hiccups.
In June, Federal Defence Minister Richard Marles announced Australia would only buy three second-hand nuclear-powered submarines instead of the promised mix of new and used US vessels.
This plan was expected to happen before Australia eventually built its own submarines using US nuclear-propulsion technology and parts made in Britain.
The second-hand subs announcement comes after the US has struggled to make enough Virginia-class submarines for its own use, leading some American lawmakers to question how it could also build enough of the boats to meet Australia’s needs.
Australia faces a critical window to receive the submarines before its existing, 1980s-designed Collins-class vessels are retired from service.
Australian resistance to the war machine -500 march towards Pine Gap this morning demanding closure of the facility
Monday 20 July 2026, Mparntwe Alice Springs, Arrernte Country
Hundreds from across the country have joined a rally on the road to Pine Gap this morning demanding the closure of the controversial military facility. The action closes out the Close Pine Gap Sacred Land Back Convergence 2026 organised by Mparntwe for Falastin and Anti Militarism Action Network, the biggest convergence of its kind since 1987.
The Hayes family – Traditional Owners of Kuyunba, the sacred land that Pine Gap occupies – lead the rally, with a list of four demands:
- Return of Kuyunba
- The closure of Pine Gap
- Compensation for the years Kuyunba has been occupied
- Compensation to the families in Gaza for the lives lost there
These actions have been echoed by rallies across the country.
The action follows two days of learning and discussion about militarism and colonialism. Experts from around the country addressed the violent reality and risks of Pine Gap.
“If ever there was a message to end the world, it would come through Pine Gap. We would be the handmaidens of that,” said Senator David Shoebridge on the weekend, adding, “US bases have never made us safe, but right now they are especially making us a target.”
Felicity, Wyonna and Jacquita Hayes, Arrernte Apmereke-artweye Traditional Custodians, said earlier to supporters:
“We want people to support us to close down Pine Gap. We want them to know it’s a sacred site. We don’t want to be feeling guilty all the time when bad things are happening overseas to little ones. We’re not the ones controlling that facility, but we feel guilty that it’s coming from our land.”
Pacific nuclear survivors urge Australia to sign and ratify UN treaty banning nuclear weapons ahead of key conference
Australia is the only state party to a nuclear-weapon-free zone treaty in any region of the world that has claimed to be protected by the nuclear weapons of another state.
Andrew Mathieson, July 3, 2026, https://nit.com.au/03-07-2026/25161/pacific-nuclear-survivors-urges-australia-to-sign-and-ratify-the-un-treaty-banning-nuclear-weapons-ahead-of-key-party-conference
A delegation of Pacific nuclear survivors joined Indigenous advocates in Canberra on Wednesday to call on Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to sign and ratify an international disarmament agreement which aims to comprehensively ban and eliminate nuclear weapons in the region.
Members of the Parliamentary Friends of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons invited members of the Pacific civil society to Australia’s Federal parliament to lay bare the human and environmental toll of tests over several decades.
The Australian parliamentary friends forms a bipartisan, cross-party forum, which currently is comprised of 47 of the 226 MPs across both houses and from all sides of politics, who meet and interact with nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation proponents to discuss treaty matters and their ongoing issues.
They were also reportedly joined this week by Anangu-Yankunytjatjara woman and second-generation nuclear test survivor, Karina Lester, who recently spoke with National Indigenous Times about the impact on her family of the 1953 British nuclear tests at Emu Field in remote South Australia.
She urged mobs that were “tested on, mined on, threatened with nuclear waste dumps or feared the impacts on their people, country and culture” to find their voice and speak up at the public inquiry that had commenced last month in Melbourne.
Australia has not yet signed or ratified the treaty which the United Nations first established as a resolution in 2017.
The invitation to multiple Pacific islander representatives coincided with two significant anniversaries falling on the first two days of the month: the 80th year of the first US test detonation on Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Islands followed by the 60th year of the first French test detonation at Mururoa Atoll, Mā’ohi Nui in colonial French Polynesia.
‘Powerful nations can have consequences that last for generations’
Pacific civil society members lined up to plea to Australian MPs from the Labor Party, the Liberal-National coalition, the Greens and Independents.
“The experiences of the Marshall Islands and other Pacific communities remind us the decisions made by powerful nations can have consequences that last for generations,” the spokesperson for a concerned Marshall Islands Student Association, Samuel Barton, told the gathering.
“We ask the world to remember our history, stand with survivors, pursue nuclear disarmament, and place human dignity, justice, and peace at the centre of global decision-making.”
The UN general assembly first decided nine years ago to convene a conference to negotiate a legally-binding instrument to prohibit the use of nuclear weapons.
The Australian government announced in 2023 that it was “considering the treaty systematically and methodically, as part of (Australia’s) ambitious agenda to advance nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament”.
According to the Labor government’s national defence strategy published two years ago, “Australia’s best protection against the increasing risk of nuclear escalation is (the) US extended nuclear deterrence and the pursuit of new avenues of arms control”.
But this implicit endorsement of nuclear weapons is incompatible with the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, the government has also admitted.
‘Australia must match its history with urgent new action’
Australia is the only state party to a nuclear-weapon-free zone treaty in any region of the world that has claimed to be protected by the nuclear weapons of another state.
Reverend James Bhagwan, General Secretary of the Pacific Conference of Churches, said that in a region of increasingly militarisation that signing the treaty “would be a clear commitment to a nuclear-free free Pacific and a genuine ocean of peace”.
Merewalesi Tuilau, speaking on behalf of the Fiji Veterans and Families Association, added the Pacific “demands and deserves complete freedom from nuclear weapons and their threat – not simply management, but total elimination.
“Australia has shown it can lead,” Mr Tuilau said, “Australia must match its history with urgent new action”.
‘We want nuclear weapons testing to be relegated to history’
The anniversaries of the dual detonations in the Pacific were acknowledged after Labor member for Macquarie Susan Templeton put forward a motion to push the government to signing the treaty ahead of its ALP national conference later this month.
“With the legacy of nuclear testing still felt deeply in Australia, our region, right across the world, we want nuclear weapons testing to be relegated to history,” she said.
“I will continue to advocate for the importance of sustained international commitment to nuclear non-proliferation, including the Treaty on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and also the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.”
The Canberra event was a part of a wider lobby and advocacy tour that also took in Sydney and Melbourne, sharing heartfelt testimony from Indigenous communities affected by nuclear testing and calling for a Pacific region that is “decolonised, demilitarised, de-nuclearised and decarbonised”.
Articles 6 and 7 of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons call on “victim assistance, environmental remediation, and international cooperation and assistance” to address ongoing and unresolved humanitarian, human rights, and environmental impacts from nuclear weapons.
1 This Month
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- September 2026 (184)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (375)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 