Commitment to non-proliferation won’t be weakened by AUKUS, committee finds

By Jackson Graham

December 20, 2021

Britain’s Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Australia’s Prime Minister Scott Morrison and US President Joe Biden at a joint press conference via AVL from The Blue Room at Parliament House in Canberra, Thursday, September 16, 2021.
There is an initial agreement between the UK, US and Australia to share information. (AAP Image/Mick Tsikas)

Australia’s commitment to nuclear non-proliferation won’t be weakened as a result of the first stages of the new AUKUS agreement, a parliamentary committee says. 

The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties has given a tick of approval to an initial agreement between the UK, US and Australia to share information in a legally binding agreement. 

The agreement marks the first time the US and UK are sharing sensitive classified knowledge about nuclear-powered submarines with a third country and a step forward in Australia’s bid to acquire the vessels. 

A committee report finds that the sharing of information would not result in non-proliferation concerns, but issues could arise during the proposed acquisition of the submarines. 

“[The committee] will seek to remain informed of the Australian Government’s ongoing engagement with the International Atomic Energy Agency,” the report says. 

It notes that the nonproliferation treaties Australia is party to do not prohibit the exchange of naval nuclear propulsion information. 

The committee received a number of submissions that raised concerns that Australia was making use of a “loophole” in the non-proliferation agreement allowing naval nuclear propulsion because it is considered a non-proscribed military activity in the agreement. 

The Medical Association for Prevention of War said in a submission that was “unprecedented” for a non-nuclear armed nation like Australia to acquire nuclear-powered submarines. 

“The exchange of this extremely sensitive information around the fuel and the technology that is needed to make nuclear weapons is a dangerous global precedent that other nations are likely to follow,” the group’s WA branch warned. 

ANU international law expert professor Donald Rothwell said he believed the proposed agreement did “not cause … any direct alarm in terms of inconsistency” with Australia’s non-proliferation obligations. 

However, Rothwell believed a stronger statement reaffirming Australia’s NPT obligations would have been appropriate.


READ MORE:

There’s a long and devastating history behind the proposal for a nuclear waste dump in South Australia

About the author

Any feedback or news tips? Here’s where to contact the relevant team.

The Mandarin Premium

Try Mandarin Premium for $4 a week.

Access all the in-depth briefings. New subscribers only.

Get Premium Today