Paul Keating warns AUKUS could drag Australia into a US‑China war

Paul Keating’s warning on AUKUS and a potential US‑China clash

Former Australian prime minister Paul Keating has warned that the AUKUS security partnership binds Australia to any future United States confrontation with China. Keating argues that the United States would "certainly lose" such a war, leaving Australia exposed to Chinese retaliation.

What is AUKUS?

AUKUS, announced in September 2021, is a trilateral security pact between Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States. Its flagship project is the procurement of nuclear‑powered submarines for the Royal Australian Navy. The agreement also covers joint development of cyber capabilities, artificial intelligence and advanced missile systems.

According to the Australian Department of Defence, the submarines are expected to be delivered in the early 2030s and will give Australia a strategic edge in the Indo‑Pacific.

Keating’s core argument

Keating’s criticism focuses on the strategic lock‑in created by AUKUS. He says that by aligning its defence procurement with the United States, Australia is effectively signing up to fight on the side of Washington should a conflict with China erupt. "The deal locks Australia into a war that America would certainly lose," Keating told reporters after a briefing on the comments of Republican congressman Michael McCaul.

McCaul, a senior member of the U.S. State Department and co‑chair of the Congressional Friends of Australia caucus, has warned that "Australia is already a target" for nations hostile to the United States. McCaul argues that deeper integration with U.S. forces would increase Australia’s security, not diminish it.

Strategic stakes for Australia

The debate pits two competing visions of Australia’s future security:

• Alliance‑centric model: Emphasises close ties with the United States and the United Kingdom, leveraging shared technology and intelligence.
• Regional autonomy model: Calls for a more independent defence posture that can navigate between great‑power competition without being drawn into a binary conflict.

Keating aligns with the latter, warning that a forced alignment could make Australia a "lightning rod" for Chinese retaliation, especially in the South China Sea and around the strategic chokepoint of the Malacca Strait.

China’s likely response

Beijing has repeatedly condemned AUKUS as a threat to regional stability. In a statement to the United Nations, the Chinese foreign ministry described the pact as "a blatant attempt to contain China". Analysts at the Lowy Institute note that China could respond with increased naval patrols, cyber attacks on Australian infrastructure, or diplomatic pressure on Australian trade partners.

Recent incidents, such as the alleged cyber intrusion into Australian government networks attributed to Chinese actors, illustrate the potential for asymmetric retaliation.

Political fallout in Canberra

The AUKUS debate has become a flashpoint in Australian domestic politics. The opposition Labor Party, led by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, has defended the pact as a necessary deterrent, while also pledging a review of its implementation to ensure it does not compromise sovereign decision‑making.

Keating’s comments have reignited calls for a parliamentary inquiry. Critics argue that the original AUKUS agreement was negotiated in secrecy, limiting public scrutiny of the strategic and financial implications.

Economic considerations

The submarine programme is projected to cost over AUD 100 billion, a figure that has drawn scrutiny from fiscal watchdogs. The cost includes not only the submarines themselves but also the construction of a new shipyard in South Australia, training of personnel and long‑term maintenance contracts.

Supporters contend that the investment will create thousands of high‑skill jobs and stimulate the domestic defence industry. Opponents warn that the financial burden could divert resources from other critical areas such as health, education and climate resilience.

International perspectives

Other allies have weighed in on the AUKUS debate. A recent article in Reuters highlighted that Japan and India, both participants in the Quad security dialogue, view AUKUS as complementary to their own maritime security initiatives.

Meanwhile, the United Kingdom’s Ministry of Defence has emphasized that the partnership strengthens the “global rule‑based order”. The British government argues that nuclear‑powered submarines will enable Australia to patrol vast oceanic distances, thereby contributing to collective security.

Key concerns summarised

1. Strategic lock‑in to a US‑China conflict.
2. Potential for Chinese retaliation against Australian assets.
3. High financial cost and long‑term budgetary impact.
4. Limited parliamentary oversight during the negotiation phase.
5. Implications for Australia’s diplomatic relationships with non‑aligned nations.

What the future may hold

Several scenarios could unfold as the AUKUS programme moves forward:

• Full implementation: Submarines are delivered on schedule, Australia deepens its defence integration with the United States and the United Kingdom, and the strategic balance in the Indo‑Pacific shifts toward a stronger Western bloc.
• Strategic recalibration: Canberra renegotiates aspects of the deal, seeking greater operational independence while retaining technology sharing.
• Escalation of tensions: A flashpoint in the South China Sea triggers a broader confrontation, and Australia is compelled to choose sides, exposing it to economic sanctions or military action from China.

Keating’s warning serves as a reminder that security arrangements are not purely technical contracts; they carry profound geopolitical weight.

Public sentiment and media coverage

Australian opinion polls show a split view. While a majority of respondents support a strong alliance with the United States, a significant minority express concern about being drawn into great‑power rivalry. The media landscape reflects this divide, with outlets such as the BBC providing balanced coverage of both strategic benefits and risks.

As the first submarine is expected to enter service in the early 2030s, the debate is likely to intensify. Stakeholders from the defence industry, academic circles and civil society will continue to press for transparency and accountability.

In the meantime, the Australian government maintains that AUKUS is a cornerstone of its national security strategy, arguing that the partnership will deter aggression and uphold a rules‑based order in the region.