Australian Institute of International Affairs | Intern Debate: "The AUKUS partnership is in Australia's national interest" @AIIAvision | Uploaded May 2023 | Updated October 2024, 12 minutes ago.
We always try to choose topics for our interns' debates on which a strong case can be made for both sides of the argument. At first sight, that might seem not to be the case with our topic for the next debate, "That the AUKUS partnership is in Australia's national interest". Public discussion in the mainstream media and much of the more specialised literature has largely enthused about the prospects of increased Australian defence readiness through obtaining materiel under the AUKUS partnership, with considerable focus on new submarines – most stridently in a Sydney Morning Herald/Melbourne Age series from 7 March, led by veteran commentator Peter Hartcher.
But the discussion is now more contested; aggressively so in the case of Paul Keating's National Press club address of 15 March. The underlying assumption that Australia's interests are substantially the same as those as the United States – particularly in relations with China – has become an important point of difference. Concerns have been raised about increasing the integration of Australian and US defence planning, equipment and command. In the case of the projected submarine purchases, cost and timing have also come under examination, along with the relevance of Britain as a possible alternative or supplementary source. Australian strategic sovereignty is arguably at the heart of the issue.
Our interns will delve into these complexities in their debate on Tuesday 4 April.The affirmative case will be put by speakers Nadia Maunsell, Isobel Logan and Ryan Lung; the negative by Roisin Browne, Bakar Mohamed and Ella Whitehurst.
We always try to choose topics for our interns' debates on which a strong case can be made for both sides of the argument. At first sight, that might seem not to be the case with our topic for the next debate, "That the AUKUS partnership is in Australia's national interest". Public discussion in the mainstream media and much of the more specialised literature has largely enthused about the prospects of increased Australian defence readiness through obtaining materiel under the AUKUS partnership, with considerable focus on new submarines – most stridently in a Sydney Morning Herald/Melbourne Age series from 7 March, led by veteran commentator Peter Hartcher.
But the discussion is now more contested; aggressively so in the case of Paul Keating's National Press club address of 15 March. The underlying assumption that Australia's interests are substantially the same as those as the United States – particularly in relations with China – has become an important point of difference. Concerns have been raised about increasing the integration of Australian and US defence planning, equipment and command. In the case of the projected submarine purchases, cost and timing have also come under examination, along with the relevance of Britain as a possible alternative or supplementary source. Australian strategic sovereignty is arguably at the heart of the issue.
Our interns will delve into these complexities in their debate on Tuesday 4 April.The affirmative case will be put by speakers Nadia Maunsell, Isobel Logan and Ryan Lung; the negative by Roisin Browne, Bakar Mohamed and Ella Whitehurst.
