Sovereignty is a nebulous concept separate to strategic alliance realpolitik. Also, as "Australia's Sovereign" Charlie has found, a crown may muzzle political utterances and "Black spider memos" (Cartoon courtesy Ben Jennings for The Guardian)
---
Sovereignty is a nebulous and outdated aspiration separate from strategic alliance realpolitik. It is also set apart from Australia’s “Sovereign”. I understand the final one is King Charles III (muzzshot above).
When it comes to US strategic operations
in the Indo-Pacific Australian forces interoperate in alliance with the US
rather than standing apart out of sovereign separateness. The US is supplying 3
to 5 Virginia SSNs to Australia in the 2030s precisely because this allows
Australia to fight in far off theatres like Taiwan – something that Australia’s Collins
SSKs simply don’t have the range or speed to do.
After the AUKUS submarine schedule was announced on March 14, 2023 Australia's Defence Minister Marles quickly started to argue Australian having Virginia SSNs would not erode Australia’s sovereignty/discretion on whether or not they would work with the USN to defend Taiwan. Marles’ main concern was widespread opposition (within his own governing Labor Party ranks and in public surveys) to the “A$368 Billion” SSN price-tag and perceived loss of sovereignty. Put another way Marles argued Australia would enjoy sovereign freedom of choice not to fight alongside the US Navy.
US Governments don’t see things that way - since America forces in WWII saved Australia’s “bacon” in the Battle of the Coral Sea and Guadalcanal (in the Solomons). Both represented Japanese threats on the approaches to Australia. The US doesn’t see Australia always fighting in alliance with the US as a “loss of Australian sovereignty”. The US sees it as in Australia’s best interests. This includes the mythical or actual US nuclear umbrella that theoretically keeps any Chinese nuclear threat to Australia at bay.
Marles’ spurious reaction “Australia
would retain its sovereignty” flies in the face of regular US State Department,
US Defense Department and retired US flag officer reminders that the US and
Australia have fought shoulder-to-shoulder for more than 100 years and will
continue to do so, through shared interests.
FOR EXAMPLE
Said current US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin on the US DoD website in September 2021 https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/2777798/australia-us-alliance-is-stronger-deeper-than-ever-officials-say/
“Today, we still stand
shoulder-to-shoulder as mates, ready to face the challenges and the
opportunities of the future,” Austin said. “That’s what this new trilateral
security partnership between the U.S., the U.K. and Australia is all about. …
An important first step for AUKUS will be our efforts to help Australia acquire
nuclear-powered submarines. This will significantly improve the Australian
Navy’s reach and defensive capabilities.
[and this is the "Kicker", Austin further stated]"It will also help contribute to what I call ‘integrated deterrence’ in the region — the ability for the United States military to work more effectively with our allies and partners in defense of our shared security interests.”
Pete Comment
Basically “‘integrated deterrence’ in the region” and US defined "shared security interests" (a la the US and allies deterring China over Taiwan) trumps separate Australian defence sovereignty or choice.