Today’s R&D is brought to you by Prepd (pronounced “prepped”). Prepd is building debate technology that helps extempers and congressional debaters research, practice, and compete. Visit www.prepd.in to learn more.
This week’s R&D covers the AUKUS partnership. Announced on September 15, AUKUS is a trilateral security agreement between the United States, Great Britain, and Australia. The nations pledge to cooperate on defense issues and is seen by experts to be a counter to Chinese influence in the Indo-Pacific region, even though British Prime Minister Boris Johnson told the British Parliament recently that the partnership is not meant to antagonize China. The European Union was less than thrilled with the agreement, with France recalling ambassadors to the United States and Australia last week after Australia cancelled plans to purchase French submarines for nuclear models from the United States and Great Britain.
A new security partnership, AUKUS, will deliver nuclear-powered submarines to Australia. This sets a troubling precedent for nuclear nonproliferation policy.@james_acton32 highlights this precedent and what can be done to offset its consequences: https://t.co/VpeKV7FV2H
— Carnegie Endowment (@CarnegieEndow) September 22, 2021
Balance is needed between the hard power of AUKUS and the collaboration and rules-based competition with China that are required for climate diplomacy and trade https://t.co/yddCnaUr2p
— The Economist (@TheEconomist) September 23, 2021
“Raising the costs for major Indo-Pacific powers of going to war is in Indonesia’s interests, but not if that means China has greater maritime capabilities which threaten Indonesia or are used in grey-zone operations.” Read @SecurityScholar on #AUKUS: https://t.co/ZbQWbkdFsm
— Brookings FP (@BrookingsFP) September 23, 2021
The decision to include the U.K. in the AUKUS security pact contradicts the Biden administration’s stated goal of keeping the U.S. out of post-Brexit U.K.-EU tensions, writes @DaveKeating in this week’s Europe Decoder newsletter.https://t.co/2ZtWKuu0f5
— World Politics Review (@WPReview) September 23, 2021
Chinese media have played up US-EU discord over AUKUS nuclear sub deal but the West vs China battle lines are still firmly in place https://t.co/n5DxcXnSB7
— Asia Times (@asiatimesonline) September 23, 2021
The AUKUS pact announcement and this week’s Quad summit are highly representative of the United States’ strategic reorientation toward the Indo-Pacific.https://t.co/vvOsF1WCE0
— Foreign Policy (@ForeignPolicy) September 23, 2021
“China’s vitriolic opposition to AUKUS is telling,” writes @AmbJohnBolton in a piece for The Economist https://t.co/FwOoQDs7hK
— The Economist (@TheEconomist) September 23, 2021
Ian Buruma questions why the United Kingdom, which has little at stake in the Indo-Pacific region, joined the new #AUKUS defense pact with the United States and Australia. https://t.co/WbMPrwX8oT
— Project Syndicate (@ProSyn) September 23, 2021
One cannot help but feel that the United States is making a mistake with the momentous AUKUS partnership. By so greatly privileging military answers to challenges, Washington is inching toward the classic hammer dilemma, writes @hofrench.https://t.co/awbgQr0JiH
— World Politics Review (@WPReview) September 23, 2021
Furious French defence contractor to seek compensation over Aukus deal https://t.co/fq6AAREH1c
— Guardian news (@guardiannews) September 23, 2021
“The fallout is about much more than a scrapped business deal, Gallic pride and bruised egos,” writes @SylvieKauffmann of the AUKUS deal. “The past week has been about 21st-century geopolitics and the brutal adjustment of old alliances to new realities.”https://t.co/sCLPbbTXNC
— New York Times Opinion (@nytopinion) September 22, 2021