Australia's AUKUS submarine plan reignites debate over war risk with China
Australia's AUKUS submarine plan has returned to the centre of political debate after the government reaffirmed that the pact is moving ahead and the Greens warned it could pull the country into a future US war with China. The dispute is focused on Australia's plan to buy secondhand Virginia-class attack submarines from the United States. It comes as the government continues to defend the multi-decade defence agreement, which has become one of the country's most contested security projects.
Sponsored
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said AUKUS was "full-steam ahead", according to the report, after the Greens renewed calls to cancel the nuclear-powered submarine deal. The party's defence spokesperson, David Shoebridge, raised the warning during an appearance on a Sunday political programme, arguing that Australia should prioritise defending its own borders. He said the country did not need weapons designed to operate thousands of kilometres from shore and questioned whether the submarine purchase would make Australia more closely integrated with the US military.
The government said this week that it had always preferred to buy "in-service" Virginia-class submarines from the US, arguing that the approach would save money on acquisition, maintenance and training. The Greens used the announcement to renew their broader criticism of the agreement, which they said could expose Australia to strategic risk. Shoebridge argued there was still time to abandon AUKUS and instead buy conventionally armed submarines from countries including Japan, South Korea or Sweden, while avoiding a capability gap as Collins-class submarines are retired.
The row matters because AUKUS is not only a procurement plan but a long-term strategic alignment involving Australia, the US and the UK. Supporters see it as central to Australia's future undersea capability and its ability to operate alongside allies in a more contested Indo-Pacific environment. Critics argue that the deal could narrow Australia's strategic independence and tie its defence posture more closely to US planning, especially if tensions with China deepen further.
Sponsored
The latest exchange also reflects how the submarine project has become a proxy for a wider argument about sovereignty, alliance management and the scale of Australia's military ambitions. The government has framed the purchase as a practical step that improves capability and reduces costs. The Greens, by contrast, have cast it as a decision that could shape Australia's role in any future conflict involving the US and China, rather than simply strengthening national defence.
What remains unclear is how much political traction the renewed criticism will gain, and whether it will affect the government's timetable or public support for the deal. The immediate question is whether Canberra can keep the project on track while addressing concerns about cost, capability gaps and strategic dependence. The broader issue is how Australia balances alliance commitments with the risk of being drawn into a conflict it does not control.
Sponsored
