Senators Raise Concerns Over Dwindling US Nuclear Submarine Supply Amid Deal With Australia

The Virginia-class nuclear-powered attack submarine USS Illinois (SSN 786) returns home to Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam from a deployment in the 7th Fleet area of responsibility on Sept. 13, 2021. Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Michael B. Zingaro/U.S. Navy via AP

Senators on the Foreign Relations Committee are concerned that the United States doesn’t have enough nuclear submarines to properly defend itself after striking an agreement to supply Australia with U.S. submarines.

The senators made the remarks during a Sept. 6 hearing in which officials from the State and Defense departments testified on the trilateral security pact between Australia, the UK, and the United States, known as AUKUS, announced in September 2021.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, and U.S. President Joe Biden have agreed that Australia would purchase three submarines to acquire “conventionally-armed, nuclear-powered submarine (SSN) capability” as part of that partnership, which also aims to trilaterally develop and provide joint advanced military capabilities.

The agreement states that the United States may sell up to two more submarines to Australia if needed (pdf).

As part of that deal, Australia has agreed to contribute roughly AU$3 billion (US$1.9 billion) to the efforts in the United States and the UK to develop and expand the submarine technology, with the majority of that funding set to be used to speed up the production of U.S. Virginia-class submarines, Reuters reported.

However, during the Sept. 6 hearing, lawmakers raised concerns over whether the United States is well-stocked enough to sell nuclear submarines to Australia, particularly at a time of heightened tensions with China and Russia. Others raised concerns over the contribution agreed to by Australia, which hasn’t yet been finalized.

Lawmakers noted that the U.S. Navy currently has 49 fast-attack submarines, leaving it 17 submarines short of the 66 nuclear attack submarines it needs to properly defend the country.

In contrast, China and Russia are on track to far surpass U.S. naval power, with the former looking likely to command as many as 440 warships by the end of this decade compared to the United States’ 290 vessels, according to an August statement by Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

U.S. President Joe Biden (C) speaks alongside British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak (R) and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese at a press conference during the AUKUS summit at Naval Base Point Loma in San Diego, Calif., on March 13, 2023. Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images

China ‘Outpacing’ US Navy

“We have talked a lot today about the People’s Republic of China, they have the largest navy in the world,” Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.) said during the hearing. “They are expanding their capabilities and this is all part of the plan to dominate the world by 2049. In some areas, they are outpacing us but one area they cannot do that in is our allies, which is why this agreement is important.

“It is important that we get our ducks in a row to meet the commitment.”

Mr. Rickets cited the Navy’s requirement of 66 fast-attack nuclear submarines necessary to defend the nation.

He said the United States has 49 submarines and that nearly half of those aren’t available due to maintenance issues.

“We are grateful that the Australians want to invest AU$3 billion,” the lawmaker said. “What are we going to have to invest to get to 66 submarines?”

Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.) shared a similar concern, noting that providing Australia with U.S. submarines could result in delays in the U.S. Navy reaching its optimal defense goals.

“Today, the Navy has 49 attack submarines, that’s roughly 25 percent short of its goal of 66 submarines,” Mr. Hagerty said. “The pace of making as I’ve read is maybe 1.2 submarines a year. By giving these submarines to Australia, that will put us three to four years behind in our production process.”

A Chinese naval nuclear-powered submarine sails during an international fleet review for the 60th anniversary of the founding of the People's Liberation Army Navy, on April 23, 2009. Guang Niu/AP Photo

Deal a ‘Risk We Should Not Take’

In July, a group of 25 Republicans, including Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), wrote to President Biden warning that the plan to supply Australia with submarines—if implemented as it currently stands—would “unacceptably weaken the U.S. fleet even as China seeks to expand its military power and influence.”

“Under the current AUKUS plan to transfer U.S. Virginia-class submarines to a partner nation before meeting the Navy’s own requirements, the number of available nuclear submarines in the U.S. submarine fleet would be lowered further. This is a risk we should not take,” the Republicans wrote.

“We support the vision of the Australia–United Kingdom–United States (AUKUS) partnership and its potential to change the strategic landscape in the Indo-Pacific. The AUKUS agreement is vitally important, but we must simultaneously protect U.S. national security.”

Despite ongoing concerns regarding the deal, Mara Karlin, assistant secretary of defense for the Defense Department, told lawmakers that the Biden administration is continuing to work with Congress to build up a defense industrial base that, “frankly, was not strong” as she thinks anyone would like it to be.

“With Congress’s leadership and support, the administration has been able to put in billions of dollars—indeed, approximately $4 billion in the latest president’s budget—for both production and maintenance of submarines,” she said.

“And so there’s a lot of really hard work to help increase those numbers.”