By Zeynep Katre Oran, and Irmak Akcan
ANKARA – Provisions in the AUKUS agreement between Australia, the UK, and US related to nuclear waste management and political commitments have sparked significant public criticism in Australia.
The pact, aimed at fostering cooperation on nuclear submarine technology, positions Australia as the first country with nuclear submarines without having nuclear power, a strategic move seen as counterbalancing China’s influence in the Indo-Pacific region.
Critics have focused on aspects of the agreement facilitating the transfer of nuclear technology and highly enriched uranium materials from the US and UK to Australia. Opposition parties and experts have raised concerns over these provisions.
In early August, Australia, Britain, and the US signed an updated version of the AUKUS agreement, officially known as the "Intergovernmental Maritime Nuclear Cooperation Agreement."
This new iteration includes "political commitments" regarding the transfer of nuclear submarine technology and the sharing of confidential information among the three nations.
The agreement introduces additional commitments to ensure ongoing communication and information exchange on nuclear-powered subs among the AUKUS partners.
It also contains a provision allowing Britain and US to influence regulatory interactions between Australia and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
The White House has characterized the agreement as a non-legally binding memorandum outlining the governments’ intentions on certain provisions, including these new commitments.
US President Joe Biden affirmed that the agreement represents a significant step forward in trilateral cooperation, essential for Australia’s development and maintenance of nuclear-powered subs.
- Political backlash and controversies
Former Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating has criticized the agreement, suggesting it could lead to Australia effectively becoming a US state.
Speaking to Australia’s ABC, Keating claimed: "So AUKUS is really about, in American terms, the military control of Australia. I mean, what’s happened … is likely to turn Australia into the 51st state of the US."
Peter Dutton, head of the opposition Liberal Party, urged the government to provide more details about the "political commitments" agreed on with the US, suggesting the situation is unusual and that Prime Minister Anthony Albanese should explain the nature of Australia’s agreement.
In response, Albanese defended the pact, saying that it only has to do with advancing the exchange of information on nuclear-powered submarines. "There aren't extra political commitments, I'm not sure what you mean," he added.
- Concerns over radioactive waste management
The public backlash intensified following a White House statement indicating that the agreement facilitates the sale of special nuclear materials.
Claims that the agreement could allow the US and Britain to send nuclear waste to Australia have become a major issue. Anticipated regulations suggest Australia will only accept waste from its own nuclear subs, though these regulations are not yet in effect.
Dave Sweeney, disarmament spokesperson for the Australian Conservation Foundation, criticized the AUKUS partners for failing to manage their own marine waste, suggesting the agreement could turn Australia into a "poison portal" for international waste.
David Shoebridge, spokesperson for the Australian Greens, argued that the UK lacks the technology for safely dismantling or storing decommissioned nuclear subs and waste. He stressed the need for immediate action: "We are fully aware of this; we are engaging with our own radioactive waste agency, ARWA, on this, and it’s something that needs to be dealt with now, not later," he said.
- Government’s position on waste management
Members of the Labor Party have dismissed concerns about Australia becoming a "dumping ground" for other countries' nuclear waste, calling such claims part of a "scare campaign" by the Greens.
The Albanese government has introduced the Australian Naval Nuclear Power Safety Bill 2023, which includes provisions to ban the storage and disposal of used nuclear fuel not associated with Australian subs.
Defense Minister Richard Marles emphasized that Australia will not accept nuclear waste from other countries "under any circumstances."
"Nuclear waste won't end up in Australia, other than the waste that is generated by Australia," Marles said.
- AUKUS pact and China’s reaction
Signed in 2021, the AUKUS agreement aims to establish a nuclear-powered submarine fleet for Australia with technology transfers from the US and UK.
The agreement outlines plans to build at least eight nuclear-powered subs at shipyards in Adelaide, South Australia.
Although China is not explicitly mentioned in the agreement, the focus on increased regional security concerns has led to interpretations that it is aimed at balancing China's military power in the region.
China has condemned the agreement, arguing that it undermines regional peace and stability and hampers international efforts to prevent nuclear weapons proliferation.
*Writing by Gizem Nisa Cebi in Istanbul