Australia news live updates: Albanese says government will ensure Cardinal Pell’s body returns home for funeral

Snap analysis on US jostling on Aukus

It’s worth taking a moment to step through why a group of US politicians felt the need to write to Joe Biden in strong support of the Aukus security deal – and where the points of contention remain as key decisions loom.

Under Aukus, Australia plans acquire at least eight nuclear-powered submarines with the help of the US and the UK, and March looms as the deadline for more details about which design will be adopted and the timeframe for construction. That’s why there is an uptick in activity to bed down exactly how this might be achieved.

The letter to the US president, published overnight, was signed by nine US House of Representatives members from both parties, including Democratic representative Joe Courtney who led the effort.

They were implicitly pushing back at an argument advanced recently by two key senators about risks to the US’s own submarine needs if the Biden administration agrees to sell one or two Virginia-class submarines to Australia this decade. The idea has been floated as a potential way to bridge the gap before Australia is ready to start building its own nuclear-powered submarines in Adelaide. Domestically built ones may not start to be operational until the late 2030s or early 2040s, but Australia’s existing conventional Collins class submarines will start to be retired in the late 2030s.

The stopgap idea is clearly being taken seriously by the Biden administration. But it’s well known that the US production line is already under stress as the US navy seeks to ramp up construction of its own submarines.

That is what led Democratic senator Jack Reed – the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee – and then-Republican senator James Inhofe to implore Biden not to stress “the US submarine industrial base to the breaking point”. Reed and Inhofe raised concern that “what was initially touted as a ‘do no harm’ opportunity to support Australia and the United Kingdom and build long-term competitive advantages for the US and its Pacific allies, may be turning into a zero-sum game for scarce, highly advanced US [nuclear submarines]”.

But the new letter by the Courtney-led bipartisan group says the US will gain from providing “our closest ally with an undersea capability to better posture itself in the region”. Courtney’s grouping says while it is essential for the US to stick to its own plan to build a minimum of two submarines a year to meet its own requirements, “we are supportive of expanding the industrial base to meet Aukus expectations”.

Far from a zero-sum game, the potential for the United States to provide or build new submarines under Aukus, should that be the recommendation of the trilateral consultation, could very well be a ‘rising tide that lifts all boats’ …

We particularly believe that an expansion of our industrial base beyond two submarines would support the early provisioning of existing Virginia class submarines to be made available concurrent with the retirement of the Collins class attack submarines. These realities should not be viewed as a reason not to pursue US build submarine options in Aukus but rather as a unique opportunity to leverage the support and resources possible under Aukus to grow our industrial base to support both US and Australian submarine construction, recognizing that the full fruition of Aukus over many decades will result in Australia’s ability to domestically produce nuclear-powered submarines.

It should be pointed out that none of the US politicians who have been active on either side of this debate have been hostile to the broad security partnership known as Aukus. The contention is about exactly how the US can help Australia in the short to medium term without undermining its own submarine needs.

For his part, Reed popped up on Twitter overnight to made clear his recent letter should not be seen as opposing Aukus; he just wanted “responsible oversight and a stable industrial base”. Reed said Aukus was “central to ensuring a free and open Indo-Pacific, dramatically improving the capabilities of our allies, and increasing our engagement in the region”.

Expect to see this debate heating up in the weeks ahead.