Premier Roger Cook bound for the UK to push WA's case for AUKUS deal on the rocks
Roger Cook is heading to the UK this week to push WA's case for why the shaky AUKUS deal should proceed, amid fears Donald Trump will torpedo the $368 billion defence agreement.
With Mr Trump ordering a review of the deal, the Premier — accompanied by his Defence Industries Minister Paul Papalia — will meet with senior British government and defence personnel to emphasise why AUKUS is important to not just Australia, the US and the UK, but to WA.
The 2021 AUKUS security pact between the US, Britain and Australia, is supposed to deliver Australia up to five nuclear-powered submarines from about 2030.
WA stands to be a major beneficiary, with Henderson — just south of Perth — scheduled to get a $20b boost to become a major defence hub where the submarines would be serviced and naval ship building further developed.
About $8b of upgrades are also scheduled to happen at HMAS Stirling, which will become home to Australia's nuclear-propelled AUKUS submarines — Virginia Class SSNs.
'I'm confident that AUKUS is a great deal for the US and Australia and that the Trump administration's review will confirm that,' Mr Cook said.
'While it's only natural that a new administration does a review, there's no doubt we live in uncertain times, and that's why this UK mission is a priority for my Government.'
At the G7 summit, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was unable to get a one-on-one meeting with Mr Trump to discuss AUKUS after the US President left early to due to escalating the Middle East crisis.
Mr Cook said the deal was in the interests of all three nations, adding any decision not to proceed with the agreement would be worrying.
'Obviously, it (AUKUS not proceeding) would be a concern not only for Australia but for the UK and a concern in relation to the US security attitude towards the geopolitical situation in this region,' he said.
'But, as has been observed by several people, the UK Government undertook its own review of AUKUS when it was elected.
'So, we are not too concerned.'
During the five-day mission Mr Cook will hold a roundtable meeting in London with defence industry heavyweights and meet with UK Government officials, including Maria Eagle, Minister of State for Defence Procurement and Industry, and Lord Spellar, the UK's trade envoy to Australia.
The Premier and Mr Papalia will also visit His Majesty's Naval Base, in Devonport which is the sole nuclear repair and refuelling facility for the Royal Navy.
Regardless of AUKUS, Mr Cook was confident WA would play a significant in Australia's — and the US and UK's — defence industries.
Mr Cook said UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer had, for example, recently announced a plan to build up to 12 additional nuclear-powered submarines over the next decade — and WA businesses could play a pivotal role in speeding up the construction of these military assets.
'There will still be significant opportunities for Western Australia's defence industry,' Mr Cook said.
'The US and UK will still need WA businesses, or WA manufacturers, to be part of the global supply chain for their own construction effort.
'There are three big opportunities for Western Australia.
'One is around maintenance and sustainment, the other is around frigate construction and the third is around being part of the international manufacturing supply chain for the construction of UK and US subs back in their countries.'
Mr Cook said the State's move to renewables and clean energy would also be a selling point.
'This mission to the UK is a crucial part of my Government's plan to diversify the economy and ensure it remains the strongest in the nation,' Mr Cook said.
'We are doing everything we can to ensure that local businesses benefit from this once in a generation boom, and that's why strategic talks with decision-makers to sell our State to the world and garner investment is so important.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
18 minutes ago
- The Age
US attacks Iran LIVE updates: Trump joins Israel's war after bombing Iran's nuclear facilities; Iranian top diplomat to meet Vladimir Putin
Go to latest The latest on the crisis in the Middle East The United States yesterday launched an assault on three nuclear sites in Iran, bringing the US directly into a conflict that threatens to escalate. US President Donald Trump claimed in an address to the American people that nuclear facilities in Natanz, Isfahan and – crucially – Fordow, the 'nuclear mountain' that could only be penetrated by American military technology, had been 'completely and totally obliterated'. Trump said he hoped that Iran would engage in peace talks, but he also threatened any retaliatory action would be met with force and lead to 'tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days'. Overnight, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said America 'does not seek war' with Iran despite entering the latest Middle East conflict on the side of Israel. What comes next? Iran's top diplomat will travel to Moscow today to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The International Atomic Energy Agency called an emergency meeting as fears grow of escalation in the Middle East. As for Trump? North America correspondent Michael Koziol writes: 'Despite his declaration of success, it is too soon to tell whether this was a master stroke or a mistake.' How will Iran respond? The regime has threatened a full and ferocious response with 'everlasting consequences', and had already flagged its intention to target US military and diplomatic sites if America entered the war. However, Iran's options are limited, according to Middle East and security analyst Rodger Shahanan, who writes: 'It is relatively weak militarily and Israel has air supremacy. Iran's armed non-state supporting actors have either been degraded, or internal political or broader national considerations have forced them to critically re-evaluate that support.' What about the enriched uranium? A senior Iranian source has told Reuters that most of the highly enriched uranium had been removed from the Fordow nuclear facility before the US attack. Experts have said chemical contamination was the most likely consequence of damage to Iranian nuclear facilities, but the prospect of nuclear fallout or widespread contamination was low. More on this from science reporter Angus Dalton here. Stay with us as we bring you the latest developments throughout the day. Map: Nuclear sites hit by US military bombing raid 4.14am Decoys and bunker-busters: How America attacked Iran Here is a little more information to have come out of a Pentagon briefing overnight. US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth and General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, provided some extraordinary detail about the US mission to hit Iran's nuclear sites. They described an extensive operation that included 125 aircraft overall, strikes by Tomahawk missiles launched from a US submarine and the use of 14 massive ordnance penetrator – or bunker-buster – bombs, which were used for the first time in combat. Potentially the most interesting part, though, was when they spoke of how the US used decoy planes to draw attention so that B-2 bombers could more easily evade flight trackers and slip into Iranian airspace. 4.11am More details of Operation Midnight Hammer released At a Pentagon media briefing overnight, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said America 'does not seek war' with Iran despite appearing to enter the latest Middle East conflict on the side of Israel. Hegseth used the briefing to divulge more details of Sunday's attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. The mission, called 'Operation Midnight Hammer,' involved decoys and deception, and met with no Iranian resistance, Hegseth and Air Force General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said. Seven B-2 bombers flew for 18 hours from the United States into Iran to drop 14 bunker-buster bombs, Caine said. In total, the US launched 75 precision-guided munitions, including more than two dozen Tomahawk missiles, and more than 125 military aircraft. The attack was made without the knowledge or support of Congress. Hegseth said the Pentagon only notified US lawmakers about the operation after American aircraft had left Iran.
Sydney Morning Herald
28 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
US attacks Iran LIVE updates: Trump joins Israel's war after bombing Iran's nuclear facilities; Iranian top diplomat to meet Vladimir Putin
Latest posts Latest posts 4.05am Opinion: Trump ignores intelligence advice and attacks anyway In the end, Israel's leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, got what he wanted – America involved in his aerial campaign against Iran. And in a timeframe determined by Israeli rather than US calculations, writes Middle East and security analyst Rodger Shanahan. It is an extraordinary turn of events. Neither the International Atomic Energy Agency nor America's own Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard supported Netanyahu's claim about the 'golden information' possessed by Israel indicating an imminent threat posed by any weaponised nuclear program. Yet, US President Donald Trump told reporters not to listen to Gabbard. Once again, the White House has committed its forces to a conflict in the Middle East without making a proper case. 4.04am Analysis: Master stroke or mistake? Five months after the starter's gun fired on Donald Trump's second presidency, he has made his most consequential decision, writes our North America correspondent Michael Koziol. The decision to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities had been one faced by many of his predecessors, who ultimately opted against the idea. The merits of this cannot and will not be known today, not until the damage to the three Iranian sites has been assessed and the regime's retaliation, whatever that may be, has taken place. But politically, this move fundamentally changes the shape of the Trump presidency. The accusation of timidity and indecision – Trump Always Chickens Out (TACO) – can no longer be credibly levelled against him. Did that irksome critique contribute to his resolve? We don't know. But it is becoming clearer that Trump has followed a predetermined path, or at the very least, seized on an opportunity with relish – and along the way, he has obscured his intentions to America and the world. 4.04am The latest on the crisis in the Middle East The United States yesterday launched an assault on three nuclear sites in Iran, bringing the US directly into a conflict that threatens to escalate. US President Donald Trump claimed in an address to the American people that nuclear facilities in Natanz, Isfahan and – crucially – Fordow, the 'nuclear mountain' that could only be penetrated by American military technology, had been 'completely and totally obliterated'. Trump said he hoped that Iran would engage in peace talks, but he also threatened any retaliatory action would be met with force and lead to 'tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days'. Overnight, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said America 'does not seek war' with Iran despite entering the latest Middle East conflict on the side of Israel. What comes next? Iran's top diplomat will travel to Moscow today to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The International Atomic Energy Agency called an emergency meeting as fears grow of escalation in the Middle East. As for Trump? North America correspondent Michael Koziol writes: 'Despite his declaration of success, it is too soon to tell whether this was a master stroke or a mistake.' How will Iran respond? The regime has threatened a full and ferocious response with 'everlasting consequences', and had already flagged its intention to target US military and diplomatic sites if America entered the war. However, Iran's options are limited, according to Middle East and security analyst Rodger Shahanan, who writes: 'It is relatively weak militarily and Israel has air supremacy. Iran's armed non-state supporting actors have either been degraded, or internal political or broader national considerations have forced them to critically re-evaluate that support.' What about the enriched uranium? A senior Iranian source has told Reuters that most of the highly enriched uranium had been removed from the Fordow nuclear facility before the US attack. Experts have said chemical contamination was the most likely consequence of damage to Iranian nuclear facilities, but the prospect of nuclear fallout or widespread contamination was low. More on this from science reporter Angus Dalton here. Map: Nuclear sites hit by US military bombing raid
Sydney Morning Herald
5 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
How Iran could hit back after US strike
The US military has a presence at no fewer than 20 bases in the Middle East and the surrounding regions. The majority of these would be within the 2000-kilometre range of Iran's Sejil-2 ballistic missile. American bases in Iraq and Syria would be likely to be first on the hit list, with Tehran then turning its attention to outposts in Arab countries. Any attempt to strike US military facilities in the Middle East is likely to be less effective than the ballistic missile attack on two US bases in Iraq in January 2020 to avenge the assassination of Qassem Soleimani ordered by Trump at the end of his first term. Although the attacks on the two American bases caused no fatalities, partly because Iran had issued a warning, 110 servicemen suffered concussions and other brain injuries because of the force of the impact. So great was the extent of the damage that it may have deterred Trump from retaliating. Washington also has two hulking aircraft carriers, with a third en route, deployed to the Middle East, which would be considered prime targets for Iranian missiles. Targets Israel has proven just how hard ballistic missiles, which are fired up high into the Earth's atmosphere before travelling to the ground at supersonic speeds, can be to intercept, even with what is considered one of the most sophisticated air defence systems in the world. The US military possesses at least two tried and tested surface-to-air systems capable of intercepting ballistic missiles – Patriot and Terminal High Altitude Area Defence, known as THAAD. Loading And they've slowly been redeploying these systems from Asia to the Middle East for months amid mounting tensions between its ally, Israel, and Iran and its Islamist proxies. America's bases in Iraq – Erbil and Ain al‑Asad air bases – have Patriot batteries positioned, which have been used to fend off militant attacks. American commanders also ordered Patriots to be removed from South Korea and placed at Isa Air Base, Bahrain, and Al Udeid Air Base in recent months. Capacity Of course, mass barrages of ballistic missiles can confuse and overwhelm these systems, as witnessed in both Israel and Ukraine. US servicemen and women will, however, be quietly confident that the Israel Defence Force has significantly reduced Iran's capacity to launch hundreds of missiles at once. Iranian salvos have drastically shrunk in size in recent days. What started as 100-projectile blitzes aimed at Israel has been reduced to just dozens of missiles being fired off at any one time. Iran's production capacity has been significantly eroded, with Israel striking various elements of the supply chain in recent days. Loading Fabian Hoffmann, a missile expert, said: 'Iran is heavily constricted in the missile domain. 'The likelihood that Iran can cause a large amount of damage is very, very slim. 'It could also be counterproductive because if you strike American infrastructure, there will be an even greater cost because you risk the Americans getting involved and really getting involved. So I think that's also a huge political consideration.' Proxies Iran's network of regional proxies was always considered its first line of defence. Hezbollah and Hamas were responsible for keeping Israel's military occupied and unable to strike at the Islamic Republic. The Yemen-based Houthi rebels also distracted the West by targeting commercial shipping in the Red Sea. Militants armed by Iran have been responsible for deadly attacks on the US base in Iraq, using one-way attack drones. It's most likely that the Houthi rebels will once again resume targeting American shipping containers travelling through the Red Sea. The militants had briefly paused attacks on American ships after Trump ramped up strikes on the group. In Iraq, Kataib Hezbollah could likely carry out its threat to 'act directly against its [US] interests and bases across the region'. But Israel's decimation of these proxy groups – chiefly Hamas and Hezbollah – in the past year is one saving grace that will comfort the Americans. 'The fact that virtually the only missiles and drones that are launched against Israel right now are coming from Iran is striking,' said Dmitri Alperovitch, chair of the Silverado Policy Accelerator think tank in Washington. Strait of Hormuz Tucked between the Arabian Peninsula and the Persian Gulf's western flank lies one of Tehran's most powerful weapons against the West. Nothing hurts a government more than the price of oil, and this narrow stretch of water between Oman and Iran is vital in the global supply. The Islamic Republic has the means to effectively shut down access to the strait, crippling shipping through the region because there are no alternative routes. The threat of its closure is perhaps why the USS Nimitz, one of America's largest aircraft carriers, is being moved into the region. Iran could quite easily close the strait by mining it, repositioning mobile ballistic missile launchers, and using maritime drones. It employed similar tactics during the so-called Tanker Wars of the 1980s – although it never fully succeeded, largely due to UK Royal Navy and later US Navy efforts to escort commercial vessels through the Gulf. This, US officials fear, would keep American naval warships in the Persian Gulf. 'Mine clearance is one of the US Navy's few weaknesses,' Tom Sharpe, a former Royal Navy officer, wrote in The Telegraph this week. For Tehran, closing the strait is one of the most likely ways of bringing the US into the conflict. Trump was happy to expend billions of dollars in strikes against Houthi rebels, the Iranian-backed militia, when they attempted to snarl up Western shipping through the Red Sea. The US president is acutely aware of global oil prices, and with a fifth of global petroleum shipped through Hormuz, any blockages would be likely to lead to him sanctioning some strikes to restore shipping. The other fact that makes this option particularly nuclear for Tehran is that China, the largest buyer of Iranian oil, uses the strait for shipping its purchases. This hasn't stopped Iran from meddling with shipping through GPS navigation interference. Two tankers collided and caught fire on the narrow stretch of water after allegedly being impacted by the disruption. US officials have claimed the GPS meddling originated from the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas, located just north of the strait. Some analysts believe Iran is unlikely to carry out such threats, fearing it would provoke Arab states into the conflict and complete Tehran's global isolation. Oil fields If the Iranian regime believed it faced an existential crisis or the irreversible destruction of its nuclear program, it could play what analysts describe as its 'last big card' by also attacking energy infrastructure in the Gulf. The world got a glimpse of what could be to come in 2019 when drone and missile strikes hit the Abqaiq and Khurais oil facilities in eastern Saudi Arabia. Yemen's Iran-backed Houthi rebels claimed responsibility – but both the US and Saudi governments accused Iran of orchestrating the attacks. Loading The attacks temporarily knocked out half of Saudi Arabia's oil production, triggering a sharp spike in global energy prices. Abqaiq, which processes 7 million barrels of crude a day – more than two-thirds of Saudi Arabia's production capacity – would almost certainly be a prime target if Iran followed through on its threats. Other potential targets include oil and LNG terminals in Saudi Arabia and the UAE, as well as oil tankers moving through the region's waters. In May 2019, limpet mines damaged three tankers and a bunkering ship off the coast of Fujairah in the UAE. No one claimed responsibility, but Western officials suspected Iranian frogmen were behind the attacks. Cyber Over the years, Iran and its regional proxies have claimed responsibility for numerous cyberattacks against Israel. They include destroying data, phishing campaigns and information operations. Given the threat poses a danger to both civilian and military worlds, the US government has been appealing for information on Iranian hackers responsible for targeting critical infrastructure. A $US10 million ($15.5 million) reward was posted for details on a group, known as CyberAv3ngers, who US officials have linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
