Tight Deadline to Push AUKUS Agreement Forward
iStock illustration
The trilateral security partnership between Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States, known as AUKUS, has been an important focus of both government and industry since the agreement was announced in September 2021.
In December 2023, Congress passed the fiscal year 2024 National Defense Authorization Act, which contained several critical legislative provisions to propel the AUKUS security partnership forward.
The NDAA language supports Pillar I — the main tenant of the agreement — through authorizations to transfer up to three Virginia-class submarines to Australia, to accept Australian funds to support the U.S. submarine industrial base and to allow Australian contractors to train in U.S. shipyards to aid in the development of Australia’s submarine industrial base, among other provisions.
These are long-lead lines of effort that will come to fruition well into the 2030s.
Currently, NDAA provisions relating to Pillar II — which focuses on emerging technologies like autonomy and hypersonics — are taking center stage within the trilateral discussions. Section 1343 of the NDAA directs the president to certify by April 2024 that the United Kingdom and Australia have implemented comparable export control systems to that of the United States. If the certification is made, the administration will issue immediate export licensing exemptions for the two partners.
Additionally, Section 1344 directs the secretaries of state and defense to initiate a rulemaking this summer to establish an expedited decision-making process for applications to export between and among Australia, the United Kingdom and Canada for defense articles and services not covered by an exemption under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations.
Congress laid out an incredibly aggressive timeline to take leaps forward on export control reform within the context of AUKUS, and the administration — especially the State Department — has been working hard in good faith to meet these deadlines. For this, the administration deserves commendation. However, it’s necessary to question whether this timeline is realistic and what it would mean if the United States were to fail in meeting these deadlines.
Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Ambassador Bonnie Jenkins testified before a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on Feb. 14 that U.S. officials are working “around the clock” to meet the April certification deadline. She noted this type of certification is a process that usually takes six to 12 months, but the State Department is working with its counterparts, and they are on track to meet the April deadline despite the shortened timeframe. While this is encouraging to hear, industry is incredibly skeptical that the deadlines will be met.
Meeting the April and summer deadlines set out in the authorization act are difficult both because of a lack of clarity and the complexities surrounding U.S. regulatory processes and procedures.
To successfully implement Sections 1343 and 1344, the administration will need to address the following three issue areas: defining what “comparable regulatory regimes” between the three partner countries means; establishing mechanisms for trilateral industry partners to utilize exemptions; and addressing the challenges that the scope of the exemptions could create. These are not easily said nor easily done.
However, meeting these deadlines presents a unique opportunity to build momentum on AUKUS Pillar II initiatives as the timeline coincides with the first two AUKUS Advanced Capabilities Industry Forum events being held in April and July in the United States and United Kingdom, respectively.
Announced in December by U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, Australian Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defense Richard Marles and the U.K. Secretary of State for Defense Grant Shapps, the AUKUS Advanced Capabilities Industry Forum will convene government and industry representatives to help inform policy, technical and commercial frameworks to support the development of Pillar II capabilities.
Industry is hopeful that these meetings will provide more clarity on Pillar II, which calls for the three partners to develop other advanced technologies such as hypersonics, cybersecurity, quantum computing, undersea robotics and space.
Industry will want to learn more details, including the status of procedures, what acquisition will look like for trilateral projects, legislative updates from partner countries and the sharing of foundational documents like terms of reference with wider industry.
Industry is also keenly interested in how the trilateral partners jointly and individually view Pillar II success. Additionally, if the U.S. administration can meet the NDAA deadlines, discussion at the two forum events would be breakthrough opportunities for government and industry to collaborate on exemption guidance and implementation.
Nevertheless, it’s important that the administration gets the execution of Sections 1343 and 1344 right. Pillar II of AUKUS has the potential to be a generational change in defense cooperation between the United States and allied countries. Setting the foundation for this type of partnership to be an enduring success should not be threatened by meeting deadlines. Industry wants AUKUS to not only survive, but to thrive. If getting this right comes at the expense of meeting the April and summer deadlines, then this shouldn’t be considered a failure.
In the ideal scenario that the NDAA deadlines are met, it will take time to see Pillar II end results that are the product of these exemptions.
Seeing AUKUS through will require patience and determination well past the deadlines, but the foundation for unprecedented collaboration is being set now. ND
Bridgit Sullivan is a strategy and policy associate at the National Defense Industrial Association.
Topics: International
Comments (0)