AUKUS: Impossible to Break – Strengthening Deterrence in the Indo-Pacific

Is Australia’s rhetoric towards China hardening? It’s nothing compared with how the US views AUKUS

Richard Marles recently warned of China’s military build-up, sparking concern in Beijing. But the Trump administration has been much more candid about its view of AUKUS as a China deterrent.
Anton Nilsson
Nov 7, 2025

When the AUKUS pact was launched in 2021, none of the three leaders of Australia, the US and the UK mentioned the word “China”. Instead, observers had to read between the lines about delivering security and stability to the Indo-Pacific to understand the true aim of the submarine agreement.

In Beijing, the meaning was considered clear: the AUKUS nations were exhibiting a “Cold War mentality and ideological prejudice”, which would risk “seriously undermin[ing] regional peace and stability and intensif[ying] the arms race”, in the words of Chinese officials.

Since then, it’s fair to say the rhetoric has hardened somewhat. Defence Minister Richard Marles told a navy conference earlier in the week that protecting trade routes in the South China Sea and East China Sea were at the core of Australia’s national interest.

“That work is challenging, and in truth it is becoming increasingly risky. The biggest military build-up in the world today is China,” he told the Indo-Pacific conference in Sydney, according to Reuters. “That it is happening without strategic reassurance means that for Australia and so many countries a response is demanded.” (Some independent analysts have cast doubts on Australia’s assessment of the rate of China’s military build-up.)

In China, Marles’ comments were interpreted as Australia seeking a “pretext” for its own “military expansion”.

The Chinese Communist Party-linked newspaper Global Times reported a local analyst as saying, “Marles’ claim appears to show that Australia is viewing China as an imaginary enemy and taking it as a pretext to push for the expansion of its own defence budget.”

Paraphrasing comments from Professor Chen Hong, director of the New Zealand Studies Centre from East China Normal University, the paper reported: “Rather than repeatedly provoking China to divert conflicts, what some Australian politicians should prioritise is reflecting on their own national defence and security strategies … otherwise, the holes Australia digs for itself in the security domain will only grow deeper and wider.”

The Albanese government, which has sought to repair the relationship with Beijing after the low point reached during Scott Morrison’s tenure, is performing a balancing act when it comes to China. Albanese has been criticised in the past for not using stronger rhetoric against Australia’s largest trading partner. But his government has also indicated its growing worry about Beijing’s military power, including joining recently with ASEAN nations to sign a “strongly worded statement on conflict prevention and crisis management”, sections of which were clearly aimed at Beijing, due to its military aggression in the region”, as ABC News reported.

Meanwhile, the US under Donald Trump has been far less subtle. Ahead of a congressional hearing overnight to consider the nomination of Alexander Velez-Green to be deputy under secretary of defence policy, the Trump nominee submitted responses to a questionnaire in which he was clear about what he saw as the purpose of AUKUS.

In response to the question “Does the AUKUS defence trade agreement strengthen deterrence of China?”, Velez-Green said: “AUKUS has the potential to significantly enhance deterrence in the Indo-Pacific by strengthening US force posture in the region, while also bolstering Australia’s own military capabilities. Consistent with President Trump’s intent, it is therefore vitally important for the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom to work together to ensure that it is a success.”

Velez-Green also said that the ongoing US review of AUKUS would ensure that the pact would be “tailored to increasing US warfighter lethality and well-aligned with President Trump’s America First agenda”.

Last year, Velez-Green was lead author on a paper by the right-wing think tank Heritage Foundation in which he argued that Washington needed to “surge investments in America’s deterrent posture in the Western Pacific”, including to deny Beijing a “fait accompli” in seeking to “seize control of Taiwan rapidly before the United States and its allies can respond effectively”.

“To that end [the US must] harden and disperse US operating locations in the First and Second Island Chains, including by securing and improving US military access in Japan, the Philippines, and Australia and accelerating military construction on Guam and the Northern Marianas,” the paper said.

He also wrote that helping Australia strengthen its defences could “contribute directly to the ability of US and allied forces to deter or defeat a Chinese invasion of Taiwan”.

“Japanese and Australian forcs, for instance, could make a significant difference in such a contest, and both countries share America’s interest in preventing China from breaking through the First Island Chain,” the paper said.