AUKUS under scrutiny: A flawed pact undermining regional stability

In early June 2025, the U.S. Department of Defense initiated a comprehensive review of the AUKUS submarine deal. Led by Pentagon policy chief Elbridge Colby, the review questions whether the program meets the "America First" agenda, casting serious doubt on the sustainability and strategic reliability of the AUKUS arrangement.

Australia and the United Kingdom are scrambling to contain the fallout. Political figures from both sides of Australia's political aisle, including former Prime Ministers, have called for reassurance and a clearer sense of where AUKUS is headed.

What's clear is this: a pact built on U.S. domestic political consensus has now become hostage to U.S. political volatility. Australia's strategic future now hinges on decisions made in Washington, not Canberra.

The true nature of AUKUS: Diverging interests behind a common front

AUKUS was never the balanced alliance it claimed to be. From its inception in 2021, the pact has been serving as a geopolitical maneuver for each party's own agenda.

For the U.S., it aims to outsource part of its so-called Indo-Pacific containment strategy by pushing Australia to the front lines without bearing long-term costs or commitments. For the U.K., it sees AUKUS as a symbolic re-entry into the region, capitalizing on outdated imperial nostalgia and its post-Brexit "Global Britain" narrative. For Australia, it is mortgaging its strategic autonomy for access to high-end technology that may never be fully materialized.

Despite the hype, the flaw of AUKUS lies first in its enormous economic cost and insufficient military benefits. Under the agreement, Australia must invest up to over US$200 billion in its nuclear submarine project over the next thirty years, which is more than ten times the country's entire defense budget for 2023. However, the public funds are used to subsidize defense manufacturers in the U.K. and the U.S. This clearly unequal arrangement reveals that AUKUS, in essence, serves as a mechanism for channeling benefits to the Anglo-American military-industrial complex, rather than genuinely safeguarding Australia's security interests.

Even more worrying is the pact's exclusionary nature. AUKUS bypasses regional institutions, marginalizes ASEAN's role, and promotes a bloc-based approach reminiscent of Cold War dynamics. It offers no platform for inclusive security, consultation, or trust-building. Instead, it fuels regional arms races and ideological division.

The predicament of AUKUS is not an isolated case, but rather a common fate of the "small clique" system the U.S. has been constructing in the Asia-Pacific region. From the "Five Eyes Alliance" to the "Quad," the U.S. has continuously devised new ways to cobble together exclusive blocs, yet none have escaped the dual pressures of internal contradictions and external resistance. This practice of drawing ideological lines and engaging in bloc confrontation runs counter to the essence of multilateralism and represents a geopolitical manipulation that goes against the trend of our times.

China's perspective: Rejecting bloc politics, promoting collective security

China does not oppose cooperation between states. But cooperation must be open, inclusive, and genuinely conducive to peace. Exclusive, military-centered groupings like AUKUS which is built on deterrence, not dialogue, run counter to the collective interests of the region. The Asia-Pacific does not need a new arms race. It needs a stable environment for development, connectivity, and shared prosperity.

In stark contrast to the Cold War mentality of exclusivity and zero-sum games embodied by AUKUS, China has consistently adhered to a development philosophy of openness, inclusiveness, and win-win cooperation, making substantive contributions to peace and development in the Asia-Pacific region through concrete measures. China has proposed the Global Security Initiative (GSI), advocating a new path toward security that features dialogue over confrontation, partnership over alliance, and win-win results over zero-sum game. The Initiative has won support from over 120 countries and international and regional organizations. China has also facilitated the entry into force of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), establishing the world's largest free trade area. China and the ASEAN countries are working together to build a common home of peace, tranquility, prosperity, beauty and friendship. All these positive efforts have embodied China's vision of cooperation and security.

Conclusion: AUKUS is a strategic mirage instead of a regional solution

The AUKUS pact is beginning to crack under the weight of its own contradictions. Its foundational premise is proving less durable than imagined, while its promise of security is increasingly viewed as a source of instability. And its long-term feasibility is in doubt.

The Asia-Pacific is not a chessboard for great power rivalry. It is a shared home for over half the world's population, where security must be cooperative, not confrontational. The international community must remain vigilant and ensure that bloc-based military alliances do not derail the prospects for lasting regional peace.

It is time to look beyond AUKUS and invest in an Asia-Pacific future defined not by submarines and suspicion, but by dialogue, inclusiveness, and common development.

(Yi Xin is a Beijing-based international affairs commentator.)