In the Australian press: Creation of the military bloc AUKUS opens up new prospects for the export of submarines for Russia

The creation of the AUKUS military bloc by Washington, London and Canberra opens up new prospects for the export of submarines for Russia. After all, the transfer by the Americans to Australia of technologies for creating nuclear submarines can become a precedent for other countries and a signal for similar actions.

This is how the assistant professor at Curtin University, Alexei Muravyov, argues in his article published by the Australian portal The Conversation.

Of course, military-technical cooperation between the United States and Australia carries certain risks for the Russian Federation, but so far it is not a direct threat to security. At the same time, the contract between these countries on nuclear submarines makes it clear to Russia that it, too, can start promoting such defense technologies on the international market. And in this case, the Australian press claims, it is unlikely to have problems with the sale of its submarines.

The Australian press emphasizes that this is not a personal conclusion of an individual university employee, but a conclusion based on information from experts close to the Russian Ministry of Defense. One of them believes that Vietnam and Algeria will be the first to want to buy Russian nuclear submarines, and soon others may follow these countries.

A new market for nuclear submarines is being created literally before our eyes

- he said.

Comments

[Bashkirkhan]

Yes, but first you need to build nuclear submarines for the Russian fleet. Because in 20 years only two representatives of the Yasen and Yasen-M projects have received a submarine from the multipurpose atomarines. And actually, of the 4 factories that built atomarines, only Sevmash remained, which was loaded with orders. So this is the publication of the assistant professor in the order of delirium. Nothing to export in the next 10 years.

[Shurik70]

And what, before there was some kind of ban on the export of nuclear submarines?
What, I have not heard about this. Only the majority prefer diesel.
Cheaper.

[Zakidon]

A new market for nuclear submarines is being created literally before our eyes

It is very expensive, very few countries can afford it, it makes no sense ..
In fact, these nuclear submarines are needed for the final strike of retaliation. God forbid, of course, and no one is going to export them.
PS And Australia, for the United States, the point of pressure on China is just .. They surround China from all sides, as well as Russia .. They are afraid of something!

[Orange bigg]

.In the press of Australia: Creation of the military bloc AUKUS opens up new prospects for the export of submarines for Russia

... The Australian press emphasizes that this is not a personal conclusion of an individual university employee, but a conclusion based on information from experts close to the Russian Ministry of Defense. One of them believes that Vietnam and Algeria will be the first to want to buy Russian nuclear submarines, and soon others may follow these countries.

A new market for nuclear submarines is being created literally before our eyes

- he said.

Maybe the Anglo-Saxons have deliberately muddied this AUKUS so that we sell our submarines, and not modernize, otherwise our nuclear submarines are a problem for them and so they want to cunningly solve it, hinting to us about this through the media? I hope that we will not fall into this hook. we need nuclear submarines ourselves. After SDI, such a trick could well have occurred to the Anglo-Saxons. The same Nerpa was leased to the Indians. And as you know, greed ruined the fryer. If we want to make money, we will get problems in the country's defense and end up under the distribution. The submarine fleet of the Russian Federation is a serious deterrent. They want to undermine it. And so that we decide to sell the nuclear submarine, they can hypocritically stir up the alleged warming in relations with us, but this is just a trick. Anglo-Saxons love tricks.

[Most polite]

Quote: OrangeBigg

Maybe the Anglo-Saxons deliberately muddied this AUKUS so that we sold our submarines, and not modernized

Do you at least think before you print such nonsense. Firstly, who in the Kremlin will take such a crazy step, and secondly, which of the potential allies will buy the nuclear submarine, having neither the appropriate specialists, nor the infrastructure.

[Abbot]

A new market for nuclear submarines is being created literally before our eyes

The nuclear submarine market in the Pacific Ocean is very cool, of course. Do we need it? Which countries can afford it? What for? Some kind of market illusions from the author of the note - anyhow to trade. And in general, after a grandiose scam, who will have a desire to contact such "reliable" partners.

The Australian press emphasizes that this is not a personal conclusion of an individual university employee, but a conclusion based on information from experts close to the Russian Ministry of Defense.

It is always alarming that the notes contain references to anonymous knowledgeable sources and the opinions of unnamed experts close to the Ministry of Defense. Australian associate professors, yeah.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Zakidon

It is very expensive, very few countries can afford it.

I think China is one of those countries. With the technologies of transport reactors of 4 generations, they, frankly, are not very good yet ... But for the sake of a hedgehog in the pants of the Anglo-Saxons, the whales will try ... For example, they will put a small transport nuclear reactor on their 039 and sell them to Pakam or Comrade. Kim ...
This would be logical, as a countermeasure against the hegemon in the same APR.
At the expense of Iran. We will definitely not supply them with submarines. Not for the sake of the Ams, but for the immigrants from the Union in Israel for. But I will not undertake to vouch for the whales. But common sense dictates that even for the sake of a small nuclear war in the BV zone, hunfuzs will not sell submarines to the Persians.
We may sell / build a 4th generation submarine in India, as opposed to our "strategic partners" ... perhaps. As an option - Argentina, if asked, we can sell. Also Chile, Venezuela ...
Somehow, however. AHA.

[Denis812]

Submarines are needed for the final blow of retaliation

Do you accidentally confuse simple nuclear submarines with SSBNs?
A conventional nuclear submarine is just a submarine, in which the reactor is used as a power plant.
From the fact that there is a reactor, the boat does not become a carrier of nuclear weapons. :)
What kind of last blow of retaliation are you talking about?

[Private-K]

This is not more likely to "obfuscate" China.
For just laying around, just 12 ordinary diesel-electric submarines would be more useful.
But here are 8 nuclear submarines of the ocean zone. And the task for them can already be set to parry the expanding Chinese fleet already in the ocean. First of all, the Indian Ocean - for which the amers lack the strength - for China is the route of goods to Europe, the export of oil from the Near East, expansion to Africa ... Well, in the Pacific, they can help amers, if something happens.

[apricot]

"PS And Australia, for the United States, the point of pressure on China is just .. They surround China from all sides, as well as Russia .. They are afraid of something!"
Two, back to back, though not quite friends, but there are no options, you can only fight back this way ...

[Machito]

Submarine defensive armament?

[ja-ja-vw]

Quote: Shurik70

And what, before there was some kind of ban on the export of nuclear submarines?

IAEA - exactly
Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement (CSA)
the position of the United States, the EEC and of Israel is likely.
No one will sell the nuclear sub to Iran, the DPRK is the same

[Pandiurin]

Quote: Shurik70

And what, before there was some kind of ban on the export of nuclear submarines?
What, I have not heard about this. Only the majority prefer diesel.
Cheaper.

The ban applies to enriched uranium.
Type materials and technologies fall under the international treaty and the obligations of countries on the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons.

It is enriched uranium that is used in the power plant, and not as depleted uranium at a nuclear power plant. If at nuclear power plants, for example, in Iran or Turkey, the spent fuel is taken by Rosatom for processing and disposal, and it is possible to ensure control by the IAEA at a civilian stationary facility. A military submarine is clearly a different case.

Those. two violations at once:
1. Enriched uranium (tons)
2. Lack of any possibility of control by the IAEA.

[Taliy YAN]

let them first learn to sell them everything old.

[Orange bigg]

Quote: Taliy YAN

let them first learn to sell them everything old.

Like we have a lot of new things. The backbone of the Russian submarine fleet is old submarines, if we sell them, then what will we be left with? Remind you of our difficult geopolitical position, and without an efficient submarine fleet it will become hopeless, which our enemies will obviously take advantage of.

[Piramidon]

Quote: Taliy YAN

let them first learn to sell them everything old.

The maintenance of the old one will require much more money than the new one.

[zenion]

First, you need to find out if there are banks with Russian deposits there. If there are, then of course nuclear submarines are needed, against Russia's attack on itself.

[Alex777]

There are few countries that have the ability and need to have a nuclear submarine.
In addition to Australia and India, only Japan can swing at the Premier League ...
Vietnam and Algeria don’t need nuclear submarines for nothing. For many reasons. IMHO.

[URAL72]

Only countries with global ambitions and corresponding economies need nuclear submarines. Today it is Japan and Brazil. Others already have them, including India. Japan has more opportunities than Brazil, but less desire - they have good nuclear submarines with VNEU, more is not needed yet.

[gohomeyanki]

This is, of course, the proliferation of nuclear weapons. A little bit more and drones powered by nuclear engines will be sold all over the world: underwater, air, and also trucks with nuclear engines, and of course EVERYTHING will not be proliferation.

USA opens Pandora's box. And many will want to acquire such nuclear weapons, I think Iran would not mind buying a couple of them. All African dictators, some Brazil, many countries of the East, Latin America, and others.

Such things off the coast of the United States seriously change the balance, and it will already be difficult to conduct a war against the countries of Latin America. ))

[Sergey Valov]

“This is, of course, the proliferation of nuclear weapons” - in this case, the construction of nuclear power plants is also the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

[gohomeyanki]

In theory, yes, but in practice I can't imagine how you will disassemble the nuclear power plant, then at the moment of moving, start a nuclear reaction there. But in theory, yes, this is possible, like a station was placed on a huge truck, then an atomic reaction was launched on this truck, it rather sounds like fantasy.

ps
But to start a nuclear reaction, which will end in an explosion, in a truck, or a nuclear submarine and direct it in the direction you need is easier. Roughly speaking, there is a delivery vehicle.
And then you can always say that it was an accident.

[Sergey Valov]

It is incomparably easier to take nuclear fuel from a nuclear power plant and spray it from the air over the required territory. There are other options as well. But these are all ersatz weapons. A nuclear reactor has never been considered a nuclear weapon. In addition, a nuclear charge is easy to create only in theory, but in practice it is very difficult.

[gohomeyanki]

LOL what. Fuel .. Pts funny. It is not efficient to scatter fuel, there is very little of it, and if sprayed in the air, this efficiency is equal to zero, a reaction is needed.

It is not the fuel in the gas tank that kills, but the brought match.

[Dharma]

You don't understand what you are writing about at all.

[gohomeyanki]

The fact that you do not understand what I wrote does not mean that I do not understand it, such extrapolation does not work here. It is easier to write another one in order to descend to your understanding, it is already difficult, since you do not understand the simplest analogies.

[Pandiurin]

Quote: Sergey Valov

“This is, of course, the proliferation of nuclear weapons” - in this case, the construction of nuclear power plants is also the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

Depleted uranium is used at nuclear power plants.
Enriched on the nuclear submarine.
If the IAEA needs it, the nuclear power plant will be monitored as often as it wants.
Will supply video cameras with recording and online access, seal, etc.

Nobody will let the military IAEA into the nuclear submarine.

[Borik]

The creation of the military bloc AUKUS opens up new prospects for the export of submarines for Russia

From the mere thought that Iran can order nuclear submarines in Russia, America should acquire rabbit disease en masse.

[Andobor]

Quote: Borik

The creation of the military bloc AUKUS opens up new prospects for the export of submarines for Russia

I don’t know about boats, but the prospects for exporting coal to China instead of Australian ones have opened up fantastic, ten railway brigades are building the second track on the eastern section of the BAM, there’s a shaft of coal, export routes need to be expanded, China will buy everything.

[Podvodnik]

acquire rabbit disease.

Rather bearish

[Private-K]

For Iran, it is fundamentally important to invest 100-200 billion. to update the deadly obsolete Air Force.
And they don't even need the nuclear submarine.

[Prjanik]

Can we build additional nuclear submarines for Belarus, not included in START-3, to protect the Belarusian sea from the Australian threat

[Crash]

Quote: Prjanik

from the Australian threat

Then from the US Sixth Fleet

[salad]

To protect Belarusian shrimps from farting Norwegian herring))))

[ammunition]

Quote: Prjanik

build additional nuclear submarines for Belarus, not included in START-3

Clever thought! finally .. the British (they are Americans and Australians and Canadians ..) always do so. Bombers are also .. and "Poplar" Belarusian .. but with a single command .-))

[Denis812]

Psaki will say: "I told you that there is a sea in Belarus !!!"

[tralflot1832]

We still need a project of a nuclear submarine hunters for a nuclear submarine of an adversary, such as Lyra. I saw something similar in 1991, but this is definitely not Lyra. Rather, 671 projects, on the rudder, a GAS container.

[alch3mist]

The creation of the military bloc AUKUS opens up new prospects for the export of submarines for Russia

For this, AUKUS will be renamed AURUS.

[Mountain shooter]

Do not do not ... first yourself! Although ... one to myself, one to the side. So we will develop technologies, and we will reduce the cost price.

[Cat Alexandrovich]

I think the line of thought is correct. But numbers! 12000 for yourself, and for sale 120000! That's better!

[CommanderDIVA]

The export of nuclear submarines, in my opinion, is limited by law, so our Indians leased nuclear submarines, but here the Americans made a trick with their ears with the formation of AUKUS, now the Australians, and then Canada and New Zealand will catch up, later the Indians, smells of new NATO in the Asia-Pacific region, directed against the PRC

[Ros 56]

And the assistant professor is stupid, as Kartsev and Ilchenko used to say, from the word completely.

[Eug]

Both Vietnam and Algeria hardly need nuclear submarines, their maritime interests lie in relative proximity to their own coastline. In this situation, as for me, a dozen submarines are better than 3-4 submarines.

[Artemion3]

It has long been necessary to supply Cuba with Barracudas.

[Hindu]

Associate Professor Alexey Duak Shtole? We are not allowed to enter the vaccine market, and then Australia will of course order us submarines

[Pavel57]

Who, apart from India, can buy a sub / l with a nuclear power plant?

[gohomeyanki]

This is, of course, the proliferation of nuclear weapons. A little more and all over the world drones on nuclear engines will be sold: underwater, air, and also trucks with nuclear engines, and of course EVERYTHING will not be proliferation.

USA opens Pandora's box.

[Codett]

If ours start selling nuclear submarines to other countries, then they won't hand over anything to their navy. But knowing the greed of our bureaucrats, they can generally score on their fleet, and drive everything to third countries, shifting the dates of the ships for our Navy

[Siberian54]

Quote: Zakidon

A new market for nuclear submarines is being created literally before our eyes

It is very expensive, very few countries can afford it, it makes no sense ..
In fact, these nuclear submarines are needed for the final strike of retaliation. God forbid, of course, and no one is going to export them.
PS And Australia, for the United States, the point of pressure on China is just .. They surround China from all sides, as well as Russia .. They are afraid of something!

- In general, this alliance is the first visible movement of the Pentagon in connection with the appearance in my country of carriers of YAZU of unlimited range, the interception of warheads from the southern direction ..

[Dikson]

Nonsense .. Vietnam .. Algeria .. Remember India with their attitude to complex technology .. This article is not about that .. First of all, the appearance in that region of another player with a powerful modern submarine fleet is a counterbalance to China and of course to us .. And if China, with their pace of building a fleet, can still chase three "hares" - the United States, Britain and Australia, then we will have to be sad in the Pacific Ocean .. However, given the capabilities of the nuclear submarine, the Australopithecines will throw us a problem for all oceans ..

[Glagol1]

Anti-ship coastal complexes, naval aviation and long-range air defense will not raise the mood of the Anglo-Saxons. And the corvettes should be stamped. Don't be so afraid.

[Ivanushka Ivanov]

We - to the States, the States - to Australia, Tajikistan - to us.

Well, if in essence, then it is necessary to put them on nuclear weapons from now on and forever, amen.

[Glagol1]

There will be no big market, nuclear submarines are too complicated, expensive and dangerous.
Diesel ones are not going anywhere. Although it is also expensive. There was information that the German one now costs more than 400 million euros. 35 billion rubles Darkness...
And I wish Australians to tie up their navel.

[Pandiurin]

Quote: Glagol1

There will be no big market, nuclear submarines are too complicated, expensive and dangerous.
Diesel ones are not going anywhere. Although it is also expensive. There was information that the German one now costs more than 400 million euros. 35 billion rubles Darkness...
And I wish Australians to tie up their navel.

Australia probably had completely different reasons, not about the cost.

First
it is a strategic choice of allies and enemies for decades. An Anglo-Saxon alliance was formed (possibly to replace the dying NATO) against China.
It is now clearly defined that they are mortal enemies with China, and a higher level of partnership is expected with Britain and the United States than with any other countries. Australia is of course the "six" in this company.

Second
French diesel submarines could perform different tasks, but were more suitable for the defense of the adjacent coastal zone of Australia and some specific sea routes.
The nuclear submarine, in comparison with the diesel one, will cope well with long-distance, stealthy (no need to surface) raids.
You can walk to China to control its sea routes. Those. The nuclear submarine is no longer so much about defense, but more about offense, power projection, etc.

Thirdly
Nuclear submarines are usually larger or may be larger than diesel submarines. Those. there may be more missile silos, they may be longer. More weapons, more powerful.
It is quite possible that the silos will be "universal" ie. The United States may, over time, secretly provide YABCH missiles, as is now the case with British nuclear weapons. Since the United States and Australia have already demonstratively violated the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, they can do it again, but this time on the issue of missiles.

Are you talking about money)