AUKUS: This could only end in a very bad place

Summary

Podcast Summary: 7am

Episode: "AUKUS: This could only end in a very bad place"
Date: May 16, 2026
Host: Daniel James, Solstice Media
Guests: Ruby Jones (interviewer), Dr. Albert Palazzo (former Director of War Studies, Australian Army; Adjunct Professor, UNSW)
Main Theme:
A sharp critique and exploration of the AUKUS defence pact, focusing on escalating US military presence in Australia, deepening secrecy, and the existential risks of tagging along with US military strategy—potentially leading Australia toward a catastrophic confrontation with China.

---

Episode Overview

This episode dissects recent developments in AUKUS, the trilateral security pact between Australia, the UK, and the US, particularly the increasing integration of the Australian defence with US military planning and assets. Through a conversation with Dr. Albert Palazzo, the episode probes what the secrecy surrounding AUKUS may be hiding, whether the US can or will deliver its promised submarines, and the now-real prospect that Australia may be drawn into a US-China conflict—potentially even a nuclear one.

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. AUKUS: "Full Steam Ahead" but Lacking in Transparency

• Both governments reiterate the partnership often—“full steam ahead”—but offer little concrete detail on implementation.
  • Daniel James, [00:00]: "We are full steam ahead. We are full steam ahead."
  • Pete Hegseth, [00:04]: "At the direction of the President, AUKUS is full steam ahead, as he said."
• Announcements tout billions in new funding and expanded cooperation, but the actual substance is thin.

2. Deepening US Military Presence in Australia

• Upgrades to air bases and infrastructure (Queensland, Northern Territory, Darwin) to support US forces—especially for bomber rotations and rapid response (MV22 Ospreys).
  • Pete Hegseth, [02:45]: "We're upgrading infrastructure on air bases in Queensland and the Northern Territory that allows for additional US Bomber rotations."
  • Dr. Albert Palazzo, [02:59]: "We already have a significant US Presence on Australian territory. And now they're talking about bringing in more basing Ospreys here..."
• Recent example: US Air Force launching attacks from Australian soil (Amberley Air Base) on targets in Yemen, marking a shift in Australia’s passive role toward active participation.
  • Dr. Albert Palazzo, [03:28]: "We've even had the US Air Force mounting attacks from Australian soil to foreign soil..."

3. Secrecy, Lack of Public Accountability, and the “Rubber Stamp” Review

• The Pentagon’s review of AUKUS remains undisclosed; what little is shared is positive, but no substantiation is provided.
  • Dr. Albert Palazzo, [04:36]: "The government has not released it and there's no indications that the Minister for Defence will release it... Whatever it's going to cost, well, we don't know, but it'll be paid for and everything's going to work out swimmingly well."
• Australia’s own “AUKUS Review Committee” described as a political fig leaf—appointed members are unlikely to challenge the AUKUS orthodoxy, and most proceedings will be secret.
  • Dr. Albert Palazzo, [06:54]: “So this is not so much as a review committee, as a rubber stamp committee. And it's also largely going to be held in secret...”

4. Concerns Over Sovereignty and Strategic Autonomy

• Dr. Palazzo voices deep concern over who will actually control the technology acquired through AUKUS:
  • Dr. Albert Palazzo, [07:43]: "Who's going to control these submarines? Is it going to be controlled by the United States or by Australia? ...Will there be a kill switch that will prevent them from doing stuff unless the United States agrees?"
• Secrecy is less about legitimate national security and more about political risk aversion and narrative control.
  • Dr. Albert Palazzo, [09:31]: "The government doesn't want to trust the Australian public with this knowledge because if they did, it's likely to be politicized... So, you know, the government wants to control the narrative. And the best way to control the narrative is to not let anybody in on what the narrative is.”

5. Real World Constraints: The Submarine Mirage

• US promises of submarines are unlikely to be fulfilled; its own production capacity is insufficient:
  • Dr. Albert Palazzo, [05:18]: "US build rate has not budged. They are not building enough submarines for their own needs... There's just no way it's going to double. That's just an impossibility."
• Australian financial contributions (another $1 billion) are described as a “drop in the bucket” and their use is opaque.

6. Existential Risk: Australia “Tagging Along” in a Path Toward Nuclear Conflict

• Dr. Palazzo warns of an unacknowledged, growing risk that Australia will be drawn into a catastrophic US-China war.
  • Dr. Albert Palazzo, [09:31]: "We're heading down a pathway that can only lead to confrontation with China... In a war with China, that is a risk of enormous magnitude because great powers cannot go to war. But our government seems to discount that as an outcome."
• Most chillingly, he underscores the stakes of nuclear-armed conflict:
  • Dr. Albert Palazzo, [10:49]: "Both the United States and China are nuclear armed and nuclear armed powers cannot go to war because if they do, everyone dies. And I'm saying that quite directly because that is the outcome of a nuclear war between great powers."

7. Alternatives: Diplomacy Over Militarism

• Dr. Palazzo criticizes the US propensity to default to military solutions for international challenges, urging diplomacy, especially with China:
  • Dr. Albert Palazzo, [11:50]: "The US has consistently over the last 45 years, pulled the military lever... Diplomacy, talking, negotiating are no longer considered first rank levers of government power. So what you should be doing with China is a lot of talking and that's what Australia should be doing."
  • He warns: “There are international problems to which there is no military solution, and this is one of them.”

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Australia’s actual independence in AUKUS:
  Dr. Albert Palazzo, [07:43]:
  "Who's going to control these submarines? ...Will there be a kill switch that will prevent them from doing stuff unless the United States agrees?"
• Regarding the futility of secrecy:
  Dr. Albert Palazzo, [09:31]:
  "The government wants to control the narrative. And the best way to control the narrative is to not let anybody in on what the narrative is."
• The existential warning:
  Dr. Albert Palazzo, [10:49]:
  "Both the United States and China are nuclear armed and nuclear armed powers cannot go to war because if they do, everyone dies. And I'm saying that quite directly because that is the outcome of a nuclear war between great powers."
• On alternatives to militarism:
  Dr. Albert Palazzo, [11:50]:
  "There are international problems to which there is no military solution, and this is one of them."

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• AUKUS press conference rhetoric: 00:00–01:26
• Specifics on US-Australia military integration: 02:30–04:03
• Secrecy and the unreleased AUKUS review: 04:17–06:30
• Formation of Australia’s AUKUS Committee: 06:54–07:41
• Debate on secrecy and accountability: 07:41–09:31
• US militarism, alternatives to confrontation: 11:41–13:19

---

Tone and Style

• The tone is analytical, at times urgent, and deeply sceptical of government reassurances.
• Dr. Palazzo is direct and uncompromising, challenging official narratives, expressing frustration at democratic deficits, and repeatedly emphasizing the danger of “tagging along” with US interests.
• The conversation is rich with historical context and strategic analysis, positioning the episode as a warning about Australia’s future.

---

Conclusion

This episode challenges the optimism and vagueness around the AUKUS pact. It surfaces fundamental concerns about sovereignty, public accountability, and—as Dr. Palazzo starkly summarizes—the irreconcilable risk of sleepwalking into a catastrophic US-China conflict with Australia following the US military lead, lacking both transparency and viable alternatives. The core message: there are choices beyond militarism, but only if governments are willing to engage with their citizens and rethink the path they are on.

Transcript

[Daniel James]

We are full steam ahead. We are full steam ahead.

[Pete Hegseth]

At the direction of the President. Aukus is full steam ahead, as he said.

[Daniel James]

When Richard Marles and Penny Wong stood beside their US counterparts in Washington at the end of last year, everyone sang from the same songbook.

[Pete Hegseth]

Finally, as we move as was mentioned, full steam ahead on Aukus, we applaud Australia's upcoming delivery of an additional 1 billion to help expand U.S. submarine production capacity.

[Daniel James]

And now this week's budget puts even more money into Australia's most expensive defence plan, funding the agencies workforce and infrastructure needed for nuclear powered submarines. But the deal still relies on the US agreeing to sell them to Australia. And on a Trump administration that's already reviewed Aukus through an America first lens. I'm Daniel James and You're listening to 7am today. We're bringing you an episode where Ruby Jones speaks with former Director of War Studies, the Australian army and adjunct professor at University of New South Wales, Dr. Albert Palazzo on the US military's plans for expansion on Australian soil and what the secrecy around Aukis is really hiding. It's Sunday, May 17th. This episode originally aired in December 2020.

[Ruby Jones]

Albert during this press conference there was a lot of talk about orcas going full steam ahead, but not a lot of detail about what that actually looks like. So tell me what you gleaned from what we actually heard.

[Dr. Albert Palazzo]

Well, they trotted out all the traditional remarks, including the ones that Australians and Americans have fought side by side in every major war since the First World War.

[Pete Hegseth]

It is our only ally that has fought with us in every war over the last, over the, certainly over the last four or five decades. And we're very grateful to them for that. And this is a very strong partnership.

[Dr. Albert Palazzo]

Why that is relevant nobody has ever said, but it certainly is used to indicate that we're closer than ever and closer than any two countries could ever be. But the last time I checked, Australia and the United States were different countries. And being different countries, you would expect us to have different interests.

[Ruby Jones]

And perhaps the most detail that we did get was from Pete Hegseth, the Secretary of Defence. So let's talk about what he said about how exactly the US and Australia are set to deepen their defence ties.

[Pete Hegseth]

On the defence side, we're working on force posture. We're working on defense industrial cooperation first, on force posture initiatives. Initiatives. We're upgrading infrastructure on air bases in Queensland and the Northern Territory that allows for additional US Bomber rotations.

[Dr. Albert Palazzo]

We already have a significant US Presence on Australian territory. And now they're talking about bringing in more basing Ospreys here so that the Marines could rapidly deploy on an offensive operation.

[Pete Hegseth]

We're upgrading logistics and infrastructure in Darwin so more US Marines can do rotational deployments and pre positioning MV22 Ospreys. This establishes new and resilient logistics networks across Australia.

[Dr. Albert Palazzo]

We've even had the US Air Force mounting attacks from Australian soil to foreign soil when they conducted that raid on the Houthi militants in Yemen and they based out of Amberley Air Base.

[Daniel James]

America and the United Kingdom joining forces with Australia in tow to bomb Yemen. The allies are targeting an Iran backed militant group which has been launching attacks on international ships. Just minutes ago the Houthis responded saying the US and UK would pay a heavy price for the blatant aggression.

[Dr. Albert Palazzo]

Now I find this all very concerning because bit by bit our government is allowing the United States to go to war from Australian soil as if it's not of any importance to us.

[Ruby Jones]

And Albert, earlier this year the Pentagon ordered a review of Aukus. That review was delayed. It still hasn't been publicly released. But some lawmakers in Australia and the US have actually seen it now. So what do we know about that review and what it says?

[Dr. Albert Palazzo]

Well, we know very little because you know, the government has not released it and there's no indications that the Minister for Defence will release it. But what he has said is that everything's great, it's all wonderful, we're powering ahead. Whatever Aukus is meant to deliver, it's going to deliver it. And whatever it's going to cost, well, we don't know, but it'll be paid for and everything's going to work out swimmingly well. And the United States is standing by us steadfastly as our most important ally.

[Daniel James]

It really was a very constructive, warm, frank meeting between the four of us which took the alliance forward another year.

[Dr. Albert Palazzo]

Now they're continuing to believe that we're going to get these submarines. But as the US Navy's Chief of Naval Operations has already pointed out, the US build rate has not budged. They are not building enough submarines for their own needs. They're not maintaining enough submarines for their own needs. It has not shifted in the slightest. There's not been the slightest improvement in four years. Essentially they have to double the build rate in order for Australia to get its submarines. There's just no way it's going to double. That's just an impossibility. And we're now scheduled, according to the Osmond dialogue, is scheduled to give them another billion dollars next year to put towards the US submarine industry. That frankly is a drop in the bucket. Although where our money is going is not ever explained. So the US cannot build enough submarines. And if they can't build enough submarines, it would be madness on their part to give us a few.

[Ruby Jones]

Coming up is Australia tagging along into nuclear war with China. So, Albert, at the same time as all of this has been happening, the Albanese government here in Australia has announced its own review mechanism. It's the Aukus Committee. So what is that in practice?

[Dr. Albert Palazzo]

Well, the Albanese government, along with the opposition leader Susan Lee, have decided to establish a Aukus Review committee within Parliament. And it'll consist of up to seven parliamentarians and up to six outsiders. So we can fairly expect that anyone who gets this job will be fully committed to the Aukus agenda. So this is not so much as a review committee, as a rubber stamp committee. And it's also largely going to be held in secret, so the Australian public will never really find out what they're talking about.

[Ruby Jones]

And how concerned are you by that concept?

[Dr. Albert Palazzo]

Well, I'm an Australian citizen and I like to think that I have a right to know what the government is doing. And I like to think that in a strong, vibrant democracy, the government can actually trust the people. Now, yes, there are certain things that will need to be kept secret, such as how many missiles it'll carry and what's its range and the exact parameters of its sensors and communications devices. Absolutely required secrecy, but most of it is in secret and most of it is things that we as Australian citizens have a right to know, such as who's going to control these submarines. Is it going to be controlled by the United States or by Australia? And if Australia decides to do something that the United States doesn't approve of, will the submarines still function or will there be a kill switch that will prevent them from doing stuff unless the United States agrees? Now, I think that's fairly important and that should be confirmed to the Australian public. And the same way are we planning to operate with these submarines in the East China Sea or in the Straits of Taiwan, you know, in the face of potential Chinese opposition? Again, a fairly important thing to know. And I have very little expectations that the government will tell us what their broader strategic planning is in the use of these platforms.

[Ruby Jones]

And so what do you think is behind that then, behind this amount of secrecy around Aukus? Is this about national security or do you see something else underpinning it?

[Dr. Albert Palazzo]

There's an element of national security here which is legitimate, but that is, I fear, the minor element here, the larger element is that, you know, the government doesn't want to trust the Australian public with this knowledge because if they did, it's likely to be politicized by the opposition or by the Greens or by just, you know, ordinary people like myself who will look at what the government is saying and point out where there are failures in logic or failures in strategic thinking or risks that they're posing to the country without telling the Australian public. So, you know, the government wants to control the narrative. And the best way to control the narrative is to not let anybody in on what the narrative is. Politicians, perhaps rightly or correctly, can be concerned about political risk to their own futures and their own ability to win elections. But I'm more interested in the national security risk. And we're heading down a pathway that can only lead to confrontation with China. And that's the full steam ahead. And if you looked at the national security strategy that the US government published just a couple of days ago, it is heading towards a confrontation with China. And Australia is tagging along as a good little buddy, doing our best to help our long established friends. In a war with China, that is a risk of enormous magnitude because great powers cannot go to war. But our government seems to discount that as an outcome. And you know, the worst part of all is that both the United States and China are nuclear armed and nuclear armed powers cannot go to war because if they do, everyone dies. And I'm saying that quite directly because that is the outcome of a nuclear war between great powers.

[Ruby Jones]

So yeah, if Aukus is this risky bet on an increasingly chaotic partner in the us what is the alternative?

[Dr. Albert Palazzo]

Well, there are alternatives. And one of the many areas of concern regarding the United States over the last, let's say since the end of the Cold War, is that when there's a problem, governments have numerous levers in which they can solve the problem or try to solve the problem. But the US has consistently over the last 45 years, pulled the military lever. If they've got a problem in the world, their default response is to smash it. Diplomacy, talking, negotiating are no longer considered first rank levers of government power. So what you should be doing with China is a lot of talking and that's what Australia should be doing. There are international problems to which there is no military solution, and this is one of them. The US Chinese contest does not have a military solution because the military solution is enormously painful. So if there's no military solution, find a different government lever and start working that one. But unfortunately, that's not what happened. They're doubling down on the military one, and the Albanese government and the Australian military, the Australian Defence Force, are just happily tagging along for the ride. And this can only end in a very bad place.

[Ruby Jones]

Albert, thank you so much for your time.

[Dr. Albert Palazzo]

It's a pleasure to speak to you.

[Daniel James]

I'm Daniel James. Thanks for listening to 7am we'll be back tomorrow with an episode on the politics of Eurovision and how Israel turned a song contest that claims to be above politics into a global soft power campaign.

People have known from the very start that Israel in the last two or three years has been manipulating the contest. They've been instrumentalizing it and using it as a vehicle for political soft power. And how they do that is that they put adverts on various social media saying, vote for our song. Vote 20 times.

It'll be in your feed tomorrow. See you then.