[Stingrei]

SYDNEY – Japan will get the chance to pursue an unprecedented military export deal when its defence and foreign ministers meet their Australian counterparts in Tokyo next month.

Japan is considering selling submarine technology to Australia — perhaps even a fleet of fully engineered, stealthy vessels, according to Japanese officials. Sources on both sides say the discussions so far have encouraged a willingness to speed up talks.

Any agreement would take months to negotiate and remains far from certain, but even a deal for Japan to supply technology would likely run to billions of dollars and represent a major portion of Australia’s overall $37 billion submarine program.

It would also be bound to turn heads in China.

Experts say a Japan-Australia deal would send a signal to Asia’s emerging superpower of Japan’s willingness, under nationalist Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, to export arms to a region wary of China’s growing naval strength, especially its pursuit of territorial claims in the East and South China seas.

A deal would also help connect Japanese arms makers like Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Kawasaki Heavy Industries to the world market for big, sophisticated weaponry — a goal Abe sees as consistent with Japanese security.

Abe has eased decades-old restrictions on Japan’s military exports and is looking to give its military a freer hand in conflicts by changing the interpretation of a pacifist Constitution that dates back to Japan’s defeat in World War II.

“There’s a clear danger that aligning ourselves closely with Japan on a technology as sensitive as submarine technology would be read in China as a significant tightening in what they fear is a drift toward a Japan-Australia alliance,” said Hugh White, a professor of strategic studies at the Australian National University. “It would be a gamble by Australia on where Japan is going to be 30 years from now.”

Australia’s proposed fleet of submarines is at the core of its long-term defence strategy. Although Canberra will not begin replacing its Collins-class vessels until the 2030s, the design work could take a decade or more and each submarine could take about five years to build, according to industry analysts.

A final decision on the type and number of submarines Australia will build is expected to be made after a review due in March 2015.

Australian officials have expressed an interest in the silent-running diesel-electric propulsion systems used in Japan’s Soryu diesel submarines, built by Mitsubishi Heavy and Kawasaki Heavy. Those vessels would give Australia a naval force that could reach deep into the Indian Ocean.

More recently, Japanese military officials and lawmakers with an interest in defence policy have signalled a willingness to consider supplying a full version of the highly regarded Soryu to Australia if certain conditions can be met. These would include concluding a framework agreement on security policy with Canberra that would lock future Australian governments into an alliance with Japan, the officials said.

Mitsubishi Heavy had no comment. Kawasaki Heavy said it had not been approached about any proposal regarding the Soryu and could not comment.

Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott has said he favours boosting strategic cooperation with Japan. For their part, Australia’s military planners are similarly enthusiastic about cooperation as a means of hedging against an over-reliance on the United States, people with knowledge of their thinking said.

The Soryu’s ultra-quiet drivetrain could avoid a problem that makes Australia’s six current submarines prone to detection, said sources with knowledge of the discussions in Australia.

The Australian government has committed to building the A$40 billion ($37 billion) replacement for its Collins-class submarines at home. However, a government-commissioned report from U.S.-based think tank Rand Corp. found that Australia lacked enough engineers to design and build a vessel it said would be as complex as a space shuttle.

“The likely practical approach is that Australia would partner with a foreign partner company and government,” the report published last year said.

Australian Defence Minister David Johnston met his Japanese counterpart, Itsunori Onodera, in Perth recently and the pair meet again in June in Tokyo along with foreign ministers. Abe will follow up with a trip to Australia in July, one of the sources in Tokyo said.

Johnston said this month he believed the Soryu was the best conventional submarine in the world. He has also said he expects Japan and Australia will work together on research in marine hydrodynamics as an initial area of cooperation while working toward a “framework agreement” on military technology.

It is possible that Australia could purchase submarine hulls from Germany or Sweden and then opt to buy Japanese drivetrains for the vessels, although that would add a layer of complexity and additional cost, officials said.

Participants in a joint-development deal could also include Britain’s BAE Systems and state-owned Australian Submarine Corp., which maintains the nation’s current fleet.

Australian Submarine Corp.’s head of strategy and communications, Sean Costello, said the ship-builder had hosted Japanese government officials at its shipyards in March 2013 but no technical discussions had yet taken place.

BAE spokesman Mark Ritson said the British firm was keen to play a major role in Australia’s submarine program and was in regular contact with the Australian government.

In Japan, any submarine supply deal could face roadblocks.

Some senior officials in Japan’s maritime self-defence forces are wary of any joint development that could risk a leak of sensitive information about the identifying “signature” of Japanese submarines, one official in Tokyo said.

However, exports would enable Japanese arms-makers to spread their costs over a bigger production base, making them more efficient. At the same time, Abe has pressed for a loosening of legal limits on Japan’s military, including an end to a ban on helping allies under attack — though opinion polls show the public is divided on Abe’s security policies.

The Soryu submarines have a range of more than 11,000 km and come armed with Harpoon missiles designed to hit enemy ships operating over the horizon. The export or transfer of such lethal technology would be a first in Japan and could face political opposition.

“It’s impossible for us to move quickly on this. It has to be a gradual cooperation,” one Japanese official with knowledge of the discussions said.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2014/05/29/national/tokyo-canberra-test-sub-fleet-export-waters/

A possible replacement for the old Collins class submarines. The Soryu is certainly stealthier which is probably more suitable for Australia given that we can’t really support a large fleet of subs.
Of course there are the issues of whether or not Japan is confident in sharing their military tech with Australia and whether or not this move will antagonize China.

[Typhoon]

The Collins class were a disaster for Australia (though I would not say they were old boats) so its unsurprising that Australia would look abroad to help find some technical solutions or expertise for the next generations of boats.

What surprises me is that the srticle says they are going to Japan for the propulsion system as the Soryu’s propulsion system (or at least the most interesting parts of it - the air-independent propulsion) was developed by Kockums of Sweden. If it is the electric motors and diesel engines that Australia are after which were developed by Kawasaki then the Australian boats must be in a lot of trouble.

[ThirdTerm]

Abe has eased decades-old restrictions on Japan’s military exports and is looking to give its military a freer hand in conflicts by changing the interpretation of a pacifist Constitution that dates back to Japan’s defeat in World War II. “There’s a clear danger that aligning ourselves closely with Japan on a technology as sensitive as submarine technology would be read in China as a significant tightening in what they fear is a drift toward a Japan-Australia alliance,” said Hugh White, a professor of strategic studies at the Australian National University. “It would be a gamble by Australia on where Japan is going to be 30 years from now.” Some senior officials in Japan’s maritime self-defence forces are wary of any joint development that could risk a leak of sensitive information about the identifying “signature” of Japanese submarines, one official in Tokyo said. However, exports would enable Japanese arms-makers to spread their costs over a bigger production base, making them more efficient. At the same time, Abe has pressed for a loosening of legal limits on Japan’s military, including an end to a ban on helping allies under attack — though opinion polls show the public is divided on Abe’s security policies.

Abe's current hawkish policies are likely to be reversed by his successors and it's dangerous for Japanese military officials to make future commitments with Australia on military matters as the country would honour its long-standing pacifist tradition after Abe. Japan had never forged a close alliance with Australia and it would be a British firm which would sign a deal to upgrade Australia’s submarine programme and defending a British Commonwealth country should not be Japan's responsibility. Japan as a nation will not benefit from such unprecedented defence cooperation with Australia except for some shadowy defence contractors in Japan and it would weaken the US-Japan alliance, which is the cornerstone of Japan's national security strategy.

[Decky]

Why are they not buying British? What is the point of having colonies if they don't do their duty and create jobs in the motherland?

[Rei Murasame]

Ah, but you see, Taxizen has a plan, along with Farage, to do some kind of commonwealth thing. But there is no evidence of that actually being possible.

[Typhoon]

Why are they not buying British?

The UK has not designed or built conventional submarines for 20-30 years, its difficult to imagine production being restarted as there is no demand in the Royal Navy which could pave the way for exports. Having gone entirely down the nuclear route the export market today is dominated by Germany, Russia and France, our last conventional submarine exports to Canada have had a controversial service life.

[Decky]

Ah so they are shit same as everything we build. I should have guessed.

[Stingrei]

Well I hope we get some decent subs at some point.
After all Australia needs top grade hardware to continue defending the world from the ever present threat of New Zealand.

[GandalfTheGrey]

I was impressed to learn that Australia designs and builds its own submarines.

they're probably pieces of shit, but still...

[Typhoon]

they're probably pieces of shit, but still...

I think the attempt to achieve self-sufficiency was commendable even if the result was less than satisfactory, but I suppose everyone has to start somewhere.

[Igor Antunov]

Scandinavia or Germany would have been far more logical places to source diesel subs from.

[mikema63]

Does the US use diesel subs anymore?

And if Australia is looking for an arms dealer, why not the US?

[Igor Antunov]

US is overpriced and gives us old tech or 2nd hand stuff.

Europeans are sanely priced and give us cutting edge stuff.

[layman]

The F35 might signal a change too.

Utter waste of money buying American these days.

[Typhoon]

Scandinavia or Germany would have been far more logical places to source diesel subs from.

Certainly either of those would be a good choice the Japenese submarine technology being based on the former in part.

Does the US use diesel subs anymore?

And if Australia is looking for an arms dealer, why not the US?

The US no longer has expertise in this technology like the Uk they have gone completely over to atomic vessels.