CRS Report Raises Serious Concerns
Despite sharp warnings from the US Congress’s Congressional Research Service (CRS), the Australian Submarine Agency’s head, Vice Admiral Jonathan Mead, appears to show no concern. Instead of addressing clear issues raised in official documents, Mead seems to be deflecting accountability in a matter that could cost Australia billions and jeopardize national security.
Recently obtained FOI documents have exposed a diplomatic cable from the Australian Embassy in Washington to Canberra, alerting the government about the CRS report. This report explicitly assesses the US’s capability to uphold its AUKUS commitment to transfer Virginia-class submarines to Australia—casting serious doubt on its feasibility.
CRS Flags U.S. Inability to Deliver
The CRS frequently reviews US submarine programs and the political and industrial implications involved. Their reports are influential and thoroughly researched, especially regarding programs like AUKUS that entail massive international cooperation and technological sharing.
The latest CRS publication lays out a sobering reality: the US likely cannot deliver Virginia-class submarines to Australia as promised under the AUKUS deal. Instead of evading the problem, it offers Congress various alternative paths that may be more achievable.
Mead Downplays the Findings
Yet when Senator David Shoebridge questioned Admiral Mead during a Senate hearing, Mead did not respond directly to the content of the report. Rather than acknowledge its findings, he chose to dismiss its authority by saying, “It’s not a definitive document, it’s more an academic document.”
This blatant attempt to undermine the CRS reveals more than just bureaucratic defensiveness—it reflects a troubling disregard for transparent governance. Shoebridge, pointing out the lack of seriousness with which Mead approached the report, rightly highlighted that Mead had failed to respect both the public and the report’s author, Ronald O’Rourke.
Denial Is Not a Strategy
When a senior defence official responds in such a dismissive and evasive manner to critical oversight, it raises red flags about the integrity of the entire submarine acquisition process. The Australian public deserves answers, not spin or condescension.
Admiral Mead’s response has drawn criticism not only for ignoring the report’s findings but also for treating the inquiry with unwarranted arrogance. “He owes O’Rourke, Shoebridge, and the Australian public an apology,” say observers frustrated by the lack of accountability.
AUKUS Project Faces Mounting Scrutiny
Sadly, no course correction seems forthcoming from the Department of Defence. Despite valid, evidence-based concerns, officials continue to proceed as if nothing is wrong—failing to recognize that denial is not a strategy.
With Australia preparing to spend hundreds of billions on the AUKUS submarine project, the consequences of ignoring independent warnings like those from the CRS could be profound. Strategic planning must be rooted in realism, not political expedience or misplaced confidence.
