Machiavelli would have a lot to say about Australia’s AUKUS deal

Australia’s leaders, seeing the future as one of growing threats and complexity, have chosen AUKUS as their solution. The wisdom of this act is yet to be determined, but numerous commentators, including myself, have voiced our doubts.

Readers would know that across history, this isn’t the first time a government has had to respond to a different and more dangerous threat environment. It is reasonable, then, to seek out the thoughts of earlier intellectuals who lived through similar situations.

One such thinker was Niccolò Machiavelli.

Machiavelli wrote during a tumultuous period in his native Italy, as rival powers conquered many of the peninsula’s independent states. The Princehis best-known work, instructs rulers on the steps they can take to preserve and manage power, to secure and expand their state. The passing of five centuries hasn’t reduced the pertinence of Machiavelli’s instructions, and those responsible for AUKUS would do well to heed his words.

Machiavelli had no illusions as to the brutality needed to wield power. In his day, he was identified with the Devil. Today’s international relations specialists would simply label him a realist.

In establishing AUKUS, Australia doubled down on its dependency on the United States for national security. Numerous Department of Defence documents highlight the importance of the US alliance to Australia, and the government clearly sees it as a way to leverage national power.

Machiavelli points out the folly of such dependency, however. Quoting the Roman philosopher Livy, he agrees that “nothing is so weak or unstable as a reputation for power which is not based on one’s own forces”. US and Australian soldiers first fought alongside each other in World War I and have frequently been comrades in arms since. Yet Machiavelli knows that even a long association doesn’t matter, since another power’s forces may not be available when needed. The core tenet of Australia’s defence policy is thus one not of rationality but of hope.

Machiavelli comments further on the worth of the friendships that existed between the principalities of his age — the nation states of today. He concludes that leaders who depend on the promises of others without taking additional precautions ensure their ruin. This is exactly what Australia has done in signing up to AUKUS: deliberately intensifying its dependence on the US.

Australia is slowly increasing its defence spending, but the goal is a military force interchangeable with the US military — and thereby one that supports US interests. However, friendship, as Machiavelli knows, cannot be bought, no matter the expenditure, and it doesn’t last. One is reminded of Lord Palmerston’s comment:

We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.

Presumably Machiavelli rolled in his grave when Australia handed over $800 million in its second instalment of AUKUS payments, following the first $800 million payment during a visit by senior leaders to the US in February.

Australia’s leaders have never understood that friendship is a poor substitute for interests. Bonds with Britain were far deeper than anything that exists between us and the US, but in 1941, our friends in London didn’t hesitate to cut us loose as Singapore fell.

In 1941, circumstances dictated that for the British, their best course of action was to sever ties with their Australian cousins. One of Machiavelli’s core principles is that to be successful, leaders must know when to break their word. He says:

… a prudent ruler cannot, and must not, honour his word when it places him at a disadvantage and when the reasons for which he made his promise no longer exist.

He could write these words because he was well aware of the numerous promises the leaders of his age had broken. Even without Trump, a president not known for his loyalty to others, faith and promise are a poor foundation upon which to build a security policy. Ordinary people seem to know this. A 2025 Pew survey reported only 18% of Australians believed Trump to be honest — the global median was 28%.

Australian security requires more independence, not dependence on a great power partner. I argue this in my forthcoming book, The Big Fix: Rebuilding Australia’s National Security. Our leaders must understand that a defence policy reseting on sentimentality is unsound.

In The PrinceMachiavelli recognised that leaders found it difficult to change established policy. He wrote:

Fortune is changeable whereas men are obstinate in their ways.

The Australian government correctly makes the case that the world is becoming more dangerous, but its security policy defaults simplistically to an intensification of the old way, instead of seeking a better path.

Machiavelli knew such stubbornness to be folly.