
US reviewing Aukus submarine pact as part of 'America First' agenda
WASHINGTON — The US has launched a review of its multi-billion dollar submarine deal with the UK and Australia, saying the security pact must fit its "America First" agenda.
Under the trilateral pact, believed to be aimed at countering China, Australia is to get its first nuclear-powered subs from the US, before the allies create a new fleet by sharing cutting-edge tech.
Both Australia and the UK - which did its own review last year - have played down news of the US probe, saying it is natural for a new administration to reassess.
The move comes as both Australia and the UK face pressure from the White House to lift military spending, demands heeded by Downing Street but largely resisted by Canberra.
The Aukus agreement - worth £176bn ($239bn; A$368bn) - was signed in 2021, when all three countries involved had different leaders.
A US defense official told the BBC the pact was being reviewed "as part of ensuring that this initiative of the previous administration is aligned with the President's America First agenda".
"As [US Defence] Secretary [Pete] Hegseth has made clear, this means ensuring the highest readiness of our servicemembers [and] that allies step up fully to do their part for collective defense," the defense official said.
The US has been pushing allies to start spending at least 3% of GDP on defense as soon as possible.
The UK has agreed to spend 2.5% of GDP on its defense by 2028, and 3% by the next parliament, while Australia has also said it will lift funding, but not to the 3.5% that the US wants.
The review will be headed up by Elbridge Colby, who has previously been critical of Aukus, in a speech last year questioning why the US would give away "this crown jewel asset when we most need it".
Defense Minister Richard Marles, speaking to local Australian media on Thursday morning local time, said he was optimistic the deal would continue.
"I'm very confident this is going to happen," he told ABC Radio Melbourne.
"You just need to look at the map to understand that Australia absolutely needs to have a long-range submarine capability."
Some in Australia have been lobbying for the country to develop a more self-reliant defense strategy, but Marles said it was important to "stick to a plan" - a reference to the previous government's controversial cancellation of a submarine deal with France in favor of Aukus.
An Australian government spokesperson told the BBC it was "natural" that the new administration would "examine" the agreement, adding the UK had also recently finished a review of the security pact between the long-standing allies.
There is "clear and consistent" support for the deal across the "full political spectrum" in the US, they said, adding Australia looked forward to "continuing our close cooperation with the Trump Administration on this historic project".
A UK defense spokesperson told the BBC it was "understandable" for a new administration to look at the deal, "just as the UK did last year".
Aukus is a "landmark security and defense partnership with two of our closest allies", the spokesperson said, and "one of the most strategically important partnerships in decades, supporting peace and security in the Indo-Pacific and Euro-Atlantic".
Jennifer Kavanagh, from American thinktank Defense Priorities, told the BBC that the US was "absolutely right to take another look at this deal" as its submarine capacities were already stretched.
"The US cannot meet its own demand for these nuclear-powered submarines," she said.
The other concern the US might have is whether Australia would use the submarines they buy in the way the US wants them to, she said, particularly if conflict erupts over Taiwan.
Dr Kavanagh said the review might see the security pact shift its focus away from providing submarines to sharing other long-range weapons technology.
However, if the US were to pull out of the deal, China would "celebrate" as they have long criticized the deal, Dr Kavanagh added.
For Australia, the deal represents a major upgrade to its military capabilities. The country becomes just the second after the UK to receive Washington's elite nuclear propulsion technology.
Such submarines will be able to operate further and faster than the country's existing diesel-engine fleet and Australia would also be able to carry out long-range strikes against enemies for the first time.
It is a big deal for the US to share what is often called the "crown jewels" of its defence technology.
But arming Australia has historically been viewed by Washington and Downing Street as essential to preserving peace in a region they themselves aren't a part of.
From 2027, the pact will allow both the US and UK to base a small number of nuclear submarines in Perth, Western Australia.
Canberra will also buy three second-hand Virginia-class submarines from the US at a yet-to-be-determined date in the early 2030s - with options to purchase two more.
After that, the plan is to design and build an entirely new nuclear-powered submarine model for the UK and Australian navies.
This attack craft will be built in Britain and Australia to a British design, but use technology from all three countries.
The security alliance has repeatedly drawn criticism from China, with the foreign ministry in Beijing saying it risked creating an arms race. — BBC
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Saudi Gazette
a day ago
- Saudi Gazette
US reviewing Aukus submarine pact as part of 'America First' agenda
WASHINGTON — The US has launched a review of its multi-billion dollar submarine deal with the UK and Australia, saying the security pact must fit its "America First" agenda. Under the trilateral pact, believed to be aimed at countering China, Australia is to get its first nuclear-powered subs from the US, before the allies create a new fleet by sharing cutting-edge tech. Both Australia and the UK - which did its own review last year - have played down news of the US probe, saying it is natural for a new administration to reassess. The move comes as both Australia and the UK face pressure from the White House to lift military spending, demands heeded by Downing Street but largely resisted by Canberra. The Aukus agreement - worth £176bn ($239bn; A$368bn) - was signed in 2021, when all three countries involved had different leaders. A US defense official told the BBC the pact was being reviewed "as part of ensuring that this initiative of the previous administration is aligned with the President's America First agenda". "As [US Defence] Secretary [Pete] Hegseth has made clear, this means ensuring the highest readiness of our servicemembers [and] that allies step up fully to do their part for collective defense," the defense official said. The US has been pushing allies to start spending at least 3% of GDP on defense as soon as possible. The UK has agreed to spend 2.5% of GDP on its defense by 2028, and 3% by the next parliament, while Australia has also said it will lift funding, but not to the 3.5% that the US wants. The review will be headed up by Elbridge Colby, who has previously been critical of Aukus, in a speech last year questioning why the US would give away "this crown jewel asset when we most need it". Defense Minister Richard Marles, speaking to local Australian media on Thursday morning local time, said he was optimistic the deal would continue. "I'm very confident this is going to happen," he told ABC Radio Melbourne. "You just need to look at the map to understand that Australia absolutely needs to have a long-range submarine capability." Some in Australia have been lobbying for the country to develop a more self-reliant defense strategy, but Marles said it was important to "stick to a plan" - a reference to the previous government's controversial cancellation of a submarine deal with France in favor of Aukus. An Australian government spokesperson told the BBC it was "natural" that the new administration would "examine" the agreement, adding the UK had also recently finished a review of the security pact between the long-standing allies. There is "clear and consistent" support for the deal across the "full political spectrum" in the US, they said, adding Australia looked forward to "continuing our close cooperation with the Trump Administration on this historic project". A UK defense spokesperson told the BBC it was "understandable" for a new administration to look at the deal, "just as the UK did last year". Aukus is a "landmark security and defense partnership with two of our closest allies", the spokesperson said, and "one of the most strategically important partnerships in decades, supporting peace and security in the Indo-Pacific and Euro-Atlantic". Jennifer Kavanagh, from American thinktank Defense Priorities, told the BBC that the US was "absolutely right to take another look at this deal" as its submarine capacities were already stretched. "The US cannot meet its own demand for these nuclear-powered submarines," she said. The other concern the US might have is whether Australia would use the submarines they buy in the way the US wants them to, she said, particularly if conflict erupts over Taiwan. Dr Kavanagh said the review might see the security pact shift its focus away from providing submarines to sharing other long-range weapons technology. However, if the US were to pull out of the deal, China would "celebrate" as they have long criticized the deal, Dr Kavanagh added. For Australia, the deal represents a major upgrade to its military capabilities. The country becomes just the second after the UK to receive Washington's elite nuclear propulsion technology. Such submarines will be able to operate further and faster than the country's existing diesel-engine fleet and Australia would also be able to carry out long-range strikes against enemies for the first time. It is a big deal for the US to share what is often called the "crown jewels" of its defence technology. But arming Australia has historically been viewed by Washington and Downing Street as essential to preserving peace in a region they themselves aren't a part of. From 2027, the pact will allow both the US and UK to base a small number of nuclear submarines in Perth, Western Australia. Canberra will also buy three second-hand Virginia-class submarines from the US at a yet-to-be-determined date in the early 2030s - with options to purchase two more. After that, the plan is to design and build an entirely new nuclear-powered submarine model for the UK and Australian navies. This attack craft will be built in Britain and Australia to a British design, but use technology from all three countries. The security alliance has repeatedly drawn criticism from China, with the foreign ministry in Beijing saying it risked creating an arms race. — BBC


Saudi Gazette
a day ago
- Saudi Gazette
Global watchdog finds Iran failing to meet nuclear obligations
VIENNA — The global nuclear watchdog's board of governors has formally declared Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations for the first time in 20 years. Nineteen of the 35 countries on the board of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) voted for the motion, which was submitted by the US, UK, France and Germany. It says Iran's "many failures" to provide the IAEA with full answers about its undeclared nuclear material and activities "constitute non-compliance". It also expresses concern about Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium, which can be used to make reactor fuel but also nuclear weapons. Iran condemned the resolution as "political" and said it would open a new enrichment facility. It follows a report from the IAEA last week which criticized Iran's "general lack of cooperation" and said it had enough uranium enriched to 60% purity, near weapons grade, to potentially make nine nuclear bombs. Iran insists its nuclear activities are entirely peaceful and that it would never seek to develop or acquire nuclear a landmark 2015 deal with six world powers, Iran agreed to limit its nuclear activities and allow continuous and robust monitoring by the IAEA's inspectors in return for relief from crippling economic also committed to help the IAEA resolve outstanding questions about the declarations under its Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Safeguards US President Donald Trump abandoned the agreement during his first term in 2018, saying it did too little to stop a pathway to a bomb, and reinstated US 2019, Iran has increasingly breached restrictions of the existing nuclear deal in retaliation, particularly those relating to the production of enriched said three countries - Russia, China and Burkina Faso - voted against the resolution at the IAEA board's meeting in Vienna on Thursday. Eleven others abstained and two did not text, seen by the BBC, says the board "deeply regrets" that Iran has "failed to co-operate fully with the agency, as required by its Safeguards Agreement"."Iran's many failures to uphold its obligations since 2019 to provide the agency with full and timely co-operation regarding undeclared nuclear material and activities at multiple undeclared locations in Iran... constitutes non-compliance with its obligations," it a result, it says, the IAEA is "not able to verify that there has been no diversion of nuclear material required to be safeguarded". The "inability... to provide assurance that Iran's nuclear program is exclusively peaceful," it adds, "gives rise to questions that are within the competence of the United Nations Security Council".The issue could now be referred to the Security Council, which has the power to restore sanctions lifted under the 2015 Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran (AEOI) and the Iranian foreign ministry issued a joint statement condemning the "political action" by countries who voted in favour of the resolution and insisting that it was "without technical and legal basis".They announced that Iran would respond by setting up a new uranium enrichment facility at a "secure location" and by replacing first-generation centrifuges used to enrich uranium with sixth-generation ones at the underground Fordo facility."Other measures are also being planned," they resolution could further complicate talks between Tehran and Washington on a new nuclear agreement that Donald Trump hopes will see Iran end its enrichment program and prevent it from developing a nuclear weapon.A sixth round of talks is due to be held this Sunday in Oman. However, Trump said earlier this week that he was growing less confident of striking a also held a reportedly tense phone call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has long argued for a military rather than diplomatic approach. Israel considers the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran as an existential comes amid mounting tensions in the Middle East, with the US advising non-essential staff at some of its embassies in the region to leave and reports saying that Israel is ready to launch strikes on Iranian nuclear defense minister has warned that it would respond to any attack by targeting all US military bases "within our reach". — BBC


Arab News
a day ago
- Arab News
Australia ‘confident' in US nuclear sub deal despite review
SYDNEY: Australia said Thursday it is 'very confident' in the future of a US agreement to equip its navy with a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines, after the Trump administration put the pact under review. The 2021 AUKUS deal joins Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States in a multi-decade effort to balance China's growing military might. It aims to arm Australia with a fleet of cutting-edge, nuclear-powered submarines from the United States and provides for cooperation in developing an array of warfare technologies. US President Donald Trump's administration has advised Australia and the United Kingdom that it is reviewing AUKUS, a spokesperson for the Australian Department of Defense confirmed Thursday. Defense Minister Richard Marles said he was 'very confident' Australia would still get the American submarines. 'I think the review that's been announced is not a surprise,' he told public broadcaster ABC. 'We've been aware of this for some time. We welcome it. It's something which is perfectly natural for an incoming administration to do.' Australia plans to acquire at least three Virginia Class submarines from the United States within 15 years, eventually manufacturing its own subs. The US Navy has 24 Virginia-class vessels, which can carry cruise missiles, but American shipyards are struggling to meet production targets set at two new boats each year. In the United States, critics question why Washington would sell nuclear-powered submarines to Australia without stocking its own military first. Marles said boosting the US production of US Virginia Class submarines was a challenge. 'That's why we are working very closely with the United States on seeing that happen. But that is improving,' he said. Australia's focus is on 'sticking to this plan and on seeing it through,' Marles said. He criticized Australia's previous conservative government for 'chopping and changing' its submarine choice. On the eve of announcing its participation in AUKUS in 2021, the government of the time abruptly scrapped plans to buy diesel-powered submarines in a lucrative deal with France — infuriating Paris. The AUKUS submarine program alone could cost the country up to $235 billion over the next 30 years, according to Australian government forecasts, a price tag that has contributed to criticism of the strategy. Australia should conduct its own review of AUKUS, said former conservative prime minister Malcolm Turnbull, noting that Britain and now the United States had each decided to re-examine the pact. 'Australia, which has the most at stake, has no review. Our parliament to date has been the least curious and least informed. Time to wake up?' he posted on X. Former Labour Party prime minister Paul Keating, a vehement critic of AUKUS, said the US review might 'save Australia from itself.' Australia should carve its own security strategy 'rather than being dragged along on the coat tails of a fading Atlantic empire,' Keating said. 'The review makes clear that America keeps its national interests uppermost. But the concomitant question is: Why has Australia failed to do the same?' Any US review of AUKUS carries a risk, particularly since it is a Biden-era initiative, said Euan Graham, senior analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. But it is 'fundamentally a good deal for the US,' he said, with Australia already investing cash to boost American submarine production as part of the agreement. 'I just do not think it is realistic for Australia, this far backed in, to have any prospect of withdrawing itself from AUKUS,' Graham said. 'I don't think there is a Plan B that would meet requirements and I think it would shred Australia's reputation fundamentally in a way that would not be recoverable.'