Pentagon set to review AUKUS nuclear submarine deal: Report
The US Pentagon is set to review a nuclear submarine deal agreed during the Biden administration with Australia and the UK, casting the agreement's future into uncertainty, the Financial Times reported.
The review of AUKUS is apparently led by senior Pentagon official and AUKUS skeptic Elbridge Colby.
The report comes just days after the UK recently committed more than $8 billion to boost London's submarine-building capacity to bolster AUKUS.
But the biggest loser if the deal were to collapse may be Australia, defense experts said: The country has no viable alternative in terms of its nuclear submarine capability even as Canberra has grown increasingly concerned about China's growing military strength.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Exclusive: Trump administration tells migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela their legal status is terminated
The Department of Homeland Security on Thursday told hundreds of thousands of migrants that their permission to live and work in the United States had been revoked and they should leave the country, according to a copy of the notice obtained by CNN. The termination notice was addressed to nationals of Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela who came to the United States through a Biden-era parole program. More than half a million people from those four countries benefited from the program, though it's unclear how many have since sought other forms of immigration relief while in the United States. The notice, according to DHS, was sent to email addresses provided by those in the program. 'This notice informs you that your parole is now terminated,' the notice reads. 'If you do not leave, you may be subject to enforcement actions, including but not limited to detention and removal, without an opportunity to make personal arrangements and return to your country in an orderly manner.' The notice also states that work permits linked to the program will be revoked and directs parolees to return those permits to US Citizenship and Immigration Services. Thursday's move is the latest step in the Trump administration's aggressive and wide-ranging effort to encourage or force millions of migrants out of the country, whether they are in the U.S. legally or illegally. The Biden administration announced in 2023 that it would grant parole to qualified migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela who submitted to review by authorities rather than attempting to enter the country illegally. Applicants were required to have an American sponsor or US-based sponsor who's lawfully present in the country and clear security vetting. The program became a political flashpoint as Republicans argued the administration was misusing parole authority and overreached in establishing the program for those countries. At the time, Biden officials credited the program for driving down border crossings by instead providing a path for migrants to apply to legally migrate to the US. President Donald Trump signed an order on his first day in office seeking to unilaterally end the program. That move prompted legal challenges that eventually made their way to the Supreme Court, which allowed Trump to strip protections for beneficiaries of the parole program. 'Ending the CHNV parole programs, as well as the paroles of those who exploited it, will be a necessary return to common-sense policies, a return to public safety, and a return to America First,' Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told CNN in a statement. Though the emergency decision from the Supreme Court is not final – the underlying legal case will continue in lower courts – the order allowed the administration to expedite deportations for an estimated 530,000 migrants who had previously benefited from the program. The Trump administration told the Supreme Court that its decision to terminate parole status for the migrants at issue was one of the 'most consequential immigration policy decisions' it has made. Lower court orders temporarily blocking its policy, the administration said, upended 'critical immigration policies that are carefully calibrated to deter illegal entry, vitiating core executive branch prerogatives, and undoing democratically approved policies that featured heavily in the November election.' This article has been updated with additional developments. CNN's Devan Cole and John Fritze contributed to this report.
New York Post
39 minutes ago
- New York Post
It's not just Trump — Biden found major civil-rights problems with Harvard too
Many people assume federal civil-rights scrutiny of antisemitism at Harvard is a recent, partisan development. Headlines shout about President 'Trump's War on Harvard,' 'Trump's Harvard Vendetta' and 'His Harvard Hate Campaign.' In fact, such oversight is required by law and has been enforced consistently by both Republican and Democratic administrations, including the last one. Advertisement The Biden team raised concerns that Harvard's response to antisemitic-harassment complaints didn't fully comply with the Civil Rights Act's Title VI — with some echoing those found in the Trump administration's April 11 demand letter. Harvard quietly entered into a voluntary resolution agreement with the Biden Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights Jan. 17, days before the university settled two lawsuits with Jewish students — and days before Trump re-entered the White House. 5 The administrations of both Donald Trump (left) and Joe Biden examined Harvard's civil-rights problems. POOL/AFP via Getty Images Advertisement I've been working directly with Jewish Harvard students since the campus exploded in October 2023, so these findings did not surprise me. I witnessed firsthand the distress and frustration many experienced and watched closely as the university failed to respond effectively. In one glaring example, two students charged with assault and battery of a Jewish student during an Oct. 18, 2023, anti-Israel campus protest weren't disciplined. Instead, Harvard rewarded them. The Harvard Law Review gave Ibrahim Bharmal a $65,000 fellowship. Advertisement Bharmal, featured on the law school's admissions website, will spend his fellowship at California's chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations — whose cofounder and executive director, Nihad Awad, said, 'I was happy to see people breaking the siege' with Gaza's Oct. 7 attack. The other student, Elom Tettey-Tamaklo, was voted a class marshal by his Harvard Divinity School classmates. Harvard let both students graduate without consequence. 5 Two students charged with assaulting a Jewish student during an October 2023 anti-Israel protest weren't disciplined. Twitter/AvivaKlompas The resolution agreement, which should help all students, is significant, but it barely made news. Harvard made no public announcement. Most media outlets ignored the story. Advertisement Instead, much coverage misleadingly frames federal scrutiny of campus antisemitism as beginning with the new Trump-era task force. I strongly support the rule of law and its being applied equally to all. I champion — at the same time — the First Amendment, federal funding of lawful basic research and robust enforcement of civil-rights protections. But let's be clear: Assault, discrimination, harassment, vandalism, trespassing and support for terrorist organizations are not protected speech. I write this as an American citizen and registered Democrat. The Office of Civil Rights launched its investigation into Harvard in November 2023, following allegations of discrimination and harassment against Jewish students. While it later closed this investigation — a standard practice when federal lawsuits are proceeding — it maintained its oversight. In a heartening development, even as the Biden team reviewed Harvard's handling of Palestinian, Arab and Muslim students' harassment claims, it continued to examine records and information directly related to the harassment of Jewish students. 5 Harvard gave a funded fellowship to Ibrahim Bharmal, one of the students. Instagram/betterdays_arecoming25/ The OCR's Jan. 17 letter referenced the two federal lawsuits filed in 2024 alleging Harvard's 'deliberate indifference' and noted several disturbing examples. A federal court cited in one suit an allegation of 'student-on-student harassment' and denied Harvard's motion to dismiss both lawsuits. Students repeatedly told me they struggled to find the appropriate channels to report harassment. When they did file complaints, responses were often slow, inadequate or dismissive — falling short of the prompt and effective response Title VI requires. Advertisement Even more troubling, Harvard would not pursue investigations unless students revealed their identities to alleged harassers. This policy had a chilling effect, discouraging students from coming forward. Besides violating Title VI, the university may have breached its duty of care to ensure students' physical safety. 5 Elom Tettey-Tamaklo (left) spent time in Palestine before attending Harvard Divinity School. The OCR confirmed these failures and found Harvard often failed to create or keep records of complaints — a serious compliance lapse that undermines accountability. Advertisement At many Harvard schools, the offices generally responsible for handling discrimination complaints — formerly called Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Belonging — appeared not to have fulfilled their duties. Harvard has since renamed these offices, but a new name is not enough. Notably, the Biden agreement, which required Harvard to submit revised policies and procedures to the Office of Civil Rights by May 17 for review and approval, closely mirrors language from the Trump administration's April 11 letter — which also called on Harvard to 'immediately reform its student discipline policies and procedures so as to swiftly and transparently enforce its existing disciplinary policies with consistency and impartiality.' Both administrations focused on reviewing Harvard's response to reports of a hostile environment during the 2023-2025 academic years. Advertisement The Biden deal requires Harvard to provide 'all formal and informal reports or complaints, received by the University alleging harassment based on shared ancestry, and the University's response to those reports or complaints.' Similarly, the Trump administration required that 'Harvard must investigate and carry out meaningful discipline for all violations that occurred during the 2023-2024 and 2024-2025 academic years.' 5 The author, Clarence Schwab, has heard from countless harassed Harvard students. The resolution agreement is a step forward. Whether Harvard's revised policies and efforts will be enough remains to be seen. Advertisement The findings of Harvard's own Presidential Task Force on Combating Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Bias vindicated these concerns and the need for decisive action. The task force further recommends that Harvard develop a central hub for pluralism, implicitly acknowledging the need to protect academic freedom from Harvard's own monoculture — a culture that has driven away distinguished scholars and researchers and led to documented discrimination against Jewish students and others. Harvard also has to do more to comply with its January 2025 settlement with suing Jewish students. While all terms are not public, Harvard did commit to hiring someone to oversee all complaints of antisemitism — but still hasn't announced anyone for that position. I'm committed to helping Harvard return to its stated mission and to improving everyone on campus' safety and well-being. Equal civil rights, as guaranteed the Civil Rights Act's Title VI and Title VII, should be a nonpartisan, uncontroversial American value. Clarence Schwab is the founder and managing partner of Kronor Capital and a cofounder of Harvard Jewish Alumni Alliance.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump to cut tariffs on British cars ‘very soon', minister suggests
Donald Trump is set to cut tariffs on British cars within days, the Business Secretary has suggested. Jonathan Reynolds said he is 'very hopeful' that the carve out agreed as part of the UK's new trade deal with the US will be implemented by the end of the week. He said an update was expected 'very soon'. As part of the trade deal announced last month, the UK secured cuts to US tariffs on British cars from 25pc to 10pc for an agreed quota of 100,000 vehicles. Mr Reynolds also said Britain is 'ready to go' on its side of the bargain, which will involve slashing tariffs on US beef and ethanol imports which are used to make biofuels. While he has agreed a carve out for the UK, Mr Trump said on Thursday that he might increase tariffs on car imports more generally in the 'not too distant future'. US auto shares slumped shortly after his remarks, with shares in Ford down 1.6pc and those for General Motors sliding 1.5pc. The UK will be spared completely from levies on steel and aluminium, which rose to 25pc after Mr Trump kicked off his trade war in February. At the time, Sir Keir Starmer hailed the 'historic deal', claiming it would 'protect thousands of British jobs in key sectors including car manufacturing and steel'. But it has still not been implemented more than a month later, with both Washington and London yet to take the necessary steps to put the plans into action. Speaking at a lunch for Westminster journalists on Thursday, Mr Reynolds said he was 'hopeful' that the first changes would be in place by the end of the week. It comes after the Business Secretary pushed for progress on the deal in talks with his US counterpart, Howard Lutnick, in Downing Street on Tuesday. Asked when British carmakers could expect tariffs to be cut, Mr Reynolds said: 'Very soon.' He added: 'Secretary Lutnik and I, with the Prime Minister, talked specifically about the institution of the automotive tariff reduction for the quota, which is part of our deal. And I am hoping to be able to update you all on that very soon.' Pressed on whether the changes could be in place by the end of the week, and if Sir Keir would raise the issue with Mr Trump at the upcoming G7 summit in Canada, he said: 'I'm very hopeful. It was a specific area of conversation on Tuesday in that bilateral meeting. 'We are ready to go on our side. In terms of the steps I need to take, I will inform the House with a written ministerial statement and lay the statutory instruments for the reciprocal part of that deal, which is obviously about beef and ethanol for us on this side. 'So we're ready to go, and as soon as the president and the White House on their side are able to, we will implement that part of the deal.' Mr Reynolds also defended the UK's nuclear submarine deal with the US and Australia after the Pentagon launched a review of the pact. It emerged on Wednesday that the US was considering ending the Aukus agreement, signed to great fanfare in 2021, in a potential blow to a security alliance between the three countries. Asked if he had concerns about the future of the deal, Mr Reynolds said: 'I would have a lot of confidence in anyone looking at the merits of that agreement and saying that is an incredibly strong and important agreement for the future. 'So if US colleagues want to look at it, ok, that's their right to do so. I think it is an incredibly compelling and strong agreement.' Meanwhile, Mr Reynolds revealed that he had been cleared by the solicitors' regulator over claims he lied about his legal career. The watchdog, which protects the public from bogus lawyers, launched an investigation into the Business Secretary earlier this year after it emerged he repeatedly described himself as a solicitor despite never qualifying. Asked for an update on the probe, Mr Reynolds said: 'They came back shortly after that media period to say look, always be careful to be accurate, but there's no misleading here, and there's nothing else to look into.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
