Republicans, Democrats alike exhort Trump: Keep security pact with Australia and UK alive
Two weeks ago, the Defense Department announced it would review AUKUS, the 4-year-old pact signed by the Biden administration with Australia and the United Kingdom. The announcement means the Republican administration is looking closely at a partnership that many believe is critical to the U.S. strategy to push back China's influence in the Indo-Pacific. The review is expected to be completed in the fall.
'AUKUS is essential to strengthening deterrence in the Indo-Pacific and advancing the undersea capabilities that will be central to ensuring peace and stability," Republican Rep. John Moolenaar of Michigan and Democratic Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi of Illinois wrote in a July 22 letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. Moolenaar chairs the House panel on China and Krishnamoorthi is its top Democrat.
The review comes as the Trump administration works to rebalance its global security concerns while struggling with a hollowed-out industrial base that has hamstrung U.S. capabilities to build enough warships. The review is being led by Elbridge Colby, the No. 3 Pentagon official, who has expressed skepticism about the partnership.
'If we can produce the attack submarines in sufficient number and sufficient speed, then great. But if we can't, that becomes a very difficult problem," Colby said during his confirmation hearing in March. 'This is getting back to restoring our defense industrial capacity so that we don't have to face these awful choices but rather can be in a position where we can produce not only for ourselves, but for our allies."
US cannot build enough ships
As part of the $269 billion AUKUS partnership, the United States will sell three to five Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines to Australia, with the first delivery scheduled as soon as 2032. The U.S. and the U.K. would help Australia design and build another three to five attack submarines to form an eight-boat force for Australia.
A March report by the Congressional Research Service warned that the lack of U.S. shipbuilding capacities, including workforce shortage and insufficient supply chains, is jeopardizing the much-celebrated partnership. If the U.S. should sell the vessels to Australia, the U.S. Navy would have a shortage of attack submarines for two decades, the report said.
The Navy has been ordering two boats per year in the last decade, but U.S. shipyards have been only producing 1.2 Virginia-class subs a year since 2022, the report said.
'The delivery pace is not where it needs to be" to make good on the first pillar of AUKUS, Admiral Daryl Caudle, nominee for the Chief of Naval Operations, told the Senate Armed Services Committee last month.
Australia has invested $1 billion in the U.S. submarine industrial base, with another $1 billion to be paid before the end of this year. It has agreed to contribute a total of $3 billion to uplift the U.S. submarine base, and it has sent both industry personnel to train at U.S. shipyards and naval personnel for submarine training in the United States.
"Australia was clear that we would make a proportionate contribution to the United States industrial base,' an Australian defense spokesperson said in July. 'Australia's contribution is about accelerating U.S. production rates and maintenance to enable the delivery of Australia's future Virginia-class submarines.'
The three nations have also jointly tested communication capabilities with underwater autonomous systems, Australia's defense ministry said on July 23. Per the partnership, the countries will co-develop other advanced technologies, from undersea to hypersonic capabilities.
At the recent Aspen Security Forum, Kevin Rudd, the Australian ambassador to the United States, said his country is committed to increasing defense spending to support its first nuclear-powered sub program, which would also provide 'massively expensive full maintenance repair facilities" for the U.S. Indo-Pacific fleet based in Western Australia.
Rudd expressed confidence that the two governments 'will work our way through this stuff.'
AUKUS called 'crucial to American deterrence'
Bruce Jones, senior fellow with the Strobe Talbott Center for Security, Strategy and Technology, told The Associated Press that the partnership, by positioning subs in Western Australia, is helping arm the undersea space that is 'really crucial to American deterrence and defense options in the Western Pacific.'
'The right answer is not to be content with the current pace of submarine building. It's to increase the pace," Jones said.
Jennifer Parker, who has served more than 20 years with the Royal Australian Navy and founded Barrier Strategic Advisory, said it should not be a zero-sum game. 'You might sell one submarine to Australia, so you have one less submarine on paper. But in terms of the access, you have the theater of choice from operating from Australia, from being able to maintain your submarines from Australia," Parker said. 'This is not a deal that just benefits Australia."
Defense policy is one of the few areas where Republican lawmakers have pushed back against the Trump administration, but their resolve is being tested with the Pentagon's review of AUKUS. So far, they have joined their Democratic colleagues in voicing support for the partnership.
They said the U.S. submarine industry is rebounding with congressional appropriations totaling $10 billion since 2018 to ensure the U.S. will have enough ships to allow for sales to Australia.
"There is a little bit of mystification about the analysis done at the Pentagon,' Kaine said, adding that 'maybe (what) the analysis will say is: We believe this is a good thing.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Smithfield Lifts Full-Year Outlook as Hog Unit Returns to Profit
(Bloomberg) -- Smithfield Foods Inc., the largest pork supplier in the US, raised its full-year profit expectations as a rebound in its hog business counterbalances the impact of tariffs. US hog prices have risen this year amid tight supplies, helping lift profits for suppliers already benefiting from low feed costs. Virginia-based Smithfield has streamlined its own pig production to focus on its more profitable packaged food business, shutting down unprofitable farms and transferring part of its farming operations to a new venture. Sunseeking Germans Face Swiss Backlash Over Alpine Holiday Congestion New York Warns of $34 Billion Budget Hole, Biggest Since 2009 Crisis To Head Off Severe Storm Surges, Nova Scotia Invests in 'Living Shorelines' Chicago Schools' Bond Penalty Widens as $734 Million Gap Looms A New Stage for the Theater That Gave America Shakespeare in the Park The manufacturer of Farmland bacon and Farmer John sausages has been able to minimize the impact of China tariffs on US pork exports by tapping alternative markets, while subsequently resuming shipments to the Asian nation, according to Chief Executive Officer Charles Shane Smith. 'While we are not immune to the impacts of tariffs, we have built flexibility into our system and established multiple outlets for our fresh pork products,' Smith said during a conference call with analysts. The return to profit for hog operations was a major driver for the company's improved outlook. Smithfield is now projecting adjusted operating profit to range from $1.15 billion to $1.35 billion in 2025, an increase of $50 million at the midpoint from the prior guidance, according to a Tuesday statement. Shares of Smithfield dropped 0.7% as of 10:19 a.m. in New York, extending a retreat after reaching an all-time high last week. (Updates share move.) Why It's Actually a Good Time to Buy a House, According to a Zillow Economist Bessent on Tariffs, Deficits and Embracing Trump's Economic Plan The Social Media Trend Machine Is Spitting Out Weirder and Weirder Results Klarna Cashed In on 'Buy Now, Pay Later.' Now It Wants to Be a Bank The Game Starts at 8. The Robbery Starts at 8:01 ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
Newsweek
10 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Trump's Assault on D.C. Is a Grave Threat to the District and Democracy
President Donald Trump is federalizing control of the local police and deploying the National Guard in Washington, D.C., to further his authoritarian and anti-democratic agenda. As autocrats commonly do, Trump is seeking control over the national capital in order to intimidate and squelch dissent. Like despots around the world and throughout history, Trump is also relying on the pretextual deployment of military force to intimidate and project power, to suppress protest and undercut democracy. Across the nation, Americans should protest this move and what it means for our democracy. They should worry that Trump will misuse claims of national emergency to block peaceful protest and that he will deploy troops to deter demonstrators, or worse. President Donald Trump takes questions from reporters after signing an executive order in the South Court Auditorium in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on Aug. 5, 2025, in Washington, D.C. President Donald Trump takes questions from reporters after signing an executive order in the South Court Auditorium in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on Aug. 5, 2025, in Washington, is a move of dubious legality and no necessity. The Home Rule Act governing the District of Columbia gives the president authority to take control of the metropolitan police force when there are "special conditions of an emergency nature." There are no special conditions and there is no emergency. Like everyone, Washingtonians want to be secure in their person, but everyday street crime does not constitute an emergency—especially when the Justice Department's own statistics show the violent crime rate in the District is at its lowest point in decades. There is a major crime problem in Washington, D.C., but it's not the one Trump is talking about—and it's one the administration is making that far worse. Corporate crime and wrongdoing—pollution, dangerous products, financial fraud and scams, unsafe workplaces, and more—inflicts far more damage on people than street crime, whether measured by dollars, injuries, or lives. But Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi are epically weak on corporate crime enforcement—probably the weakest in American history. They are ending investigations and prosecutions into corporations, announcing no-prosecute policies against whole areas of corporate wrongdoing, and redirecting law enforcement resources away from corporate crime and toward its mass deportation agenda. Trump is also complaining about homelessness in D.C. There is, in fact, a significant housing problem in Washington, D.C., like there is throughout the nation. But on this score, Trump is doing nothing to help—and actively making things worse. Telling people without housing that they have to "move out" of the District, as Trump has done, does nothing to actually address that problem. Investing more in housing would help, but there were no such investments in Trump's tax and budget reconciliation bill—he was too busy conferring giant tax breaks on the super rich and corporations and stripping health care coverage from everyday Americans. Those health care cuts will significantly worsen homelessness—both because health care is key to help people without housing and because Medicaid is often used for supportive housing. Providing support to people with addiction issues would also help address the homelessness challenge; instead, the administration is considering withholding already appropriated funding for responding to fentanyl overdoses. Trump's actions have nothing to do with anything happening in Washington, D.C. Trump is motivated instead to advance his authoritarian agenda and to distract from his political weakness. This aligns perfectly with his other despotic tendencies, for example his enemies lists, his mantra of "loyalists only"—particularly those who support his election denialism—to key appointments, and Pam Biondi's recent move to deputize Ed Martin to investigate perceived opponents like Adam Schiff and Tish James. Washington, D.C. does not need National Guard members—who signed up to address genuine national security threats and actual emergencies, not to be political pawns—on our streets. Instead, what we in D.C. need is representation in Congress and more federal funding to mitigate the restrictions on the District's power of taxation. But this is an issue of import that goes far beyond the interests of the people of Washington, D.C.—and not just because D.C. is our nation's capital. Trump is now broadcasting that he hopes to militarize law enforcement in cities across the country. Whether the nation tolerates—or rises up to oppose—Trump's actions in Washington will very meaningfully impact whether the country goes down a democratic or authoritarian path. Robert Weissman and Lisa Gilbert are Public Citizen co-presidents. The views expressed in this article are the writers' own.
CBS News
10 minutes ago
- CBS News
Colorado congressional members accuse ICE of trying to prevent oversight of detention facilities
Democratic Rep. Jason Crow says he was first denied access to the immigration detention facility in Aurora, and now, Crow says he's being denied basic information about who is being held there. Crow and Colorado's three other Democratic U.S. House members -- Reps. Diana DeGette, Joe Neguse, and Brittany Pettersen -- visited the ICE facility Monday after giving seven days' notice under a federal policy they are suing to overturn. Crow says he was unable to get an exact head count at the facility, let alone information on who's being detained and whether they have criminal records. He was also unable to truly assess the conditions at the facility, he says, because the whole place was on lockdown for the entire visit. Crow says he's visited the Aurora facility 10 times in six years, but he says this visit was unlike any other. "This has been the most difficult visit in terms of getting information, getting answers out of the facility and employees," he said. He says ICE is now requiring members of Congress to submit any questions they have through the agency's headquarters in D.C., and anyone wanting to talk to a detainee must have a signed privacy release in advance. "So, if I want to visit my constituents in this facility, then somehow, I have to get a privacy release to them through the mail or other means," said DeGette. She says she was able to see immigration rights activist Jeanette Vizguerra, but the rest of the delegation was allowed to visit only one other detainee. The representatives say they have a duty to conduct oversight of federal operations, and ICE is making their job increasingly difficult. Last month, they were told they needed to give seven days' notice before any visit, so they sued. "If you have to give seven days' notice, they clean up pretty good," said DeGette. Still, Pettersen says, what they did see was concerning, including a lack of access to legal resources: "There is a phone, but you have to pay 15 cents a minute in order to make the calls that you need. That is a huge barrier for people." In addition to Democrats, Republican Rep. Gabe Evans has also asked ICE for more information on those being detained. Government data from June showed that about half of all detainees nationwide had been convicted or charged with crimes, while 70% of those in the Aurora detention facility had. Evans and his Democratic colleagues want to know the nature of the crimes. Neguse says they will continue to push for more access and information. "Above all else, transparency matters, oversight matters, accountability matters," he said. "You certainly can expect the Democratic members of Colorado's House delegation to continue to lean in on all fronts." As of Monday evening, a spokesperson for ICE had not yet responded to a request for comment from CBS News Colorado sent Monday morning.
