Concerns over US AUKUS review dismissed by deputy PM
Doubts over Australia's submarine deal with the US have been hosed down by the deputy prime minister.
Richard Marles again doused concerns about the future of the three-nation pact also involving the United Kingdom, as the Trump administration reviews AUKUS.
The Pentagon is considering whether the agreement aligns with Donald Trump's "America First" agenda.
Mr Marles on Saturday drew a parallel to Australia's own defence reviews that occur with changes in government, suggesting similar evaluations are a normal part of alliances.
His comments follow the arrival of the USS America in Sydney on a goodwill visit on Saturday.
"When we came to government, we did a review of our defence posture ... AUKUS was a key part of that, just as the British did when the new British Labor government came into power in July last year," Mr Marles told reporters in Geelong.
"It is a very natural thing for an incoming government to engage in a review of this kind. It is actually exactly what we did. That's what the Trump administration are doing, we welcome it and we'll engage with it."
Opposition Defence spokesman Angus Taylor, who was on the USS America as it made its way though the Sydney Heads, also stressed the critical nature of the US alliance.
However he additionally emphasised the importance of adequate funding to support the objectives of the AUKUS.
"We call on the government to make sure they engage with the United States to ensure AUKUS is successful into the future," Mr Taylor said.
The AUKUS pact is aimed at countering China's growing influence in the Indo-Pacific.
A key component of the pact is the provision for Australia to acquire nuclear-powered submarines, a capability deemed essential by the government for bolstering national security.
Under the $368 billion submarine program, Australia is set to acquire at least three nuclear-powered Virginia-class subs from the US in the early 2030s before a new fleet is built for delivery from the 2040s.
Australia has already demonstrated its commitment to the AUKUS partnership, paying almost $800 million to the US in February - the first of a number of payments - to help boost its submarine production.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese left Australia on Friday for the G7 summit in Canada but it is unclear if he will be able to secure a meeting with President Trump while there.
Mr Albanese previously rebuffed calls from the US for Australia to lift its defence spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP.
Doubts over Australia's submarine deal with the US have been hosed down by the deputy prime minister.
Richard Marles again doused concerns about the future of the three-nation pact also involving the United Kingdom, as the Trump administration reviews AUKUS.
The Pentagon is considering whether the agreement aligns with Donald Trump's "America First" agenda.
Mr Marles on Saturday drew a parallel to Australia's own defence reviews that occur with changes in government, suggesting similar evaluations are a normal part of alliances.
His comments follow the arrival of the USS America in Sydney on a goodwill visit on Saturday.
"When we came to government, we did a review of our defence posture ... AUKUS was a key part of that, just as the British did when the new British Labor government came into power in July last year," Mr Marles told reporters in Geelong.
"It is a very natural thing for an incoming government to engage in a review of this kind. It is actually exactly what we did. That's what the Trump administration are doing, we welcome it and we'll engage with it."
Opposition Defence spokesman Angus Taylor, who was on the USS America as it made its way though the Sydney Heads, also stressed the critical nature of the US alliance.
However he additionally emphasised the importance of adequate funding to support the objectives of the AUKUS.
"We call on the government to make sure they engage with the United States to ensure AUKUS is successful into the future," Mr Taylor said.
The AUKUS pact is aimed at countering China's growing influence in the Indo-Pacific.
A key component of the pact is the provision for Australia to acquire nuclear-powered submarines, a capability deemed essential by the government for bolstering national security.
Under the $368 billion submarine program, Australia is set to acquire at least three nuclear-powered Virginia-class subs from the US in the early 2030s before a new fleet is built for delivery from the 2040s.
Australia has already demonstrated its commitment to the AUKUS partnership, paying almost $800 million to the US in February - the first of a number of payments - to help boost its submarine production.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese left Australia on Friday for the G7 summit in Canada but it is unclear if he will be able to secure a meeting with President Trump while there.
Mr Albanese previously rebuffed calls from the US for Australia to lift its defence spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP.
Doubts over Australia's submarine deal with the US have been hosed down by the deputy prime minister.
Richard Marles again doused concerns about the future of the three-nation pact also involving the United Kingdom, as the Trump administration reviews AUKUS.
The Pentagon is considering whether the agreement aligns with Donald Trump's "America First" agenda.
Mr Marles on Saturday drew a parallel to Australia's own defence reviews that occur with changes in government, suggesting similar evaluations are a normal part of alliances.
His comments follow the arrival of the USS America in Sydney on a goodwill visit on Saturday.
"When we came to government, we did a review of our defence posture ... AUKUS was a key part of that, just as the British did when the new British Labor government came into power in July last year," Mr Marles told reporters in Geelong.
"It is a very natural thing for an incoming government to engage in a review of this kind. It is actually exactly what we did. That's what the Trump administration are doing, we welcome it and we'll engage with it."
Opposition Defence spokesman Angus Taylor, who was on the USS America as it made its way though the Sydney Heads, also stressed the critical nature of the US alliance.
However he additionally emphasised the importance of adequate funding to support the objectives of the AUKUS.
"We call on the government to make sure they engage with the United States to ensure AUKUS is successful into the future," Mr Taylor said.
The AUKUS pact is aimed at countering China's growing influence in the Indo-Pacific.
A key component of the pact is the provision for Australia to acquire nuclear-powered submarines, a capability deemed essential by the government for bolstering national security.
Under the $368 billion submarine program, Australia is set to acquire at least three nuclear-powered Virginia-class subs from the US in the early 2030s before a new fleet is built for delivery from the 2040s.
Australia has already demonstrated its commitment to the AUKUS partnership, paying almost $800 million to the US in February - the first of a number of payments - to help boost its submarine production.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese left Australia on Friday for the G7 summit in Canada but it is unclear if he will be able to secure a meeting with President Trump while there.
Mr Albanese previously rebuffed calls from the US for Australia to lift its defence spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP.
Doubts over Australia's submarine deal with the US have been hosed down by the deputy prime minister.
Richard Marles again doused concerns about the future of the three-nation pact also involving the United Kingdom, as the Trump administration reviews AUKUS.
The Pentagon is considering whether the agreement aligns with Donald Trump's "America First" agenda.
Mr Marles on Saturday drew a parallel to Australia's own defence reviews that occur with changes in government, suggesting similar evaluations are a normal part of alliances.
His comments follow the arrival of the USS America in Sydney on a goodwill visit on Saturday.
"When we came to government, we did a review of our defence posture ... AUKUS was a key part of that, just as the British did when the new British Labor government came into power in July last year," Mr Marles told reporters in Geelong.
"It is a very natural thing for an incoming government to engage in a review of this kind. It is actually exactly what we did. That's what the Trump administration are doing, we welcome it and we'll engage with it."
Opposition Defence spokesman Angus Taylor, who was on the USS America as it made its way though the Sydney Heads, also stressed the critical nature of the US alliance.
However he additionally emphasised the importance of adequate funding to support the objectives of the AUKUS.
"We call on the government to make sure they engage with the United States to ensure AUKUS is successful into the future," Mr Taylor said.
The AUKUS pact is aimed at countering China's growing influence in the Indo-Pacific.
A key component of the pact is the provision for Australia to acquire nuclear-powered submarines, a capability deemed essential by the government for bolstering national security.
Under the $368 billion submarine program, Australia is set to acquire at least three nuclear-powered Virginia-class subs from the US in the early 2030s before a new fleet is built for delivery from the 2040s.
Australia has already demonstrated its commitment to the AUKUS partnership, paying almost $800 million to the US in February - the first of a number of payments - to help boost its submarine production.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese left Australia on Friday for the G7 summit in Canada but it is unclear if he will be able to secure a meeting with President Trump while there.
Mr Albanese previously rebuffed calls from the US for Australia to lift its defence spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News.com.au
30 minutes ago
- News.com.au
Albanese ‘expects' to meet Trump next week at G7
Anthony Albanese has said he 'expects' to meet Donald Trump on the sidelines of the G7 summit in Canada on Tuesday. The prime minister made the announcement in the US city of Seattle on his way to the meeting of the world's most advanced economies near Calgary which begins late on Sunday. He also said in Seattle that Australia will be unlikely to 'pay a role' in the military conflict unfolding between Israel and Iran. Mr Albanese's confirmation of a meeting with the US president avoids would could have been a humiliating snub given he would be at the same event as Mr Trump but has never met him in person. For weeks there has been no confirmation of a meeting between the two leaders. Indeed, American officials have even scolded Australia in the last week for not spending enough, in their view, on defence and for sanctioning two far right Israeli politicians. The US also announced a review of the AUKUS nuclear submarine pact which the PM has suggested is to be expected but is still unwelcome in Canberra. 'I do expect to meet the president on the sidelines of the G7 in Canada on Tuesday,' Mr Albanese said at Amazon's headquarters in Seattle where a $20 billion investment by the tech giant in Australia was also announced. 'Obviously there are issues that the US president is dealing with at the moment but I expect that we will be able to have a constructive engagement and I look forward to building on the constructive phone conversations that we've been able to have on three occasions'. 'We'll raise tariffs we'll raise the importance of AUKUS and we'll have a discussion as two friends should do'. Asked if Australia has any requests to play a role in the Israel-Iran conflict, Mr Albanese said there was no expectation. 'As you'd expect we continue to monitor but Australia does not play a role in this conflict'.
The Age
32 minutes ago
- The Age
Iran's four possible responses to Israeli attack
Israel's attack on Iran opens the next phase of the Great Middle Eastern War that began on October 7, 2023. Over the past 20 months, that war has played out on fronts across the region and has drawn in actors from around the globe. There is much we don't yet know about what has happened, let alone what will happen. But it is clear that Iran has suffered significant damage to its leadership, its military and industrial capabilities, and perhaps its nuclear program. The endgame of this conflict and the future of the region will be profoundly shaped by how a wounded Iran responds. There are four basic possibilities. Their consequences range from a bigger, bloodier Middle Eastern mess to a potentially surprising diplomatic denouement: a far stronger nuclear deal than United States President Donald Trump could have secured just a few days ago. First, Iran could go nasty but narrow, striking back against Israel but avoiding US bases or other regional targets. Drone, missile or terrorist attacks against Israel (some of which are already underway) would offer a measure of vengeance. But this strategy would seek to avoid triggering a larger, riskier conflict with Washington. The problem is that America is already involved in this conflict: Trump has pledged to help Israel defend itself. A narrow response could thus look pathetic if Tehran's remaining weapons can't penetrate Israel's multi-layered (and multi-nation) air and missile defence. And even if Iran draws blood, Israel will just keep coming, as these opening strikes were the beginning of a larger military campaign. If Iran needs to make a bigger statement, it could go big and broad. In addition to hitting Israel, it could strike US personnel, facilities and partners from Iraq to the Persian Gulf. It could also activate its proxies – the Houthis, Iraqi Shia militias, and what remains of Hezbollah – in a bid to set the region on fire. That strategy has appeal as a way of restoring deterrence against dangerous enemies. It would remind the world that even a weakened Iran can cause real pain. But it would also cross the red line Trump has drawn against attacks on US targets. So Iran could find itself fighting a bigger war against Israel and the US, fraught with existential dangers for an already battered regime. The third possibility – nuclear breakout – could be just as dangerous. Depending on how much nuclear infrastructure is left – particularly the buried, hardened uranium enrichment facility at Fordow – Tehran could withdraw from the non-proliferation treaty and make a desperate push for the bomb.
Sydney Morning Herald
32 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Iran's four possible responses to Israeli attack
Israel's attack on Iran opens the next phase of the Great Middle Eastern War that began on October 7, 2023. Over the past 20 months, that war has played out on fronts across the region and has drawn in actors from around the globe. There is much we don't yet know about what has happened, let alone what will happen. But it is clear that Iran has suffered significant damage to its leadership, its military and industrial capabilities, and perhaps its nuclear program. The endgame of this conflict and the future of the region will be profoundly shaped by how a wounded Iran responds. There are four basic possibilities. Their consequences range from a bigger, bloodier Middle Eastern mess to a potentially surprising diplomatic denouement: a far stronger nuclear deal than United States President Donald Trump could have secured just a few days ago. First, Iran could go nasty but narrow, striking back against Israel but avoiding US bases or other regional targets. Drone, missile or terrorist attacks against Israel (some of which are already underway) would offer a measure of vengeance. But this strategy would seek to avoid triggering a larger, riskier conflict with Washington. The problem is that America is already involved in this conflict: Trump has pledged to help Israel defend itself. A narrow response could thus look pathetic if Tehran's remaining weapons can't penetrate Israel's multi-layered (and multi-nation) air and missile defence. And even if Iran draws blood, Israel will just keep coming, as these opening strikes were the beginning of a larger military campaign. If Iran needs to make a bigger statement, it could go big and broad. In addition to hitting Israel, it could strike US personnel, facilities and partners from Iraq to the Persian Gulf. It could also activate its proxies – the Houthis, Iraqi Shia militias, and what remains of Hezbollah – in a bid to set the region on fire. That strategy has appeal as a way of restoring deterrence against dangerous enemies. It would remind the world that even a weakened Iran can cause real pain. But it would also cross the red line Trump has drawn against attacks on US targets. So Iran could find itself fighting a bigger war against Israel and the US, fraught with existential dangers for an already battered regime. The third possibility – nuclear breakout – could be just as dangerous. Depending on how much nuclear infrastructure is left – particularly the buried, hardened uranium enrichment facility at Fordow – Tehran could withdraw from the non-proliferation treaty and make a desperate push for the bomb.
