Latest news with #ElbridgeColby
Canberra Times
12 hours ago
- Politics
- Canberra Times
Pacific ties in focus as ministers head to region
US official Elbridge Colby had been pushing Australia to clarify whether it would commit troops to potential conflict with China over Taiwan, while he leads a review into the trilateral AUKUS nuclear submarine deal between the US, Australia and the UK.
Russia Today
3 days ago
- Politics
- Russia Today
Pentagon can retake weapons destined for Ukraine
The Pentagon has a policy in place allowing US-made weapons intended for Ukraine to be redirected back to American stockpiles, CNN reported on Friday, citing a confidential memo seen by several sources. According to the memo reportedly written by Pentagon policy chief Elbridge Colby – described by the network as 'a noted skeptic of arming Ukraine' – the department has the power to retake arms designated for Kiev under a program known as the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI). While CNN sources reported that no weapons have apparently been diverted under the guidance, the policy could 'rob Ukraine of billions of dollars worth of US-made materiel expected to be delivered over the coming months and years.' The memo makes 'an already murky picture of the status of US arms shipments to Ukraine' even more uncertain, the network warned, particularly given the expected meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart Donald Trump. Under the reported memo, weapons in short supply, such as interceptor missiles for Patriot air defense systems, require direct approval from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth before being sent abroad. The pull-back provision is reportedly part of the same document Hegseth used last month to suspend the flow of weapons, including Patriot missiles, to Ukraine. At the time, Pentagon officials sounded the alarm over dwindling supplies at home, although Trump later ordered that shipments be resumed. The US president has since said that American weapons could be sent to Ukraine under an arrangement in which the EU would pay Washington '100% of the cost of all military equipment.' Russia has repeatedly condemned Western arms shipments to Ukraine, warning they only prolong the conflict without changing its outcome while making NATO a direct participant in the hostilities.
CNN
3 days ago
- Politics
- CNN
New Pentagon policy could divert weapons built for Ukraine back into US stockpiles
Federal agencies US military NATO National securityFacebookTweetLink Follow A memo written by the Pentagon's policy chief last month gives the Defense Department the option to divert certain weapons and equipment intended for Ukraine back into US stockpiles, according to four people who have read it — a dramatic shift that could see billions of dollars previously earmarked for the war-torn country go toward replenishing dwindling American supplies. The memo adds even more uncertainty to an already murky picture of the status of US arms shipments to Ukraine ahead of President Donald Trump's potential meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin next week. Even as Trump has greenlit a plan to sell US weapons to Ukraine through NATO, there remain deep concerns inside the Pentagon over arming Kyiv in its war with Russia at the expense of US stockpiles. That is particularly true of highly sought-after items that remain in short supply, such as interceptor missiles, air defense systems and artillery ammunition. Last month, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth paused a large package of weapons shipments to Ukraine. At the time, Hegseth was acting in accordance with the Pentagon memo, written by Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby, a noted skeptic of arming Ukraine. Shortly after the pause became public, Trump reversed Hegseth's pause and vowed to continue providing defensive weapons to Ukraine in the face of near daily attacks from Russia. Trump also announced a deal with NATO to provide potentially billions of dollars in more weapons to Ukraine, made by the US but paid for by European allies. The Colby memo, however, remains in effect and contains a previously unreported provision that allows the Pentagon to divert weapons back into US stockpiles that were built explicitly for Ukraine under a congressionally funded program known as the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative. While sources said weapons don't appear to have been diverted yet, the provision could rob Ukraine of billions of dollars worth of US-made materiel expected to be delivered over the coming months and years. It also undermines the intent of the USAI, a near decade-old program established by Congress for the explicit purpose of allocating money for the Pentagon to buy weapons for Ukraine directly from US defense manufactures. The USAI program was set up in 2016 and had traditionally provided Ukraine with a stable supply of weapons. The Senate just allocated another $800 million to USAI as part of the Pentagon's annual budget legislation known as the National Defense Authorization Act. But it's unclear whether the weapons produced with that money will ultimately go to Ukraine under the new Pentagon policy, sources told CNN. The Pentagon declined to comment for this story. Under previous administrations, top Pentagon officials believed that diverting weapons produced through USAI back into US stockpiles would violate the Impoundment Control Act, according to one of the sources familiar with the matter. That law reinforces Congress's power of the purse and requires the president to notify lawmakers of any delay or withholding of congressionally authorized funds. Indeed, the new Pentagon policy already appears to be receiving some pushback from the Senate. In the proposed NDAA for 2026, lawmakers included a provision in recent weeks that would only allow for weapons to be reabsorbed by the Pentagon if they haven't already been transferred to Ukraine and are no longer needed to support USAI training, equipping, and advisory activities. Hegseth also has to notify Congress prior to reabsorbing those stocks, the bill says. The new policy comes as the Trump administration has broadly been looking for ways to shift the burden of arming, equipping, and training Ukraine onto Europe and NATO. At the Pentagon, Colby has also previously pushed to preserve more of the US stockpiles for a potential future war with China. Separately from the USAI, the Pentagon still has nearly $4 billion left of funding authority, which Congress authorized last year, to send weapons to Ukraine taken directly from US stockpiles. Some NATO allies, including the UK, have been urging the US to use that authority to put more pressure on Putin, the sources said, and have proposed reimbursing the US for the cost of doing so. To that end, the chairmen of the Senate Armed Services Committee and Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Republican Sens. Roger Wicker and Jim Risch, last week introduced a bill that would create a US Treasury fund that allies could deposit money into to backfill US military equipment donated to Ukraine. But another source familiar with the matter said the Pentagon is more likely to let that $4 billion in funding authority expire. The Colby memo, which Hegseth approved, remains the department's policy, the sources said. It categorizes US stockpiles into 'red,' 'yellow' and 'green' categories, the sources added. The red and yellow categories include weapons the Pentagon assesses to be in short supply, and now require explicit signoff by Hegseth before they are sent anywhere else. Interceptor missiles for Patriot air defense systems, for example, are in the red category, the sources said. The weapons package that was paused by Hegseth last month included dozens of interceptors, but Trump ordered Hegseth to keep those flowing after finding out about the pause, CNN has reported. The Defense Department has broadly been following that directive to send the interceptors, the sources said. But other weapons in the package were also in the red category, the sources said. It is not clear whether they have been delivered, despite the country's continued need for layered air defenses to protect its cities from daily Russian missile and drone attacks. Ukrainian officials have long dismissed US concerns over diminishing stockpiles; the Biden administration often cited that as a reason to not provide certain materiel as well. Sophisticated US-made air defense systems, such as the Patriot system and interceptors for it, are Kyiv's most pressing need as Russia has ramped up its nightly aerial bombardment. In July, Russia launched a record 6,443 drones and missiles into the country, according to the Ukrainian Air Force. Meanwhile, the Defense Department has also been working with NATO to develop a novel system for selling weapons to European allies that can then be provided to Ukraine, the sources told CNN. The mechanism would essentially create a NATO bank account that allies can put money into to purchase weapons from the US, the sources said. Trump alluded to this new mechanism last month, when he told reporters during a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte that 'we've made a deal where we are going to be sending them weapons and they're going to be paying for them. We're not buying it, but we will manufacture it, and they're going to be paying for it.' Under the system, Ukraine would send a wish list of weapons and equipment to NATO directly, and US Gen. Alexus Grynkewich—the current head of both US European Command and NATO's allied military operations—would determine whether the US has enough in its stockpiles to sell before putting the list to European partners to potentially purchase, the sources said. NATO allies are working toward a starting point of $10 billion to invest in the NATO account for weapons purchases for Ukraine, two of the sources said. Rutte announced on Tuesday that allies had already committed over $1 billion to arming Ukraine. For some more urgent capabilities, some European countries have agreed to send their own supply directly to Ukraine and wait to be backfilled by the US. The US struck a deal with Germany last week, for example, in which Germany will supply two of its US-made Patriot systems to Ukraine and buy new ones from the US, to be delivered as soon as they come off the production line. Another source who has read the memo noted that while it won't deter Europe for now from going along with the NATO mechanism to arm Ukraine, they are counting on being backfilled by the US — and the Colby policy still being in place could mean 'that anything short of the President saying go ahead might not get through,' the person said. CNN's Kylie Atwood contributed to this report.
CNN
3 days ago
- Politics
- CNN
New Pentagon policy could divert weapons built for Ukraine back into US stockpiles
Federal agencies US military NATO National securityFacebookTweetLink Follow A memo written by the Pentagon's policy chief last month gives the Defense Department the option to divert certain weapons and equipment intended for Ukraine back into US stockpiles, according to four people who have read it — a dramatic shift that could see billions of dollars previously earmarked for the war-torn country go toward replenishing dwindling American supplies. The memo adds even more uncertainty to an already murky picture of the status of US arms shipments to Ukraine ahead of President Donald Trump's potential meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin next week. Even as Trump has greenlit a plan to sell US weapons to Ukraine through NATO, there remain deep concerns inside the Pentagon over arming Kyiv in its war with Russia at the expense of US stockpiles. That is particularly true of highly sought-after items that remain in short supply, such as interceptor missiles, air defense systems and artillery ammunition. Last month, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth paused a large package of weapons shipments to Ukraine. At the time, Hegseth was acting in accordance with the Pentagon memo, written by Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby, a noted skeptic of arming Ukraine. Shortly after the pause became public, Trump reversed Hegseth's pause and vowed to continue providing defensive weapons to Ukraine in the face of near daily attacks from Russia. Trump also announced a deal with NATO to provide potentially billions of dollars in more weapons to Ukraine, made by the US but paid for by European allies. The Colby memo, however, remains in effect and contains a previously unreported provision that allows the Pentagon to divert weapons back into US stockpiles that were built explicitly for Ukraine under a congressionally funded program known as the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative. While sources said weapons don't appear to have been diverted yet, the provision could rob Ukraine of billions of dollars worth of US-made materiel expected to be delivered over the coming months and years. It also undermines the intent of the USAI, a near decade-old program established by Congress for the explicit purpose of allocating money for the Pentagon to buy weapons for Ukraine directly from US defense manufactures. The USAI program was set up in 2016 and had traditionally provided Ukraine with a stable supply of weapons. The Senate just allocated another $800 million to USAI as part of the Pentagon's annual budget legislation known as the National Defense Authorization Act. But it's unclear whether the weapons produced with that money will ultimately go to Ukraine under the new Pentagon policy, sources told CNN. The Pentagon declined to comment for this story. Under previous administrations, top Pentagon officials believed that diverting weapons produced through USAI back into US stockpiles would violate the Impoundment Control Act, according to one of the sources familiar with the matter. That law reinforces Congress's power of the purse and requires the president to notify lawmakers of any delay or withholding of congressionally authorized funds. Indeed, the new Pentagon policy already appears to be receiving some pushback from the Senate. In the proposed NDAA for 2026, lawmakers included a provision in recent weeks that would only allow for weapons to be reabsorbed by the Pentagon if they haven't already been transferred to Ukraine and are no longer needed to support USAI training, equipping, and advisory activities. Hegseth also has to notify Congress prior to reabsorbing those stocks, the bill says. The new policy comes as the Trump administration has broadly been looking for ways to shift the burden of arming, equipping, and training Ukraine onto Europe and NATO. At the Pentagon, Colby has also previously pushed to preserve more of the US stockpiles for a potential future war with China. Separately from the USAI, the Pentagon still has nearly $4 billion left of funding authority, which Congress authorized last year, to send weapons to Ukraine taken directly from US stockpiles. Some NATO allies, including the UK, have been urging the US to use that authority to put more pressure on Putin, the sources said, and have proposed reimbursing the US for the cost of doing so. To that end, the chairmen of the Senate Armed Services Committee and Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Republican Sens. Roger Wicker and Jim Risch, last week introduced a bill that would create a US Treasury fund that allies could deposit money into to backfill US military equipment donated to Ukraine. But another source familiar with the matter said the Pentagon is more likely to let that $4 billion in funding authority expire. The Colby memo, which Hegseth approved, remains the department's policy, the sources said. It categorizes US stockpiles into 'red,' 'yellow' and 'green' categories, the sources added. The red and yellow categories include weapons the Pentagon assesses to be in short supply, and now require explicit signoff by Hegseth before they are sent anywhere else. Interceptor missiles for Patriot air defense systems, for example, are in the red category, the sources said. The weapons package that was paused by Hegseth last month included dozens of interceptors, but Trump ordered Hegseth to keep those flowing after finding out about the pause, CNN has reported. The Defense Department has broadly been following that directive to send the interceptors, the sources said. But other weapons in the package were also in the red category, the sources said. It is not clear whether they have been delivered, despite the country's continued need for layered air defenses to protect its cities from daily Russian missile and drone attacks. Ukrainian officials have long dismissed US concerns over diminishing stockpiles; the Biden administration often cited that as a reason to not provide certain materiel as well. Sophisticated US-made air defense systems, such as the Patriot system and interceptors for it, are Kyiv's most pressing need as Russia has ramped up its nightly aerial bombardment. In July, Russia launched a record 6,443 drones and missiles into the country, according to the Ukrainian Air Force. Meanwhile, the Defense Department has also been working with NATO to develop a novel system for selling weapons to European allies that can then be provided to Ukraine, the sources told CNN. The mechanism would essentially create a NATO bank account that allies can put money into to purchase weapons from the US, the sources said. Trump alluded to this new mechanism last month, when he told reporters during a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte that 'we've made a deal where we are going to be sending them weapons and they're going to be paying for them. We're not buying it, but we will manufacture it, and they're going to be paying for it.' Under the system, Ukraine would send a wish list of weapons and equipment to NATO directly, and US Gen. Alexus Grynkewich—the current head of both US European Command and NATO's allied military operations—would determine whether the US has enough in its stockpiles to sell before putting the list to European partners to potentially purchase, the sources said. NATO allies are working toward a starting point of $10 billion to invest in the NATO account for weapons purchases for Ukraine, two of the sources said. Rutte announced on Tuesday that allies had already committed over $1 billion to arming Ukraine. For some more urgent capabilities, some European countries have agreed to send their own supply directly to Ukraine and wait to be backfilled by the US. The US struck a deal with Germany last week, for example, in which Germany will supply two of its US-made Patriot systems to Ukraine and buy new ones from the US, to be delivered as soon as they come off the production line. Another source who has read the memo noted that while it won't deter Europe for now from going along with the NATO mechanism to arm Ukraine, they are counting on being backfilled by the US — and the Colby policy still being in place could mean 'that anything short of the President saying go ahead might not get through,' the person said. CNN's Kylie Atwood contributed to this report.
Axios
5 days ago
- Politics
- Axios
Consider these factors as the Pentagon dissects AUKUS
Everyone has an AUKUS take. Why it matters: The landmark defense pact — designed to arm Australia, the U.K. and the U.S. with nuclear-powered submarines and cutting-edge tech, including hypersonic weapons and electronic jammers — is today navigating choppy waters. Driving the news: The Pentagon's policy office, led by Elbridge Colby, last week announced that by fall it would conclude its "America First" examination of the initiative, which rolled out during the Biden administration. Colby has expressed AUKUS skepticism in the past, namely over resource allocation, but in March said Washington should "do everything we can to make this work." The big picture: As the review proceeds, consider these factors: Shipbuilding shortfalls. The U.S. struggles to construct, maintain and retrofit warships. The Government Accountability Office catalogues it. The Navy cops to it, too. Adm. Daryl Caudle, a career submariner turned chief of naval operations, last month told Congress the "delivery pace is not where it needs to be to make good on Pillar I of the AUKUS agreement." Pumping out the requisite two-plus Virginia-class subs per year, he added, demands "transformational improvement. Not a 10% improvement. Not 20%. A 100% improvement." Actual application. How the Trump administration perceives Australia's commitment to using the subs, and to countering China, could make or break a ruling. "They've been very coy about how they would actually employ the submarines, other than to say, 'Well, it's a deterrent, it could be employed to defend Australia,'" Bryan Clark, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, told Axios. "You've got to be willing to say that you would use it offensively if you want to gain the deterrent value out of it," he said, "because China could come away thinking Australia is going to buy these submarines, but they don't have the resolve to use them." Odds Down Under. Almost two-thirds of Australians surveyed in a recent Guardian poll thought it was unlikely the U.S. would deliver subs. And 41% of the voters thought the deal would not affect the country's security. Canberra in July cut a $525 million AUKUS check. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese denied in a television interview that it was an "extra" fee, insisting it was part of the "schedule of payments to be made." "It's about increasing their industrial capacity," he said. Pillar II obscurity. Sub construction — or lack thereof — dominates headlines. Comparably less ink has been spilled on the co-development of defense tech like AI, autonomy and hypersonic countermeasures. Articles published by War on the Rocks in June and the Australian Strategic Policy Institute last year put it succinctly: Pillar II has a public relations problem. Policy and export reform isn't as attractive as novel weapons and their delivery. "The matter at hand — sophisticated, trilaterally supported innovation — seems to be unfurling lethargically," Peter Dean and Alice Nason argued in their War on the Rocks piece. Common ground. A U.K. government spokesperson told Axios it "is understandable that a new administration would want to review its approach to such a major partnership, just as the U.K. did last year." Prime Minister Keir Starmer and President Trump have recently traded compliments, which could bode well for AUKUS. What we're hearing: The trilateral agreement will survive, but perhaps in a somewhat different form and with a less optimistic timetable. "I infer that the administration is pro-AUKUS," one defense industry executive told Axios. "I think, internally, ' the Blob ' is trying to portray it to Trump as a big, beautiful trade deal." "Everyone knows the sub industrial base is stressed, though." The bottom line: The AUKUS anxiety is legit. The ongoing review is additional evidence nothing is sacred under Trump 2.0.
