AUKUS deal under threat as Trump administration considers 'backing away' from Biden-era submarine contract
The review, led by the Pentagon, is set to cause a stir in Australia which sees the submarine deal as a critical defence investment of deterrence as tensions grow in the Indo-Pacific.
The United Kingdom will also quake over the potential scrapping of AUKUS as the deal is central to the expansion of its submarine fleet.
"We are reviewing AUKUS as part of ensuring that this initiative of the previous administration is aligned with the President's America First agenda," the official said of the review, which was first reported by Financial Times.
"Any changes to the administration's approach for AUKUS will be communicated through official channels, when appropriate."
The AUKUS deal, formed in 2021 to address China's rapidly growing militarisation, is designed to allow Australia to acquire nuclear-powered attack submarines and other advanced weapons such as hypersonic missiles.
In a statement provided to The Australian, the Pentagon said the review of AUKUS was part of ensuring the initiative of the previous administration initiative meets the "common sense" criteria of President Donald Trump's America First Agenda.
'As (Defence) Secretary (Pete) Hegseth has made clear, this means ensuring the highest readiness of our servicemembers, that allies step up fully to do their part for collective defence, and that the defence industrial base is meeting our needs,' the Pentagon said.
'This review will ensure the initiative meets these common sense, America First criteria.' Vocal sceptics of the AUKUS deal among Trump's senior policy officials include Elbridge Colby, the Pentagon's top policy advisor. In a 2024 talk with Britain's Policy Exchange think-tank, Mr Colby cautioned that US military submarines were a scarce, critical commodity, and that US industry could not produce enough of them to meet American demand. They would also be central to US military strategy in any confrontation with China centred in the First Island Chain, an area that runs from Japan through Taiwan, the Philippines and on to Borneo, enclosing China's coastal seas. "My concern is why are we giving away this crown jewel asset when we most need it," Mr Colby said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
13 minutes ago
- The Age
The surprising NSW tree-change towns where house prices rose most
Home buyers looking for a bargain are having to hunt harder across the state, as regional NSW house prices accelerate skywards to hit a record median of $800,000. After clocking up house price growth of 5.3 per cent over the year to June – the biggest jump in about three years and overtaking Sydney's 4.2 per cent annual house price rise – buyers are having to look even further afield for affordable regional options, the latest Domain House Price Report, released on Thursday, reveals. As a result, the five areas where housing prices have jumped the most because of a surge in demand all have median house prices at the comparatively inexpensive sweet spot between $560,000 and almost $670,000. 'These areas are now proving attractive to home buyers and metropolitan investors because they are the most affordable locations,' said Domain's chief of research and economics Dr Nicola Powell. 'We're seeing a clear acceleration in price in the NSW regions with a 2.6 per cent rise in the last quarter alone, which is the same as in Sydney. Interest rate cuts are giving people more confidence and boosting the housing market everywhere.' It means some of our most overlooked regional areas are now winning fresh attention. Fifty years ago, for instance, the NSW Upper Hunter coal town of Muswellbrook grabbed global headlines when it was referenced by American rock band Steely Dan in their hit song Black Friday as somewhere to go to get lost forever. Today, however, it has recorded the biggest house price growth of all the regions in the state, adding 18.2 per cent over the past year to a median of $585,000. 'For a long time Muswellbrook suffered from a cringe factor from the cities and metropolitan areas,' said local First National agent Tony McTaggart. 'As a result it's always been undervalued.
Sydney Morning Herald
13 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Segal's antisemitism plan takes us down a path we should fear to tread
This week, the federal government joined 27 other nations in condemning Israel's 'drip-feeding of aid and the inhumane killing of civilians, including children, seeking to meet their most basic need of water and food'. That same government's own antisemitism envoy, Jillian Segal, also published a report which proposed that universities, arts organisations and perhaps even public broadcasters should have funding stripped if they 'engage in or facilitate antisemitism'. This raises a question: if the words of the Australian government came instead from an academic, or artist at a festival, would it risk their public funding? The government is making grave allegations against Israel – ones that enrage its Israeli and American counterparts. It's possible some people could misuse those allegations to bolster their hatred of Jews, especially in the cesspit of social media. Could the government's words be taken to 'facilitate antisemitism' under their own envoy's plan? Personally, I think not. Trump and Netanyahu might disagree. And that's a worry. The definition of antisemitism Segal wants used to determine when institutions fall foul of it – drafted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance – states 'criticism of Israel similar to that levelled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic'. Accordingly, those suggesting the envoy's report condemns all criticism of Israel as antisemitism overstate the position. But the trouble is it's very difficult to know by how far. By what criteria, exactly, is someone to determine when anti-Israeli commentary becomes antisemitic? It's a crucial question when you're specifically proposing to make research grants terminable if the academic receiving those funds 'engages in antisemitic … speech or actions'. Or when you propose to strip charities of their tax deductibility if they 'promote speakers' who 'promote antisemitism'. Define this too broadly and you silence perfectly legitimate debate. Define it too narrowly, and these proposals have no purpose at all. Either way, it would need to be defined extremely clearly. The IHRA definition doesn't quite match this brief in two ways. Firstly, it is deliberately drafted vaguely because it describes itself merely as a working definition: guiding, illustrative and non-binding. Its drafters intended it more for the purposes of data collection than meting out punishment: a filter, not a sword. Loading Secondly, the illustrative examples attached to the definition, which outline the kinds of criticisms of Israel that would amount to antisemitism, were not unanimously adopted by those drafting it. One drafter, Antony Lerman, recalls there was so much disagreement about them that they were severed from the part of the definition to be formally adopted, to obtain a consensus. That's significant because it is in the examples that most of the controversy resides. It leaves a breach, now flooded by the most febrile cacophony, largely because this has become a contest to draw sharp lines to define something that simply cannot be defined that way. Take one common example, most recently reiterated by the chair of one of Australia's most influential Jewish advocacy organisations: that it is antisemitic, amounting to a 'blood libel', to accuse Israel of genocide. Fine, if the allegation rests on some trope that Jews by their nature delight in slaughtering children and are merely searching for an excuse to do so. Or if the accusation is so wildly fanciful that only the most prejudiced, conspiratorial mind could entertain it.
Sydney Morning Herald
13 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
The surprising NSW tree-change towns where house prices rose most
Home buyers looking for a bargain are having to hunt harder across the state, as regional NSW house prices accelerate skywards to hit a record median of $800,000. After clocking up house price growth of 5.3 per cent over the year to June – the biggest jump in about three years and overtaking Sydney's 4.2 per cent annual house price rise – buyers are having to look even further afield for affordable regional options, the latest Domain House Price Report, released on Thursday, reveals. As a result, the five areas where housing prices have jumped the most because of a surge in demand all have median house prices at the comparatively inexpensive sweet spot between $560,000 and almost $670,000. 'These areas are now proving attractive to home buyers and metropolitan investors because they are the most affordable locations,' said Domain's chief of research and economics Dr Nicola Powell. 'We're seeing a clear acceleration in price in the NSW regions with a 2.6 per cent rise in the last quarter alone, which is the same as in Sydney. Interest rate cuts are giving people more confidence and boosting the housing market everywhere.' It means some of our most overlooked regional areas are now winning fresh attention. Fifty years ago, for instance, the NSW Upper Hunter coal town of Muswellbrook grabbed global headlines when it was referenced by American rock band Steely Dan in their hit song Black Friday as somewhere to go to get lost forever. Today, however, it has recorded the biggest house price growth of all the regions in the state, adding 18.2 per cent over the past year to a median of $585,000. 'For a long time Muswellbrook suffered from a cringe factor from the cities and metropolitan areas,' said local First National agent Tony McTaggart. 'As a result it's always been undervalued.
