Latest news with #Pentagon
West Australian
8 hours ago
- Business
- West Australian
US, Trump expected to ramp up pressure on Australia to boost defence spending after NATO pledges
The US will continue to put pressure on Australia to boost its defence spending after a pledge from European leaders, a former ambassador says. NATO member nations have agreed to spend five per cent of their economic output on defence, and security more broadly, following demands by US President Donald Trump. The US has called on Australia to massively increase the defence budget by tens of billions of dollars to 3.5 per cent of gross domestic product. But Mr Albanese is standing firm and has maintained Australia will decide its spending. Former ambassador to the US Arthur Sinodinos said the best strategy for Australia was to engage with the US on extra capabilities that would best complement the two countries' aims for the Indo-Pacific. 'The pressure from the US for allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific to increase defence spending will continue, particularly in the light of commitments made at the recent NATO summit,' he told AAP. Mr Albanese is trying to secure his first face-to-face meeting with Mr Trump, after planned talks on the sidelines of the G7 summit earlier in June were cancelled due to the escalating conflict between Israel and Iran. Analyst Andrew Carr said the federal government was very aware the Trump administration represented a more 'vindictive' ally in Washington. 'Access to Australian facilities has often been to the Americans far more important than Australia's own military capabilities,' he said. 'If we're being seen to kind of 'play ball' on a whole range of political intelligence, basing and other areas, then the spending is going to be a small part of that story.' The Pentagon's 30-day review of its nuclear submarine deal with Australia under the AUKUS partnership is under way. Mr Sinodinos said there was strong support for the security pact within the state department and Congress. Defence analysts believe Mr Trump is unlikely to scrap the $368 billion submarine program altogether but might demand a bigger contribution from Australia for the US submarine industrial base. Australia has already made a first $800 million down-payment of a total $4.7 billion for its plan to acquire nuclear-powered submarines.
Perth Now
8 hours ago
- Business
- Perth Now
US pressure on defence ‘will continue', ex-ambassador warns
The US will continue to put pressure on Australia to boost its defence spending after a pledge from European leaders, a former ambassador says. NATO member nations have agreed to spend five per cent of their economic output on defence, and security more broadly, following demands by US President Donald Trump. The US has called on Australia to massively increase the defence budget by tens of billions of dollars to 3.5 per cent of gross domestic product. But Mr Albanese is standing firm and has maintained Australia will decide its spending. Former ambassador to the US Arthur Sinodinos said the best strategy for Australia was to engage with the US on extra capabilities that would best complement the two countries' aims for the Indo-Pacific. 'The pressure from the US for allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific to increase defence spending will continue, particularly in the light of commitments made at the recent NATO summit,' he told AAP. Mr Albanese is trying to secure his first face-to-face meeting with Mr Trump, after planned talks on the sidelines of the G7 summit earlier in June were cancelled due to the escalating conflict between Israel and Iran. Analyst Andrew Carr said the federal government was very aware the Trump administration represented a more 'vindictive' ally in Washington. 'Access to Australian facilities has often been to the Americans far more important than Australia's own military capabilities,' he said. 'If we're being seen to kind of 'play ball' on a whole range of political intelligence, basing and other areas, then the spending is going to be a small part of that story.' The Pentagon's 30-day review of its nuclear submarine deal with Australia under the AUKUS partnership is under way. Mr Sinodinos said there was strong support for the security pact within the state department and Congress. Defence analysts believe Mr Trump is unlikely to scrap the $368 billion submarine program altogether but might demand a bigger contribution from Australia for the US submarine industrial base. Australia has already made a first $800 million down-payment of a total $4.7 billion for its plan to acquire nuclear-powered submarines.
The Advertiser
8 hours ago
- Business
- The Advertiser
Australia to feel US squeeze for more defence cash
The US will continue to put pressure on Australia to boost its defence spending after a pledge from European leaders, a former ambassador says. NATO member nations have agreed to spend five per cent of their economic output on defence, and security more broadly, following demands by US President Donald Trump. The US has called on Australia to massively increase the defence budget by tens of billions of dollars to 3.5 per cent of gross domestic product. But Anthony Albanese is standing firm and has maintained Australia will decide its spending. Former ambassador to the US Arthur Sinodinos said the best strategy for Australia was to engage with the US on extra capabilities that would best complement the two countries' aims for the Indo-Pacific. "The pressure from the US for allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific to increase defence spending will continue, particularly in the light of commitments made at the recent NATO summit," he told AAP. Mr Albanese is trying to secure his first face-to-face meeting with Mr Trump, after planned talks on the sidelines of the G7 summit earlier in June were cancelled due to the escalating conflict between Israel and Iran. Analyst Andrew Carr said the federal government was very aware the Trump administration represented a more "vindictive" ally in Washington. "Access to Australian facilities has often been to the Americans far more important than Australia's own military capabilities," he said. "If we're being seen to kind of 'play ball' on a whole range of political intelligence, basing and other areas, then the spending is going to be a small part of that story." The Pentagon's 30-day review of its nuclear submarine deal with Australia under the AUKUS partnership is under way. Mr Sinodinos said there was strong support for the security pact within the state department and Congress. Defence analysts believe Mr Trump is unlikely to scrap the $368 billion submarine program altogether but might demand a bigger contribution from Australia for the US submarine industrial base. Australia has already made a first $800 million down-payment of a total $4.7 billion for its plan to acquire nuclear-powered submarines. The US will continue to put pressure on Australia to boost its defence spending after a pledge from European leaders, a former ambassador says. NATO member nations have agreed to spend five per cent of their economic output on defence, and security more broadly, following demands by US President Donald Trump. The US has called on Australia to massively increase the defence budget by tens of billions of dollars to 3.5 per cent of gross domestic product. But Anthony Albanese is standing firm and has maintained Australia will decide its spending. Former ambassador to the US Arthur Sinodinos said the best strategy for Australia was to engage with the US on extra capabilities that would best complement the two countries' aims for the Indo-Pacific. "The pressure from the US for allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific to increase defence spending will continue, particularly in the light of commitments made at the recent NATO summit," he told AAP. Mr Albanese is trying to secure his first face-to-face meeting with Mr Trump, after planned talks on the sidelines of the G7 summit earlier in June were cancelled due to the escalating conflict between Israel and Iran. Analyst Andrew Carr said the federal government was very aware the Trump administration represented a more "vindictive" ally in Washington. "Access to Australian facilities has often been to the Americans far more important than Australia's own military capabilities," he said. "If we're being seen to kind of 'play ball' on a whole range of political intelligence, basing and other areas, then the spending is going to be a small part of that story." The Pentagon's 30-day review of its nuclear submarine deal with Australia under the AUKUS partnership is under way. Mr Sinodinos said there was strong support for the security pact within the state department and Congress. Defence analysts believe Mr Trump is unlikely to scrap the $368 billion submarine program altogether but might demand a bigger contribution from Australia for the US submarine industrial base. Australia has already made a first $800 million down-payment of a total $4.7 billion for its plan to acquire nuclear-powered submarines. The US will continue to put pressure on Australia to boost its defence spending after a pledge from European leaders, a former ambassador says. NATO member nations have agreed to spend five per cent of their economic output on defence, and security more broadly, following demands by US President Donald Trump. The US has called on Australia to massively increase the defence budget by tens of billions of dollars to 3.5 per cent of gross domestic product. But Anthony Albanese is standing firm and has maintained Australia will decide its spending. Former ambassador to the US Arthur Sinodinos said the best strategy for Australia was to engage with the US on extra capabilities that would best complement the two countries' aims for the Indo-Pacific. "The pressure from the US for allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific to increase defence spending will continue, particularly in the light of commitments made at the recent NATO summit," he told AAP. Mr Albanese is trying to secure his first face-to-face meeting with Mr Trump, after planned talks on the sidelines of the G7 summit earlier in June were cancelled due to the escalating conflict between Israel and Iran. Analyst Andrew Carr said the federal government was very aware the Trump administration represented a more "vindictive" ally in Washington. "Access to Australian facilities has often been to the Americans far more important than Australia's own military capabilities," he said. "If we're being seen to kind of 'play ball' on a whole range of political intelligence, basing and other areas, then the spending is going to be a small part of that story." The Pentagon's 30-day review of its nuclear submarine deal with Australia under the AUKUS partnership is under way. Mr Sinodinos said there was strong support for the security pact within the state department and Congress. Defence analysts believe Mr Trump is unlikely to scrap the $368 billion submarine program altogether but might demand a bigger contribution from Australia for the US submarine industrial base. Australia has already made a first $800 million down-payment of a total $4.7 billion for its plan to acquire nuclear-powered submarines. The US will continue to put pressure on Australia to boost its defence spending after a pledge from European leaders, a former ambassador says. NATO member nations have agreed to spend five per cent of their economic output on defence, and security more broadly, following demands by US President Donald Trump. The US has called on Australia to massively increase the defence budget by tens of billions of dollars to 3.5 per cent of gross domestic product. But Anthony Albanese is standing firm and has maintained Australia will decide its spending. Former ambassador to the US Arthur Sinodinos said the best strategy for Australia was to engage with the US on extra capabilities that would best complement the two countries' aims for the Indo-Pacific. "The pressure from the US for allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific to increase defence spending will continue, particularly in the light of commitments made at the recent NATO summit," he told AAP. Mr Albanese is trying to secure his first face-to-face meeting with Mr Trump, after planned talks on the sidelines of the G7 summit earlier in June were cancelled due to the escalating conflict between Israel and Iran. Analyst Andrew Carr said the federal government was very aware the Trump administration represented a more "vindictive" ally in Washington. "Access to Australian facilities has often been to the Americans far more important than Australia's own military capabilities," he said. "If we're being seen to kind of 'play ball' on a whole range of political intelligence, basing and other areas, then the spending is going to be a small part of that story." The Pentagon's 30-day review of its nuclear submarine deal with Australia under the AUKUS partnership is under way. Mr Sinodinos said there was strong support for the security pact within the state department and Congress. Defence analysts believe Mr Trump is unlikely to scrap the $368 billion submarine program altogether but might demand a bigger contribution from Australia for the US submarine industrial base. Australia has already made a first $800 million down-payment of a total $4.7 billion for its plan to acquire nuclear-powered submarines.
Business Insider
8 hours ago
- Politics
- Business Insider
Satellite images appear to show excavators and bulldozers at work at Iran's bombed-out nuclear site
New satellite images appear to show Iran starting excavations at one of its nuclear sites hit by US bombs. In the images, Iran looks to be filling craters at Fordow and digging out access roads. Fordow was one of three facilities targeted during the US strikes on Iran's nuclear program last weekend. New satellite images show construction equipment at Fordow, one of Iran's bombed-out nuclear sites. Efforts appear to be underway to repair damage and dig out new access paths. In the images, which were captured on Friday by the US commercial satellite imaging company Maxar Technologies and obtained by Business Insider, new activity was documented near the tunnel entrances, as well as the points where heavy US bombs struck Fordow over the weekend. One image captured excavators and bulldozers apparently moving dirt near craters and holes on the northern mountain ridge at Fordow. The main strike points for the bombs, the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator bunker-busters, per the Pentagon, were exhaust shafts that allowed the weapons to penetrate deep into the underground complex. Other images capture what looks like construction equipment digging new access roads to the facility, as well as engaging in efforts to repair damage on the main access road. Iran may be attempting to restore access to the underground site in order to assess the condition of it and its equipment, though that's not explicitly clear. A Royal United Services Institute report from March of this year noted that if there wasn't a long-term strike campaign that prevented Iran from doing so, "efforts to dig down to the facilities to re-establish access and supplies would likely begin almost immediately" after a strike on its nuclear program. With the recent ceasefire, US and Israeli efforts to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities have ended. President Donald Trump has said the strikes "completely obliterated" the facilities, and Israel has determined that the strikes set Iran's program back years. Fordow was one of three nuclear sites targeted by the US in the strikes last weekend aimed at destroying Iran's nuclear program. The US also struck Natanz and Isfahan, the first with air-dropped bombs like Fordow and the second with sea-launched Tomahawk cruise missiles. The full damage to these sites and how degrading the strikes were to Iran's overall program, stockpiles of enriched uranium, and equipment are unclear. The extent of the damage to the program is still being assessed. RUSI experts previously speculated that a crippling strike on the Fordow fuel enrichment plant "would likely require multiple impacts at the same aiming point to have a good chance of penetrating the facility." At a Pentagon press briefing Thursday, Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shared that during the "Operation Midnight Hammer" strikes, MOP bunker-buster bombs were dropped one after another down exhaust shafts. The general also shared that Defense Threat Reduction Agency personnel spent roughly 15 years studying Fordow and working on how best to destroy Iran's nuclear program. US President Donald Trump has said Iran will never be able to rebuild the facilities. That is unclear. Other US and Israeli officials, as well as nuclear arms experts, have said the strikes set Iran's ambitions back by a few months to years, but this is not the same as determining whether Iran can still build nuclear weapons. It's difficult to bomb a country's knowledge out of existence, and there have been assessments that Iran may now be more eager to develop a nuclear weapon than before. The US strikes came after Israel launched a new campaign earlier this month intended to degrade Iran's nuclear program, which Tehran argues is for civilian use. The US had been seeking to reach a nuclear deal with Iran through negotiation; however, it opted for an alternative approach this past weekend, hitting Iran instead and then calling for peace. In retaliation for the US strikes, Iran fired ballistic missiles at a large US air base in Qatar this week. The US said none of Iran's missiles hit the base. US leadership has said it had advanced notice about the strikes. A ceasefire has since gone into effect, stopping the exchanges of fire for the time being.
Miami Herald
8 hours ago
- Politics
- Miami Herald
Republicans echo Trump's absurd claims justifying Iran bombing
'Peace through strength.' It's one of those deliberately vague phrases that sounds like both a euphemism and a paradox, repeated so many times that it's practically lost all meaning. President Donald Trump insists that his bombing of Iran is a perfect example of this so-called strategy, despite the fact that it stands in stark contrast to the anti-interventionist image he cultivated on the campaign trail, and to the 'peacemaker and unifier' he promised to be. Republicans are happy to defend him. The most absurd of the defenses came Monday when Rep. Pat Harrigan, who represents North Carolina's 10th congressional district, appeared on Fox News to discuss the strikes. 'We're trying to lower the temperature of global conflict while simultaneously kind of raising it here in order to lower it,' Harrigan, who is a former Army Special Forces officer, said. What? When you're trying to cool down your house, do you turn up the heat before you blast the AC? When your friends are fighting, do you intentionally inflame the situation before trying to diffuse it? The answer to that, of course, is no. So it stands to reason that raising the 'temperature of global conflict' may not be the best strategy if the goal is actually to lower it. In theory, 'peace through strength' is meant to be a strategy of deterrence. The idea is that if you build up a strong enough military that's capable of delivering a swift and devastating retaliatory response, it discourages other countries from messing with you. Whether or not it's actually a good strategy, however, depends on how you define strength. If strength means investing more into the military, that's one thing. But if you define it as deliberately escalatory and violent actions, such as bombing your enemy or floating the idea of regime change on social media, that doesn't sound like a means of achieving peace. It sounds like diving into a conflict instead of trying to avoid one, especially when there was no imminent threat. Trump and his fellow Republicans have touted the strikes as a victory because of what they supposedly 'completely and totally obliterated' Iran's nuclear program. That contradicts early Pentagon assessments that reportedly found that the strikes likely only set the program back by months, so the actual success is yet to be determined. Trump also helped negotiate a fragile ceasefire between Israel and Iran, which he claims is 'unlimited' and will 'go forever.' A Georgia congressman has even nominated Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize. Another example of Republican word salad: Vice President J.D. Vance claimed in a recent interview that 'we're not at war with Iran — we're at war with Iran's nuclear program.' That's some awfully crafty language that sounds like something straight out of '1984.' 'Peace through strength' can too easily shift into the Orwellian paradox of 'peace through war.' Rather than lauding Trump's decision, Republicans should take a more cautious approach. They should be troubled that the strikes occurred without consulting Congress and therefore may not have even been legal. They should be skeptical of Trump's claims that Iran is actively building a nuclear weapon when his own intelligence director testified that it is not. And they should be concerned about the fact that the attack may now incentivize Iran to actually develop such a weapon and make peaceful negotiation all the more difficult. Vance acknowledged the concerns of starting another war in the Middle East, but insists it's nothing to worry about with Trump. 'I understand the concern, but the difference is that back then we had dumb presidents and now we actually have a president who actually knows how to accomplish America's national security objectives,' Vance told ABC News. But there's a reason why previous presidents never made the choice that Trump did, and Trump's refusal to even acknowledge the possibility of failure is what makes his behavior so reckless. In attacking Iran, Trump took an extraordinary gamble with extraordinary risks. To cheer it on without expressing even the slightest reservation will only embolden him. Cheering, it seems, has become reflexive for Republicans who want to stay on the president's good side. We can't bomb our way to peace, and just because we were lucky enough to avoid disaster this time doesn't mean we always will.
