Pentagon says US has reached agreement with Australia and the UK on sharing nuclear-powered submarine technology AUKUS is reviewing the agreement The move was immediately condemned by congressional Democrats and could raise concerns among U.S. allies.
Pentagon's Justification: "America First" Agenda
“The Department is reviewing AUKUS as part of ensuring this initiative from the previous administration aligns with the President’s America First agenda,” a Pentagon spokesman said in a statement Wednesday. SözcüThe Pentagon did not specify who was involved in the effort, when it would conclude or why it was launched, but said it was concerned about the readiness of its forces and the U.S. defense industry. “This review will ensure that the initiative meets these common-sense, America First criteria,” the statement said. The Financial Times was first to report the review.
Scope and Objectives of the AUKUS Agreement
The AUKUS agreement, as part of a trilateral defence pact, sees Britain and Australia build a nuclear-powered submarine, while the US sells Virginia-class boats to Canberra. The agreement also includes a separate goal for the three countries to jointly develop advanced technologies such as quantum computing and hypersonic missiles. This broader cooperation was seen as a counterweight to China’s growing military influence in the Indo-Pacific region.
US Defense Secretary Hegseth's Position and Australia's Response
US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth traveled to Singapore a little over a week ago, where he met several times with his Australian counterpart Richard Marles. Hegseth’s failure to mention AUKUS in a major speech on the Trump administration’s Asia policy was notable. However, Marles later denied this in an interview with Defense News, saying, “We’ve talked about AUKUS extensively – both of our countries, including Secretary Hegseth himself. We don’t feel the need to keep repeating that,” and maintained that the program was “on track.”
Internal Debates and Concerns
Pentagon policy chief Elbridge Colby expressed some reservations about AUKUS during his confirmation hearing in March. America’s difficulty in scaling up its production of nuclear-powered submarines in particular would likely make it harder for Australia to sell additional submarines. “If we can produce attack submarines in sufficient numbers and at sufficient speeds, great. But if we can’t, that becomes a very difficult problem because we don’t want our servicemen and women to be in a weaker position,” Colby said.
Colby also argued that Australia needed to increase its defence budget much faster, having increased defence spending to around 2030% of GDP by the mid-2,4s. The Pentagon said in a statement after Hegseth and Marles' meeting that the US wanted that figure to be 3,5% of GDP.
In April, Adm. Samuel Paparo, head of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, defended the initiative’s value in testimony before the House of Representatives, saying the nuclear submarine effort “has reached every milestone” operationally. “AUKUS offers INDOPACOM something that could be a critical and significant advantage, and that is the Indian Ocean submarine base. It gives us a faster response time to the South China Sea than we have in Hawaii, Washington, San Diego,” Paparo said.
To help America build more submarines, Congress has poured billions of dollars into recent defense bills targeting the effort. Australia has also pledged $3 billion of its own funds to help the U.S. build more boats; “It’s a challenge, but I think it’s a challenge we can meet,” Marles said in an interview with Defense News.
Reactions from Congressional Democrats
Senate Democrats have expressed skepticism about the future of the AUKUS agreement from the White House. “If this administration is serious about countering the threat from China — as it said this morning — then it will work quickly with our partners in Australia and the United Kingdom to ensure that we are taking steps to strengthen this agreement and further strengthen our undersea industrial base,” Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) said in a statement. “Anything less will directly benefit China.”
Senate Armed Services Committee member Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) said news that Trump could abandon AUKUS would be “greeted with enthusiasm in Beijing” and further undermine America’s reputation around the world. “At a time when we face growing threats from [China] and Russia, we should be encouraging our partners to increase defense spending and partner with them on cutting-edge technologies, not the other way around,” Shaheen said.
The Australian Embassy did not immediately respond to a request for comment, but a spokesperson for the British Embassy responded reassuringly to the news, saying: “It is understandable that a new administration would want to reconsider its approach to such a major partnership, as the UK did last year.” This situation raises uncertainty about the future of the AUKUS agreement, and is likely to have a major impact on US relations with its allies and the course of its Indo-Pacific strategy.
