Pentagon starts the review of the Aukus -Nuklear -u -Boat deals

The Pentagon started a review of the Aukus -U -Boat Agreement from 2021 with Great Britain and Australia and questioned the security pact in a time of increased tension with China.

The review to determine whether the United States should scrap the project Sacrificeafter six people who are familiar with the matter.

The termination of the submarine and advanced technology development agreement would destroy a pillar of security cooperation between the Allies. The assessment triggered fear in London and Canberra.

While Aukus has strongly supported US legislators and experts, some critics say that this could undermine the security of the country because the navy has difficulty producing more American U boats because the threat causes Beijing.

Australia and Great Britain are due to the fact that an attack-submarine class known as a SSN-aucus, which will be put into operation in early 2040.

But the USA are committed Sale of up to five U -boats in Virginia Class to Australia from 2032 to close the gap while retiring its current ship fleet.

This obligation would almost certainly expire if the United States withdraw from Aukus.

Last year, Colby wrote about X That he was skeptical about Aukus and that it would be “crazy” for the United States to have fewer submarines with a nuclear institution that are known as SSNs in the event of a conflict around Taiwan.

In March, Colby said that it was “great” for Australia to have SSNs, however, warned that there will be a “very real threat to a conflict” in the coming years and that the US SSNs for defending Taiwan were “absolutely essential”.

Skeptic of the Nuclear technology sharing pact Also questioned whether the United States should help Australia to receive the U -boats without an express obligation to use them in a war with China.

Kurt Campbell, deputy foreign minister in the Biden administration, which was the US architect of Aukus, emphasized the importance of Australia with SSNS last year that could work closely with the USA in the case of A War for Taiwan. But Canberra did not publicly link the need for the ships with a conflict about Taiwan.

The review takes place in the middle of the increasing anxiety among us allies via some positions of the Trump administration. Colby has asked Great Britain and other European allies to concentrate more on the Euro-Atlantic Region and RCreate your activity in the Indo-Pacific.

Jeanne Shaheen, the best democrat of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, said the FT that the news of the administration, which is withdrawing from Aukus, “would occur in Beijing, which is already celebrating America’s global withdrawal and our tense connections to allies under President Trump”.

“The scrap of this partnership would further influence America and raise further questions about our reliability among our closest defense partners,” said Shaheen.

“At a moment when we are exposed to increasing threats from China and Russia, we should encourage our partners to increase their defense spending and work with them to form the latest technologies – without doing the opposite.”

A person familiar with the debate about Aukus said that Canberra and London were “incredibly fearful” about the Aukus evaluation.

“Aukus is the most extensive military and strategic undertaking between the United States, Australia and Great Britain for generations,” Campbell told Financial Times.

“Efforts of increasing the coordination, defense spending and the common ambition.

The Pentagon has urged Australia to increase its Defense spending. The US defense minister Pete Hegseth called Canberra this month to increase the expenditure of 2 percent of GDP to 3.5 percent. In response to this, the Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said: “We will determine our defense policy.”

“Australia’s defense spending is gradually increased, but it is not almost as fast as other democratic states, nor at a price that is sufficient for both Aukus and its existing conventional strength,” said Charles Edel, an expert for Australia at the CSIS Think tank in Washington.

John Lee, an Australian defense expert at the Hudson Institute, said that he had increased the pressure on Canberra because the United States focused on penetrating China from this decade in Taiwan. He added that the Australian navy would be quickly weakened if it did not increase the defense spending to 3 percent of GDP.

“This is unacceptable for the Trump government,” said Lee. “If Australia continues this trajectory, it is conceivable if the Trump government will probably freeze or cancel, Pillar 1 of Aukus (the part that deals with U -boats) to force Australia to focus on increasing its financing of its military over the next five years.”

A person trusted with the evaluation said it was unclear whether Colby was alone or as part of a more comprehensive effort by the Trump administration. “The feeling seems to be that it is the former, but the lack of clarity has confused the congress, other government departments and Australia,” said the person.

A Pentagon spokesman said the department had checked Aukus to ensure that “this initiative of the previous administration is in line with the president’s agenda” America First “. He added that Hegseth had “made his intention clear to ensure that the department (defense) focuses primarily on the Indo-Pacific region”.

Several people who were familiar with the matter said that the evaluation should take 30 days, but the spokesman refused to comment at the time. “All changes to the administration of the Aukus’ approach may be communicated via official channels,” he said.

A British government official said Great Britain was aware of the review. “That makes sense for a new administration,” said the official, who found that the Labor government had also carried out a Aukus review.

“We repeated the strategic importance of the relationship between Great Britain and the USA, announced additional defense spending and confirmed our commitment to Aukus,” added the official.

The Australian embassy in Washington rejected a statement.