Washington’s Reassessment: An ‘America First’ Lens on AUKUS
The United States has launched an internal review of the AUKUS trilateral partnership—an extensive security agreement among Australia, the UK, and the US—raising questions about its future direction amid President Donald Trump’s emphasis on an “America First” approach. While officials within the Department of Defense downplay immediate alarms, analysts warn that the review could complicate politically sensitive issues, especially in Canberra.
Officially, No Cause for Alarm, But Broader Implications Loom
The news broke Wednesday via the Financial Times, quickly spreading through London and Canberra. A US defense official, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed that the review aims to assess whether AUKUS aligns with core US priorities such as readiness, alliance contributions, and industrial base needs. The official stated, “This review will ensure the initiative meets these common sense, America First criteria.”
Despite these reassurances, critics in Australia might find new momentum, as the review could intensify debates over costs, industrial base dependencies, and US commitment levels. The focus on “America First” standards could make it more challenging for the Australian government to defend the partnership against internal opposition.
International Reactions: Support and Caution
Australia’s Deputy Prime Minister and Defense Minister Richard Marles’ spokesperson reaffirmed Canberra’s commitment to AUKUS, emphasizing continued cooperation with the US and Britain. The spokesperson noted that both allies had been informed of the review, framing it as a standard examination of a “major undertaking.”
Likewise, the UK’s Ministry of Defence reassured that the UK would continue to collaborate closely with the US and Australia, echoing the sentiment that the partnership remains vital despite shifting US administrations. A UK MoD spokesperson said, “It is understandable that a new administration would want to review its approach…we will continue working together to maximize benefits.”
Experts Caution Against Overreaction
UK defense analyst Francis Tusa suggested the review might trigger a “root-and-branch assessment” of the UK’s reliance on Washington, potentially challenging trust in longstanding treaties. “Treating ratified treaties as tradeable reflects on a state’s reliability and trustworthiness,” Tusa warned, hinting that unilaterally reconsidering commitments could damage US credibility.
Australian Strategic Policy Institute senior analyst Euan Graham urged patience, emphasizing that early indications suggest the review is unlikely to kill AUKUS entirely. “There is some risk and mixed signals, especially regarding US willingness to transfer Virginia-class submarines to Australia, but there is also potential for a more coherent, cost-benefit-oriented US approach,” Graham explained.
AUKUS Pillars Under Scrutiny: How Could the Review Affect the Foundations?
The trilateral agreement is divided into two main components—Pillar I and Pillar II. Pillar I involves the development of nuclear-powered submarines (SSNs) for the UK and Australia, with a tentative plan to fill the submarine gap with Virginia-class vessels until SSNs are operational. The US and its allies have expressed concerns about the costs and timeframe of developing these advanced submarines, and the review may delay or reshape this pillar.
Pillar II focuses on joint technological development, potentially involving partners like Japan and South Korea, and is somewhat separate from the nuclear submarine component. Experts estimate that even if the US decides to halt the transfer of Virginia-class submarines to Australia, Pillar II could still proceed, albeit with adjustments.
Political and Strategic Ramifications
Sidharth Kaushal noted that canceling the Virginia transfer might strain Australia’s political commitment, given the significant domestic investment and political capital poured into the program. Conversely, Graham sees the review as an opportunity for long-term US strategic positioning, emphasizing forward basing, maintenance, and interoperability.
Australian experts, including Jennifer Parker from the University of New South Wales, expressed cautious optimism, suggesting that the future of AUKUS remains secure for now. Both Parker and Graham agree that increased defense spending by Australia—currently projected at 2.3% of GDP by 2029—is vital for maintaining strategic momentum.
Public Opinion Favors AUKUS Despite Uncertainty
Amidst these developments, recent polling by the Lowy Institute revealed that 67% of Australians support acquiring nuclear-powered submarines—a figure steady since 2022. According to Michael Fullilove, the Institute’s Director, “Most Australians believe this arrangement is in our national interest,” highlighting public backing for the arrangement even amid political debates.
Conclusion: Cautious Watchfulness, Not Panic
While the review introduces uncertainties, defense experts generally agree it’s unlikely to derail AUKUS entirely. Instead, it may serve as a pivotal moment for clarifying US strategic priorities, recalibrating commitments, and reaffirming alliances in a rapidly evolving global landscape. Both Australia and its partners remain watchful but hopeful that the partnership will adapt to emerging realities without losing sight of shared security objectives.
