Can Trump drowned the submarine plans in Australia?

Australia’s defense minister woke up to a nightmare earlier this week – a waving situation on the horizon since the United States re -elected Donald Trump as president in November.

There was a triple teacher agreement between the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia – which would give technology the recent advanced nuclear submarine in exchange for more assistance to China in the Asia and Pacific region – under review.

The White House said on Thursday that it wanted to make sure The so -called AUKUS Agreement was “aligned with the first US President’s agenda”.

It is the last step from Washington, which challenges its long friendship with Canberra, which raised fears under this, with the high temperature of the conflict around the world, may leave Australia standing without its biggest ally.

“I don’t think any Australian should feel that our ally is completely committed to our security at this moment,” says Sam Rughen, who leads the security program at the Louis Institute in Australia.

On paper, Australia is the clear beneficiary of the AUKUS agreement, at a value of 176 billion pounds (239 billion dollars; $ 368 billion).

The technology of the agreement is based on the United States, and the United Kingdom already has, along with nuclear powered submarines. But those who are designed and sons by the three countries will be improved.

For Australia, this represents a pivotal upgrade of military capabilities. The new submarine model will be able to work more and faster than the current diesel engines fleet in the country, and allows him to carry out long -term strikes against enemies for the first time.

It is a big deal for the United States to exchange what has been described as the “crown jewel” of defense technology, and there is nothing small for the United Kingdom to deliver engine plans as well.

But the historical armament of Australia was seen by Washington and Downing Street Street is necessary to maintain peace in the Asia Pacific region, which is not their own.

Experts say it is about placing technology and devices in the right place.

But when the AUKUS agreement was signed in 2021, the three countries had very different leaders – Joe Biden in the United States, Boris Johnson in the United Kingdom and Square Morrison in Australia.

Today, when it is seen by the increasing isolation lens that Trump uses to study his country’s global relations, some argue that the United States has much lower than the charter.

Defense Secretary Elberbridge Colby, a former AUKUS critic, will lead the White House review to the agreement, where the Pentagon PBC official told that the process is to ensure that “the common instinct, the first American standards”.

Two of the criteria they cite say. One of them is a requirement from the allies, “a completely escalating to do their role to collective defense.” The other is an alleged need to ensure that the American arms industry suffice sufficiently the country’s needs first.

The Trump administration has constantly expressed its frustration with the allies, including Australia, who believe it does not reduce their weight with defensive spending.

They also say that America is struggling to produce enough nuclear power submarines.

“Why do we give the origins of this jewel of the crown when we need it?” Colbey himself said last year.

However, the Australian government offers a quiet interface.

Officials say it is normal for a new administration to reassess its predecessor’s decisions, noting that the new UK’s Labor Party government has a review of AUKUS last year as well.

“I am very confident that this will happen.”

But there is no doubt that the review will cause some early tremors to panic in Canberra.

“I think Angst was inseparable from Aukus from its inception … The review itself is not worrying. It’s just everything else,” said Euan Graham, from the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, for BBC.

There is an increased concern all over Australia that America is unreliable.

“President Donald Trump’s behavior, during these first months of this term, I do not think that any confidence observer should adhere to America to its allies,” says Rughen.

“Trump said, for example, that Ukraine is mainly a problem in Europe because it is separated by a large and beautiful ocean. Of course, there is a great and beautiful circumference that separates America from Asia as well.”

Washington’s decision to slap the large customs tariff for Australian goods earlier this year did not inspire confidence as well, as Prime Minister Anthony Albaniz said it is clear that he was “not a friend’s act.”

Albaniz has been calm in AUKUS review so far, probably holding his breath to hold a face meeting with Trump on the sidelines of the G7 summit in Canada next week. This chat is still desperate to make the American president agree on.

But many former prime ministers rushed to give two years.

Scott Morrison, the conservative leader who negotiated the AUKUS agreement in 2021, said that the review should not be “excessive in interpretation” and mocked the proposal that could meet another country the security needs of Australia.

He told ABC Radio: “The idea … and they are frankly.”

Malcolm Turnboul, who was behind the French submarine contract that Moreson has greatly torn out in favor of Okos, said that Australia needs to “wake up” and realize that it is a “bad deal” through which the United States can take place at any time, and to create other plans before it is too late.

Meanwhile, Paul Kiting, a famous sharp defender on closer relations with China, said, “The moment it may be the saving Washington Australia from itself.”

“Aukus will be shown on what was always the case: the Kharbasha deal in a hurry on the back of envelope by Scott Morrison, along with the British BlayHard Boris Johnson and the disorganized president Joe Biden.”

A whiff on Aukus feeds on a long -term criticism in some circles that have become Australia dependent on the country.

“We need an independent defense and an external policy, which does not require us to bow our will and our wealth to Trump Trump, the United States of America, which is increasingly irregular,” said Al -Khader, the third largest political party in the country.

There is every opportunity for the United States to turn within a few weeks and recommendations for the agreement.

At the end of the day, Australia purchases up to five nuclear energy submarines at a huge account, helping to keep Americans working. The United States has time – less than a decade – to sort and provide their display problems.

“(The United States) also takes advantage of the wider aspects of AUKUS – all three parties get their boat to be raised jointly by the presence of more environmental defense technology,” added Mr. Graham.

However, the anxiety achieved by the review in the relationship will be completely difficult – and only the differences on Aukus in Australia have been disposed of.

But there is also a possibility that Trump wants to rewrite the deal.

“I can easily see a future in which we do not get Virginia’s category boats,” says Mr. Rojvin, referring to temporary submarines.

This is likely to leave Australia with its increasingly excessive fleet for two decades, at risk while designing and designing new models.

What happens if the United States leaves the AUKUS alliance completely?

In this turn, a little of this alarm.

The widespread opinion is that for the United States, confronting China and preserving the Pacific in its field of influence is still very important.

Mr. Roggeven says that when it comes to a potential conflict in the Pacific Ocean, the United States did not put its money as its mouth was for years.

“China has participated in the largest accumulation of the military authority of any country since the end of the Cold War and the position of the United States in Asia has not changed mainly,” he says.

If the United States leaves, Aukus Auk may become embarrassing – but can the United Kingdom real really enough to Australia to maintain the agreement?

And if the whole matter collapses and leaves Australia without submarines, who can turn to it?

France feels an unlikely savior, given the previous row there, but Australia has options, Mr. Roger says: “This will not be the end of the world for Australian defense.”

He says Australia is “geographically blessed”, and with a “reasonable defense budget and a good strategy” that can deter China enough, even without submarines.

“There is this phrase that you hear from time to time, that the danger is on the threshold of our door. Well, it is a large threshold threshold if this is true … Beijing is more closer to Berlin than Sydney.”

“There is this mental mass in Australia and also this emotional bloc – a fear of giving up, this idea that we cannot defend alone. But we can do so at all if we have to.”