The UK government has reiterated its full commitment to the AUKUS partnership amid a review of the pact launched by the United States, saying the trilateral initiative remains a cornerstone of national defence, economic growth, and international security.
Responding to a series of parliamentary questions from former Defence Minister James Cartlidge MP, Defence Minister Maria Eagle said AUKUS continues to enjoy bipartisan support in Washington and is backed at the highest levels across all three partner governments.
“AUKUS is a landmark security and defence partnership with two of our closest allies,” said Eagle. “It is one of the most strategically important partnerships in decades, supporting peace and security in the Indo-Pacific and Euro-Atlantic, while also delivering jobs and economic growth in communities across all three nations.”
The review by the US administration follows a change in leadership and is seen as a routine reassessment rather than a signal of disengagement. The UK has itself conducted a similar review — the Lovegrove Review — to update its own strategic posture.
“It is understandable that a new administration would want to review its approach to such a major partnership, just as the UK has done,” Eagle said. “We continue to engage with the US Administration at every level. The Defence Secretary and Foreign Secretary regularly discuss AUKUS with their US and Australian counterparts and will continue to do so during the review process.”
The UK government stressed that commitments made in the recent Strategic Defence Review would serve to strengthen AUKUS, particularly through continuous submarine production. Investments in Barrow and Raynesway will support the building of a new generation of nuclear-powered submarines under the SSN-AUKUS programme.
“We expect over 21,000 people to be working on SSN-AUKUS programmes at its peak, both in UK shipyards and across the supply chain,” Eagle confirmed.
The government is aiming to produce a submarine every 18 months, allowing the Royal Navy to grow its nuclear-powered attack submarine fleet to as many as 12 SSNs, with final decisions to be made under the Defence Investment Plan.
This planned expansion is intended not only to meet AUKUS obligations but also to support the UK’s Continuous At-Sea Deterrent (CASD), which remains a foundational element of the country’s national security strategy.
The MoD says the UK will continue to work “closely with the US and Australia at all levels to maximise the benefits and opportunities which AUKUS presents.”
I’m sure this will get through the current US administration review. However the Australians will cancel it eventually. Australian politics is a farce even compared to US politics and a project as large as AUKUS will invariably get chopped by some party or PM wanting to make a name for themselves.
Australian TV “news” is a wash of never ending “experts” and talking heads telling everyone how there is a better solution costing much less if only someone would listen. (The same experts who said the F35 was inferior to the F16)
The same goes for their surface ships. A country with close to no manufacturing base and some of the highest labour costs in the world insist on building its own surface ships then inevitably discovers cost are massive and delays are great, inevitably the Australian media seeks to blame what ever foreign ship builder they previously pulled in for the project because it couldn’t possibly be the Australians at fault.
It’s was Navantia with the Hobart class that was the devil while BAE was the white knight.
Now it’s BAE that is the devil because the Hunter class doesn’t come with 100 missile tubes and cost more than $100 a copy and it’s Germany and Japan that are to be the new saviours and will make state of the art frigates in Australia for next to nothing. No mention in the Australian press of how the UK is knocking out T26 on budget or even Canada is starting the same.
Hopefully we get the cash from them for Barrow and Derby production enhancements and we can use the extra capacity for our own Submarine production.
No nation in the history of the world has been offered access to technology like AUKUS pillar 1 and treated it like they are doing everyone else a favour.
Countries like India, China or Japan would gladly give both testicles for weapons such as these 😀
The CSC project is hardly going swimmingly from a budget perspective, though it is doing better than the Hunter-class. That said, I agree that the Australians do seem to struggle even more so than the UK with ‘sticker shock’.
And yet the Australians get far more bang for buck of GDP compared to UK.
AUKUS principals will continue to ‘muddle thru,’ as you Brits often claim. 😉😁🤞🤞
“Australian TV news is awash of/with never ending “experts” and talking heads”.
They ain’t got a patch on us lot.
” you better run, you better take cover” “I come from the land down under, oh yeah”.
Okay you lot up there…no need to bash 🇦🇺 over its procurement! Agree though the news coverage can be a bit cringy with all the whinging going on with every ship and sub coming. Really surprised they just can’t get things right.
With the subs, why don’t thry have a plan (su)B and get a top up 3-4 diesel subs in the meantime time and not run the risk of having nothing or not much going with the Collins. They’ll still be useful for littoral regional patrol.
And the light frigates. Bloody hell, talking about stuff-ups, the UK sure missed the boat with that one! 11 ships.! What happened with the A140 there?! Aus is faffing around a bit on the choice. I joke to myself that if they want more ships fast make a decision or go for a split buy…Meko for the West-North and Mogami for the East. Regards to ol’Blighty from 🇦🇺.
“You’d better run all day and run all night…”