AUKUS review: Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth confirms probe on subs pact checks if it fits ‘Trump priorities’

US Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth says the Pentagon is reviewing AUKUS to ensure that it fits with President Donald Trump’s priorities.

He called for allies in the Asia region to “do more and quickly” in matching the new NATO standard of spending 5 per cent of GDP on defence, which Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is refusing to pledge.

And in his first public comments, since it was revealed last week that AUKUS-sceptic Elbridge Colby had launched an “America First” review into the project, Mr Hegseth said AUKUS was a “possible avenue” for increasing the US’s nuclear deterrent in the Indo-Pacific.

Mr Hegseth was speaking to the Senate Armed Services Committee and responding to questioning by Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen, who has criticised the review into AUKUS as a win for Beijing.

Senator Shaheen noted that Australia has already paid US$500 million as a down payment on the first of the Virginia-class submarines that are due to be transferred to Australia beginning in the early 2030s.

“Do you disagree with the position that President Trump has taken about AUKUS that we should move forward and what is the review expected to produce?” Senator Shaheen asked Mr Hegseth.

Mr Hegseth said that reviews were “prudent” and that it came after “long personal conversations” with his AUKUS defence counterparts, Australian Defence Minister Richard Marles and the UK’s John Healey.

“So we are reviewing it because that’s what the Defence Department ought to do to make sure it fits the priorities of the President and that our defence and shipbuilding industrial base can support, ensure that we’re clear on all sides of that on either pillar,” he said.

“And then on pillar two, identifying specifically the ways we can work together most meaningfully to co-produce with our industrial base, munitions or other capabilities that would be most applicable to the threats we face.”

Senator Shaheen asked Mr Hegseth if he agreed that AUKUS was one way of increasing the United States’ nuclear deterrent in the Indo-Pacific.

“I do, and working through AUKUS as a possible avenue for that, is a good thing,” he said.

Foreign Minister Penny Wong discussed AUKUS, along with the tensions in Iran and broader Indo-Pacific security in her phone call with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio late on Thursday night.

However, the State Department statement only mentioned their conversation on the Middle East and made no mention of the Pentagon review.

AUKUS, costing $368 billion, is the most ambitious and expensive defence acquisition project in Australia’s history.

The project aims to acquire nuclear-propelled submarines, firstly US-made boats from the early 2030s and then in partnership with the British, building a new attack submarine together in the 2040s.

But the US is struggling to produce enough submarines for its needs. Last month, Mr Hegseth warned a Chinese attack on Taiwan could be imminent.

Chinese President Xi Jinping has said he wants to be ready to take control of democratically-ruled Taiwan by 2027.

The United States fears China wants to dominate not just Taiwan but maritime shipping routes, upon which Australia’s trade-dependent economy relies.

Mr Hegseth said allies in the Asian region needed to do more and quickly to protect their economic security.

“As we shift toward the Indo-Pacific, we’re looking more to our allies and partners to be force multipliers alongside the United States,” he said.

“And we’re making progress in that.

“We applaud those allies who are stepping up but others need to do more and quickly.

He said that it was inconceivable before Donald Trump’s election, that European leaders would step up and pledge 5 per cent in defence spending.

“And with NATO stepping up, we now have a new standard for Allied defence spending that all of our allies around the world, including in Asia should move to,” he said.

“As the President has rightly pointed out, it’s only fair that allies and partners do their part.

“We cannot want their security more than they do.”

It is the second time Mr Hegseth has called for an increase in defence spending in public. He released a statement three days after his meeting with Mr Marles in Singapore, revealing he had asked Australia to lift its spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP.

Former Home Affairs boss Mike Pezzullo, who wrote the 2009 Defence White Paper, told The Nightly that Australia was at risk of being left behind it if it did not heed Mr Hegseth’s warnings.

“It is becoming clearer by the day that the United States sees increased defence spending by, and greater industrial integration with, allies such as Australia as being a ‘force multiplier’ for the United States,” he said.

“This is a good thing for those who support integrated deterrence, whereby Europe leads on deterring Russia, and the United States, Japan, and Australia lead on deterring China.

“What it means, however, is that we will be left behind in the development of integrated deterrence arrangements if we do not actively engage in contingency planning, in the way that NATO allies do.

“The challenge for Australia in that regard is clear: one cannot engage in contingency planning if one refuses to name and describe the contingency.”

Australia is not a member of NATO but is part of an elite so-called Indo-Pacific 4 (IP4) club whose leaders have been invited by NATO to the annual gatherings to help collaborate on how to counter the threat posed by China.

Mr Albanese has attended twice but had planned to skip this year’s summit for a second time and send his deputy, Mr Marles.

The Prime Minister said he was reconsidering that move after being stood up by US President Donald Trump at the G7 in Canada this week but on Friday ruled it out, suggesting he was unsuccessful in securing a meeting with the President at the Hague.

The two have never met and were due to discuss AUKUS and the US’ trade tariffs before the President abruptly left.

Australia’s reluctance to increase its defence spending beyond the 2 per cent it spends now will be in stark contrast to the commitments being made by European leaders and in defiance of the Trump Administration’s private - and now public - urgings.

Opposition finance spokesman James Paterson told Sunrise that Mr Albanese should be going to NATO regardless of whether or not he secured a meeting with Mr Trump on the sidelines.

“We have a strong interest in the outcome of Russia’s war on Ukraine,” he said.

“Secondly, we have a strong shared interest with our European partners on the outcome of what’s happening in Iran right now.

“And thirdly, it will give the Prime Minister an opportunity to consult with European partners on the importance of increasing defence spending, and they can tell him what the consequences are of failing to invest adequately in defence industry in peacetime, and hopefully he can heed that advice.”

Former Labor foreign minister Gareth Evans, who opposes AUKUS and argues it will make Australia a target for any Chinese aggression, wrote in the Japan Times that any breakdown in the project “should be a cause for celebration.”