Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free

Your guide to what Trump’s second term means for Washington, business and the world

The Pentagon has launched a review of the 2021 Aukus submarine deal with the UK and Australia, throwing the security pact into doubt at a time of heightened tension with China.

The review to determine whether the US should scrap the project is being led by Elbridge Colby, a top defence department official who previously expressed scepticism about Aukus, according to six people familiar with the matter.

Ending the submarine and advanced technology development agreement would destroy a pillar of security co-operation between the allies. The review has triggered anxiety in London and Canberra.

While Aukus has received strong support from US lawmakers and experts, some critics say it could undermine the country’s security because the navy is struggling to produce more American submarines as the threat from Beijing is rising.

Australia and Britain are due to co-produce an attack submarine class known as the SSN-Aukus that will come into service in the early 2040s. But the US has committed to selling up to five Virginia class submarines to Australia from 2032 to bridge the gap as it retires its current fleet of vessels.

That commitment would almost certainly lapse if the US pulled out of Aukus.

Last year, Colby wrote on X that he was sceptical about Aukus and that it “would be crazy” for the US to have fewer nuclear-powered attack submarines, known as SSNs, in the case of a conflict over Taiwan.

In March, Colby said it would be “great” for Australia to have SSNs but cautioned there was a “very real threat of a conflict in the coming years” and that US SSNs would be “absolutely essential” to defend Taiwan.

Sceptics of the nuclear technology-sharing pact have also questioned whether the US should help Australia obtain the submarines without an explicit commitment to use them in any war with China.

Kurt Campbell, the deputy secretary of state in the Biden administration who was the US architect of Aukus, last year stressed the importance of Australia having SSNs that could work closely with the US in the case of a war over Taiwan. But Canberra has not publicly linked the need for the vessels to a conflict over Taiwan.

The review comes amid mounting anxiety among US allies about some of the Trump administration’s positions. Colby has told the UK and other European allies to focus more on the Euro-Atlantic region and reduce their activity in the Indo-Pacific.

One person familiar with the debate over Aukus said Canberra and London were “incredibly anxious” about the Aukus review.

“Aukus is the most substantial military and strategic undertaking between the US, Australia and Great Britain in generations,” Campbell told the Financial Times.

“Efforts to increase co-ordination, defence spending and common ambition should be welcomed. Any bureaucratic effort to undermine Aukus would lead to a crisis in confidence among our closest security and political partners.”

The Pentagon has pushed Australia to boost its defence spending. US defence secretary Pete Hegseth this month urged Canberra to raise spending from 2 per cent of GDP to 3.5 per cent. In response, Australian prime minister Anthony Albanese said: “We’ll determine our defence policy.” 

“Australia’s defence spending has gradually been increasing, but it is not doing so nearly as fast as other democratic states, nor at a rate sufficient to pay for both Aukus and its existing conventional force,” said Charles Edel, an Australia expert at the CSIS think-tank in Washington.

John Lee, an Australia defence expert at the Hudson Institute, said pressure was increasing on Canberra because the US was focusing on deterring China from invading Taiwan this decade. He added that Australia’s navy would be rapidly weakened if it did not increase defence spending to 3 per cent of GDP.

“This is unacceptable to the Trump administration,” said Lee. “If Australia continues on this trajectory, it is conceivable if not likely that the Trump administration will freeze or cancel Pillar 1 of Aukus [the part dealing with submarines] to force Australia to focus on increasing its funding of its military over the next five years.” 

One person familiar with the review said it was unclear if Colby was acting alone or as part of a wider effort by Trump administration. “Sentiment seems to be that it’s the former, but the lack of clarity has confused Congress, other government departments and Australia,” the person said. 

A Pentagon spokesperson said the department was reviewing Aukus to ensure that “this initiative of the previous administration is aligned with the president’s ‘America First’ agenda”. He added that Hegseth had “made clear his intent to ensure the [defence] department is focused on the Indo-Pacific region first and foremost”. 

Several people familiar with the matter said the review was slated to take 30 days, but the spokesperson declined to comment on the timing. “Any changes to the Administration’s approach for Aukus will be communicated through official channels, when appropriate,” he said.

A British government official said the UK was aware of the review. “That makes sense for a new administration,” said the official, who noted that the Labour government had also conducted a review of Aukus.

“We have reiterated the strategic importance of the UK-US relationship, announced additional defence spending and confirmed our commitment to Aukus,” the official added.

The Australian embassy in Washington declined to comment.

Days after the very public breakup of President Trump and his former adviser Elon Musk, the latter appears to be doing damage control.

“I regret some of my posts about President [Trump] last week,” Musk posted on X, his social media platform, just after 3 a.m. ET on Wednesday. “They went too far.”

Trump has been active on social media early Wednesday, but has not responded publicly to Musk’s apology.

However, in a previously recorded podcast interview with the New York Post that aired on Wednesday morning, Trump said he had “no hard feelings” towards Musk.

“I don’t blame him for anything but I was a little disappointed,” Trump said, adding that he had not “thought too much about him in the last little while.”

When asked if he could forgive Musk, Trump said “I guess I could,” but that “my sole function now is getting this country back to a level higher than it’s ever been.”

The president told NBC News on Saturday that he has no desire to repair his relationship with Musk, saying he assumed it was over.

“I’m too busy doing other things,” Trump said, adding, “I have no intention of speaking to him.”

Trump was critical of Musk in that interview, saying the tech billionaire had been “disrespectful to the office of the president.”

But Trump also appeared to soften some of his stances. He said he hadn’t given any more thought to his earlier threat of canceling Musk’s companies’ federal contracts or investigating Musk’s immigration status, as Trump ally Steve Bannon had publicly suggested.

Meanwhile, Musk quietly deleted some of his more inflammatory tweets from the previous week, including posts endorsing a call for Trump’s impeachment, linking Trump to the files of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and saying Trump’s tariffs would cause a recession this year.

Trump said on Monday that he had no plans to discontinue Musk’s Starlink satellite internet system that was installed at the White House despite security concerns — though may move his Tesla, which he bought in March, off-site. And he told reporters he would not have a problem if Musk called.

“We had a good relationship, and I just wish him well — very well, actually,” Trump said. A clip of the exchange was posted to X, where Musk responded with a heart emoji.

The alliance that was 

The two had enjoyed a close relationship since 2024, when the tech billionaire poured almost $300 million into backing Trump’s reelection campaign.

Musk went on to join the new administration as the head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), becoming the public face of its controversial efforts to reshape the federal government even as government lawyers downplayed his role in court filings.

Musk’s whirlwind 130 days as a special government employee were marked by legal setbacks, clashes with Cabinet members and scant evidence to support DOGE’s claims of significant savings. His own business empire took a financial hit, with Tesla’s first-quarter profits plunging 71% compared to the same period in 2024.

Musk announced his departure from the government in late May, citing the end of his “scheduled time” in the position. At a final Oval Office press conference on May 30, Musk stood next to Trump as the president praised him as “one of the greatest business leaders and innovators the world has ever produced.”

But things soured quickly in the days that followed, fueled by Musk’s public criticisms of the president’s sweeping domestic policy bill, known as the “big, beautiful bill.” Musk wasted no time railing against what he called the “disgusting abomination,” saying it would increase the federal budget deficit and undermine DOGE’s cost-cutting efforts.

Trump and Musk’s war of words 

Social media sniping ensued.

Musk said Trump would have lost the election without his support, while Trump wrote that the “easiest way to save money” in the budget would be to terminate Musk’s federal subsidies and contracts, referring to Musk’s companies including Tesla and SpaceX.

Then Musk claimed without evidence that Trump’s Justice Department has not released the full Jeffrey Epstein files because Trump is in them — an allegation that Trump denied and called “old news” in a Saturday interview with NBC News.

While the White House did not directly comment on those allegations, press secretary Karoline Leavitt issued a statement denouncing the “unfortunate episode from Elon” and accusing him of opposing Trump’s bill because “it does not include the policies he wanted.” Trump has suggested Musk was disappointed because the bill proposes cutting subsidies for electric vehicles.

In his NBC News interview on Saturday, Trump suggested the feud with Musk had helped unite the Republican Party and made lawmakers see the benefits of his bill. It narrowly passed the House in May and remains under scrutiny in the Senate, where GOP leaders hope to pass it by July 4.