By Lin Duo and Cao Qun
The US government is currently conducting a review of the AUKUS project, if certain benchmarks are not met, the pact may even be scrapped. Facts have shown that military build-up not aimed at maintaining peace often serves self-serving agendas, with each party making its own calculations.
At its core, the current US administration's AUKUS review comes down to three key calculations. The first calculation is about "driving up the price" ahead of the G7 Summit. Even before Donald Trump formally took office as US President, there was analysis suggesting that AUKUS might become a key target for review, adjustment, or even cancellation by the new administration. This is due to the project's lengthy timeline, exorbitant cost, and the highly sensitive nature of the technology transfers involved, as well as the perception that AUKUS represents a signature diplomatic achievement of the Biden administration. Reviewing mechanisms like AUKUS, which are essentially small-multilateral arrangements, is also in line with the current US government's broader approach of increasing the cost burden on its allies. By floating the idea of an AUKUS review ahead of the G7 summit, Washington may be seeking to pressure its two partners, using the project of great concern to them as leverage to extract further commitments that align more closely with US interests.
The second calculation concerns the residual value of US allies under the banner of "America First." A US Department of Defense official offered a blunt and revealing explanation for the AUKUS review that it should meet the fundamental standard of "America First," and ensure that allies contribute more to collective security. This once again exposes the dual logic behind the "America First" doctrine. On one hand, it wishes to rely on allied strength to counter so-called adversaries like China, while on the other hand, it hopes to deplete allies' own resources in the process and keep them in a subordinate position in terms of both resources and capabilities. The parallel strategy of “outcompeting China” and "extracting value from allies" stems from the domestic economic and social challenges facing the US, which limit its deployable resources and compel it to externalize strategic costs. Such "cost outsourcing" reinforces America's comparative advantage over its allies, consolidates its dominant role in strategic planning, industrial and supply chains, and relegates countries like the UK and Australia to the role of "strategic assistants."
The third calculation involves reassessing the policy legacy of the Biden administration. A US Department of Defense official stated that the review aims to ensure that "this initiative of the previous Administration is aligned with the President's America First agenda." The policies implemented during Donald Trump's presidency inflicted tangible damage on the US' international reputation and credibility. His stance on "reciprocal tariffs," remarks endorsing territorial expansion, and ambiguous positions on the Ukraine crisis and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have all contributed to growing divisions within the US alliance system. Against this backdrop, the current US administration has been striving to carve out a distinct diplomatic achievement from that of the Biden administration. Simply continuing the policies of its predecessor would undermine its own political identity and domestic interests, while also falling short of its goal of asserting authority on the global stage.
Moreover, a key reason why the US government can openly review alliance agreements already in effect and even threaten to halt related projects lies in the presence of technical loopholes embedded in the original arrangements. In August 2024, the US, the UK, and Australia signed the Agreement for Cooperation Related to Naval Nuclear Propulsion under the AUKUS framework. According to the agreement, if the US or the UK believes that AUKUS cooperation undermines the competitiveness of their own nuclear submarine programs, they may suspend cooperation based on national interests, effectively leaving a "backdoor" for future reviews. This "backdoor" provision highlights the inherently unequal nature of the AUKUS agreement, where so-called "allies" may find it difficult to negotiate on an equal footing.
At a time when global multilateralism is facing challenges, peace and development remain the shared aspirations of countries across the Asia-Pacific region. AUKUS represents a key component of the US bloc-based confrontation strategy against China in the Asia-Pacific. It heightens the risks of nuclear proliferation and fuels a regional arms race. Washington's AUKUS review further reveals the isolationist undertone of its "America First" agenda. Regional peace cannot be achieved through weapons deployment or an arms race but through equal-footed dialogue and cooperation. How the Asia-Pacific allies of the US navigate rising tensions will test their statecraft.
(The authors are scholars from the Department for Asia-Pacific Studies and the Department for American Studies, China Institute of International Studies respectively.)
Editor's Note: Originally published on huanqiu.com, this article is translated from Chinese into English and edited by the China Military Online. The information and opinions in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of eng.chinamil.com.cn.
