The Pentagon has launched a review of the AUKUS agreement — a landmark defense pact forged under the previous administration to supply nuclear-powered submarines to Australia and enhance military collaboration with the United Kingdom.

The move, disclosed in a Wednesday statement, has sparked immediate concern among lawmakers and could rattle key allies amid rising tensions in the Indo-Pacific region.

“The Department is reviewing AUKUS as part of ensuring that this initiative of the previous Administration is aligned with the President’s America First agenda,” a Pentagon spokesperson said.

The review’s scope, timeline, and leadership remain unclear, but the Pentagon emphasized it is focused on assessing the readiness of U.S. forces and the overall capacity of the American defense industrial base.

Here's What They're Not Telling You About Your Retirement

“This review will ensure the initiative meets these common sense, America First criteria,” the statement continued.

The Financial Times was the first to report the Pentagon’s review.

The AUKUS agreement, announced in 2021, outlined plans for Australia and the U.K. to jointly develop a new class of nuclear-powered submarines, while the United States would sell Virginia-class submarines to Canberra in the interim.

The pact also includes broader defense cooperation on cutting-edge technologies such as quantum computing, artificial intelligence, and hypersonic weapons.

This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth recently traveled to Singapore, where he met multiple times with Australian Defense Minister Richard Marles.

However, during a major speech outlining the Trump administration’s Asia strategy, Hegseth made no mention of AUKUS, raising eyebrows.

Marles downplayed the omission in an interview with Defense News, asserting the trilateral pact remains solid.

“We’ve spoken extensively about AUKUS — both of our countries, including Secretary Hegseth himself. We don’t feel a need to keep reiterating it on every single occasion,” he said, adding that the program was “on track.”

Still, doubts have been expressed from within the U.S. defense establishment.

During his March confirmation hearing, Pentagon policy chief Elbridge Colby flagged concerns about the U.S.’s ability to produce enough nuclear-powered submarines for both its own fleet and for sale to allies.

“If we can produce the attack submarines in sufficient number and sufficient speed, then great. But if we can’t, that becomes a very difficult problem because we don’t want our servicemen and women to be in a weaker position,” Colby told lawmakers.

“It should be the policy of the United States government to do everything we can to make this work.”

Colby has also pushed for Australia to increase its defense spending more aggressively.

While Australia is on track to reach 2.4% of GDP in defense spending by the mid-2030s, the U.S. has reportedly encouraged a quicker rise to at least 3.5% — a number highlighted in a Pentagon readout following Hegseth’s meetings in Singapore.

Despite the internal concerns, some U.S. military leaders have defended the initiative. Adm. Samuel Paparo, commander of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, praised AUKUS during testimony before Congress in April, highlighting its strategic importance.

“AUKUS delivers something to INDOPACOM that is critical and could be a key advantage, and that is a Indian Ocean submarine base. This gives us faster response time to the South China Sea than in Hawaii, in Washington, in San Diego,” Paparo said.

The U.S. has already invested billions through recent defense spending bills to expand submarine production, while Australia has pledged an additional $3 billion to support the effort.

Marles acknowledged the challenges in his Defense News interview but remained optimistic. “It is a challenge, but I think it’s a challenge we can meet,” he said.

The Australian embassy has not publicly commented on the review, but a spokesperson for the British embassy offered a tempered response. “It is understandable that a new administration would want to review its approach to such a major partnership, just as the U.K. did last year,” the statement read.

However, the decision to reexamine AUKUS has drawn harsh criticism from Democratic lawmakers, who see the move as potentially weakening the U.S.’s strategic position.

“If this administration is serious about countering the threat from China — like it has said as recently as this morning — then it will work expeditiously with our partners in Australia and the U.K. to strengthen this agreement and ensure we are taking steps to further boost our submarine industrial base,” said Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.).

“Anything less would play directly into China’s hand.”

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, was equally blunt.

“The news that Trump may abandon AUKUS will be met with cheers in Beijing and further weaken America’s standing in the world,” she said.

“At a moment when we face mounting threats from [China] and Russia, we should be encouraging our partners to raise their defense spending and partnering with them on the latest technologies — not doing the opposite.”

As the review unfolds, allies and members of Congress alike will be watching closely, hoping that the strategic momentum behind AUKUS — seen by many as a cornerstone of 21st-century defense cooperation — is not allowed to stall.

Warning: Account balances and purchasing power no longer tell the same story. Know in 2 minutes if your retirement is working for you.