Donald Trump’s re-ascendance to influence has sparked significant discussions about the future of global alliances, with experts raising alarms over how his transactional approach may reshape longstanding relationships like AUKUS and the Five Eyes. These inquiries stem largely from Australia’s national security interests and the alliances foundational to its global posture.
Since World War II, the cornerstone of Australia’s defense and intelligence framework has been its alliance with the United States, enshrined under the Five Eyes agreement, which involves intelligence sharing among the US, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the UK.
Under this elite arrangement, member nations exchange intelligence gathered from human sources as well as electronic surveillance. This wealth of intelligence is invaluable, as highlighted by Richard Kerbaj, author of The Secret History of the Five Eyes and Australian journalist based in London, who noted, "One of Australia's greatest intelligence advantages is its geographic proximity to the greatest economic, geopolitical and security rival facing the western world — China."
Trump’s renewed presidency raises questions about the future dynamics of these alliances. Analysts like Hugh White, emeritus professor of strategic studies at the Australian National University, caution against underestimations of the impact Trump’s presidency could exert. He argues, "Trump has transformed American politics and policy. He sees America using America's power to serve US interests alone" — highlighting a potential shift away from collective defense strategies historically relied upon.
Indeed, the strategic shift could be stark. Trump appears to evaluate alliances through a lens of immediate reciprocal benefits, as raised concerns suggest. The director-general of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation, Mike Burgess, emphasized to Kerbaj, "Five Eyes is... not five nations... outside of intelligence, and that's important." This suggests the unique challenges posed to Australian security faced with the unpredictable nature of Trump’s geopolitical strategies.
Potential trouble for the AUKUS pact, formed between Australia, the US, and the UK on nuclear submarine acquisitions, has escalated under Trump's administration. White remarked on the implicit challenges: "AUKUS has created a two-tier system within the Five Eyes, leaving Canada and New Zealand on the periphery," positioning Australia and the UK more favorably within US military strategy.
Critics like White assert the likelihood of AUKUS being undermined under Trump’s policies, with its substantive maritime agreements facing significant hurdles as they may prioritize US interests over those of its allies. He described AUKUS’s future viability as contingent on broader strategic calculations rather than existing within the cooperative frameworks previously taken for granted.
The sentiment isn’t universally pessimistic; Bruce Wolpe, senior fellow at the United States Studies Centre, posits some optimism, asserting the Trump administration has yet to show direct signs of antagonism against AUKUS, perhaps due to bipartisan support still underpinning the deal. Nevertheless, he acknowledged concerns about trade restrictions Trump might impose based upon his historical inclination toward tariffs and protectionism.
International conversations remain fraught with complexity. A recent meeting between Trump and French President Emmanuel Macron cast shadows on US-European relations, particularly around issues relating to Ukraine. Trump’s mischaracterization of Russia’s willingness to accept peacekeeping troops from Europe was met with swift rebuttals from the Kremlin, showcasing the growing rifts: “...the deployment of troops ... [from] NATO countries... is, of course, unacceptable to us,” Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov relayed, underscoring the fragile web of alliances.
Macron’s warning to Trump during their meeting touched on the need for care and substantial offerings concerning Ukraine, reflecting the delicate balance of transatlantic ties now hinging on negotiations excluding certain allies, such as Ukraine itself. The evident friction between Trump’s administration and Europe underlines the pressure Australian policymakers face on aligning their strategies with US interests.
Adding fuel to the fire, analysts note differing views on financial commitments made by Europe to Ukraine, where Macron asserted European contributions were substantial, countering Trump’s narrative of limited support beyond American engagement. This juxtaposition exhibits how the ambiguity and unpredictability surrounding Trump’s geopolitical approach could potentially isolate allies.
While certain analysts foresee AUKUS becoming implausible under Trump's forthcoming decisions, others remain hopeful for its sustained impact. Allan Behm, international affairs analyst at The Australia Institute, notes, "AUKUS will stand or fall on its own merits..." underscoring the intrinsic challenges inhered within the agreement itself rather than solely on the US political climate.
The clamoring uncertainties surrounding AUKUS and Five Eyes signal not only the pivotal transitions inherent to Trump’s influence but also the broader consequences for Australia’s standing and security interests. Affiliations once deemed sacred and foundational now hang precariously at the mercy of fluctuante international negotiations and American public sentiment.
The real test looms for Australia and its allies as they navigate through this newly unpredictable geopolitical maze conjured by Trump’s leadership—pondering not just immediate investments but also long-term strategic viability.