From Aukus Sceptic to 'Full Steam Ahead': What the Pentagon's New Line Means — and What the Numbers Say

Elbridge Colby, the US under secretary of war and third-highest-ranking official at the Pentagon, has declared the Aukus pact "full steam ahead" — the same language President Donald Trump used at his October 2025 meeting with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.

Colby authored the Trump administration's review of the Aukus deal. At an Asia-Pacific press briefing on Thursday, he said the Pentagon was "very pleased with the progress that has been made since the conclusion of the Aukus review," which he said "has provided a roadmap for the success of the Aukus program." He called Australia a partner with which the US had "no better ally" and cited a "deep alignment of thinking" between the two countries (The Guardian).

The endorsement matters because Colby was, until recently, an avowed Aukus sceptic. The original draft of his review was understood to be sceptical about the agreement's chances of success. It was rewritten — on some accounts twice — to more closely match the president's position that Aukus was "full steam ahead" (ABC News).

Here is what the review actually covers. Aukus has two main parts, or "pillars." Colby's review focuses on pillar one: Australia buying between three and five Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines from the US, with the first slated for delivery in 2032, before Australia develops its own domestically built Aukus-class submarines. The UK, meanwhile, is set to launch the first purpose-built Aukus submarine for the Royal Navy by the late 2030s.

This is where the optimism meets the arithmetic. US shipbuilders are currently making Virginia-class submarines at a rate of about 1.1 to 1.2 vessels per year. The US Navy needs that rate lifted to two boats a year just to meet its own fleet requirements. To sell any submarines to Australia on top of that, the production line has to reach 2.33 boats a year. Think of it as a bakery that cannot bake enough loaves for its own customers, let alone a new one down the street. The US submarine fleet currently stands at 49 boats against a target of 66, meaning it is operating at roughly three-quarters of its stated requirement.

There is also a legal gate to clear. Before any boat can be transferred to Australia, the US commander-in-chief must certify that giving up a submarine will not reduce the US Navy's undersea capability. With the fleet already 17 boats short of target, that certification is not a rubber stamp.

Colby's framing at the briefing was that the review had settled the question — the Pentagon was pleased, a roadmap was in place, and the path forward was clear.

The broader context here is that the roadmap depends on industrial capacity that has not yet materialised and on a presidential certification that must bridge the gap between selling boats to an ally and a fleet that is already short. The gap between the rhetoric and the production numbers is not new to anyone who has followed the Aukus file closely. What is new is hearing it from Colby — the man whose own review reportedly started from a position of doubt before being brought into line with the president's preferred message. The review was rewritten to align with "full steam ahead," and now its author is delivering exactly that line publicly. Whether the shipyard numbers follow is a separate question, and one that will not be answered at a press briefing.