Category: Defence

  • HUGH WHITE. Choosing between the US and China.

     

    As strategic tensions have mounted in Asia this year, it has become steadily clearer that small and middle powers in the region — countries like Singapore and Australia — face a stark choice. But it isn’t, as some people suggest, a simple choice between accommodating China’s growing power or resisting it.

    It is a much more complex choice about how far to support the United States as it pushes back against China’s increasingly assertive regional conduct, or whether to step back and leave the United States to confront China’s challenge alone. (more…)

  • The French submarine boondoggle

    Is DCNS’s imaginary Shortfin Barracuda submarine Australia’s biggest defence blunder?

    The Turnbull government’s decision on the future submarine (FSM) represents bad policy. It is bad for the Navy, bad for the taxpayer and bad for the future defence of Australia. Given the key role the FSM is meant to play in the future of the naval shipbuilding industry, it is also bad news for South Australia.

    The Navy’s requirement is for a uniquely large conventional submarine (SSK) that can undertake force projection missions far from home. This in itself raises important strategic questions. Is this an appropriate role for Australia? Does the US want Australian submarines to operate in the South China Sea? In practice, should only nuclear submarines (SSNs) undertake such missions? (more…)

  • China’s deepening engagement in Australian society: is it a concern?

    The PRC government’s influence in domestic Australia – long active but not altogether visible or much remarked – is now emerging as a big, contentious and potentially disruptive issue in the relationship, and a thorny one for policy-makers. In some respects, it may be more challenging and more pressing than other more prominent issues like the South China Sea. Unlike PRC actions in the South China Sea it is difficult to ascertain what precise actions the PRC is taking within Australia and what influence these actions are having. (more…)

  • ANDREW FARRAN. ‘We must get out of Syria’

     

    A comment in support of Richard Woolcott’s blog: “Australia’s Shambolic Policy on Syria – Up Shi’ite Creek Without a Paddle. – We must get out of Syria” 

    Richard Woolcott has stated with clear reasons why we should get out of the Middle East conflict which threatens to broaden and involve us in an expanded war that is not in our interests. One wonders how any times these points need to be made to the government before it acknowledges the folly of its situation in Iraq/Syria.  (more…)

  • ALISON BROINOWSKI. Your laptop is watching you: ‘Snowden’ the movie.

     

    Before Snowden comes on, there’s a short film of Oliver Stone, the director, warning cinema audiences that they can be surveilled, so please turn off their devices. Even as a humourless joke for geeks, it sets the sombre tone of the movie to follow. This is a feature version of Linda Poitras’ Citizenfour (2014), that adds political and personal narratives to the story of the young intelligence employee who exposed America’s mass surveillance of the world’s communications. (more…)

  • RICHARD WOOLCOTT. Australia’s Shambolic Policy on Syria – Up Shi’ite Creek Without a Paddle.

     

    We must get out of Syria.

    The war in Syria is extraordinarily complex. It really began in 2011 with the failures of the so-called Arab Spring.

    Now the core conflict is between forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad and the rebel groups which oppose him. Both sides have split into several militias, which have attracted foreign fighters, including a number of Australians. (more…)

  • GREG DODDS. Australian sacrifice in Vietnam, it’s time to rethink the way we memorialise

    Mines are terrible weapons. They can still blow the leg off an innocent trespasser years after a conflict has ended. Dan Tehan, the Minister for Veterans Affairs demonstrated that, figuratively speaking, last month when he snarled at the Vietnamese that their cancelling the 50th anniversary service for the battle of Long Tan was “no way to treat mates”.

    The Vietnamese were ruthless, competent and game enemies but we’re now all mates? (more…)

  • JON STANFORD. Business welfare under the Coalition: two case studies (2)

    This is the second of two articles by Jon Stanford on the Coalition’s approach to industry protection and ‘business welfare’. Part 1 (Motor Cars) can be found at Jon Stanford. Business welfare under the Coalition: two case studies.

    Naval shipbuilding

    At the outset, we need to understand that there are no significant defence reasons for building naval platforms in Australia. Self-reliance means that Australia must be capable of maintaining its defence platforms and systems to a high standard and returning damaged assets to full availability as quickly as possible. Australia does not produce a single missile or weapons system that is employed on its ships, not even a 5-inch gun. Apart from the excellent CEA Technologies naval radars, almost every defence system in the ADF comes from overseas. We do not build any fixed wing platforms for the RAAF, nor do we make the Abrams tank. A sensible acquisition policy should focus on value for money, with local procurement only occurring when it represents an efficient use of resources. (more…)

  • MICHAEL McKINLEY. The unmooring of our national defence from our national interest. Part 4 of 4.

     

    Australia is currently courting offence rather than, as governments so often assert, defence – a transformation which might only charitably be attributed to absent mindedness if the alternative, stealth, is excluded. It is, moreover, a change wrought, in the first instance, as a consequence of the ways in which Australia thinks about its national defence, but also of both the logic and the inherent dangers arising from and within the Australia – US alliance. While an extraordinary number of avenues of inquiry are possible, there are four which are pursued, the drift to offence itself, followed by, second, the emergence of the “post-democratic” military and security complex in the US; third, the strategic dimension to the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, and fourth, Australia’s developing relationship with NATO.

    Part 4. Australia and NATO (more…)

  • MICHAEL McKINLEY. The unmooring of our national defence from our national interest. Part 3 of 4.

    Australia is currently courting offence rather than, as governments so often assert, defence – a transformation which might only charitably be attributed to absent mindedness if the alternative, stealth, is excluded. It is, moreover, a change wrought, in the first instance, as a consequence of the ways in which Australia thinks about its national defence, but also of both the logic and the inherent dangers arising from and within the Australia – US alliance. While an extraordinary number of avenues of inquiry are possible, there are four which are pursued, the drift to offence itself, followed by, second, the emergence of the “post-democratic” military and security complex in the US; third, the strategic dimension to the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, and fourth, Australia’s developing relationship with NATO.

    Part 3. US Grand Strategy and the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (more…)

  • MACK WILLIAMS. Here we go again: Julie Bishop and Duterte!

     

    Foreign Minister Bishop’s not so gentle rebuke of President Duterte that the Philippines as a claimant state should pull its weight in the South China Sea eerily had all the elements of the earlier Australian approach to the acrimonious bilateral debate between Washington and Manila over the closure of the huge US bases in the Philippines. Much of which occurred in my 5 years as Ambassador there. Driven by our perceived Alliance obligations we were under instructions from Canberra to offer what assistance we could to the US in their debate with the Philippines on the grounds of regional security. (more…)

  • MICHAEL McKINLEY. The unmooring of our national defence from our national interest. Part 2 of 4.

    Australia is currently courting offence rather than, as governments so often assert, defence – a transformation which might only charitably be attributed to absent mindedness if the alternative, stealth, is excluded. It is, moreover, a change wrought, in the first instance, as a consequence of the ways in which Australia thinks about its national defence, but also of both the logic and the inherent dangers arising from and within the Australia – US alliance. While an extraordinary number of avenues of inquiry are possible, there are four which are pursued, the drift to offence itself, followed by, second, the emergence of the “post-democratic” military and security complex in the US; third, the strategic dimension to the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, and fourth, Australia’s developing relationship with NATO.

    Part 2.  Reflections on Australia and the Post-Democratic Military of the United States (more…)

  • The era of American global dominance is over.

     

    In The World Post of 15 September 2016, Graham E. Fuller spells out

    ‘the declining American influence. He says that the more Washington attempts to contain or throttle Eurasianism as a genuine rising force, the greater will be the determination of states to become part of this rising Eurasian world. … China is moving in stunningly ambitious directions in creating the new Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. … The new Eurasianism is no longer about 19th century land and sea power. It is an acknowledgment that the era of western – and especially US – global dominance is over.’

    Graham E. Fuller is former Vice Chairman, CIA’s National Intelligence Council.

    John Menadue.

     

  • The unmooring of our national defence from our national interest. Part 1 of 4.

    Australia is courting offence rather than, as governments so often assert, defence – a transformation which might only charitably be attributed to absent mindedness if the alternative, stealth, is excluded. It is, moreover, a change wrought, in the first instance, as a consequence of the ways in which Australia thinks about its national defence, but also of both the logic and the inherent dangers arising from and within the Australia – US alliance. While an extraordinary number of avenues of inquiry are possible, there are four which are pursued, the drift to offence itself, followed by, second, the emergence of the “post-democratic” military and security complex in the US; third, the strategic dimension to the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, and fourth, Australia’s developing relationship with NATO.  (more…)

  • RICHARD RIGBY. Japan steps up military activity in the South China Sea.

    The announcement in Washington, in the context of last week’s visit by Japanese Defence Minister Tomomi Inada, of stepped up Japanese Maritime Self-Defence Force activities in the South China Sea, including exercises with the US Navy, has to be one of the more ill-judged decisions taken regarding this contested area in recent times. It will do nothing to alter China’s claims or diminish its presence, but will provide oxygen to precisely those forces in China who see it being subjected to a campaign of encirclement and containment. It will further fire nationalist extremism, and not only add to existing tensions in the South China Sea, but almost inevitably lead to China escalating its activities in the East China Sea around the Diaoyu/Senkakus. (We’d better get used to not calling them islands, if we follow the logic of the Hague Tribunal concerning the nature of Taiping Island/Itu Aba. The latter clearly has more of the features necessary to be classified as an island than Diaoyu/Senkaku and yet was denied this status by the Tribunal. Still less can Japan’s absurd claims regarding Okinotori-shima (shima-island) be given any credence.) (more…)

  • JOHN MENADUE. The US pivot to the Pacific is off balance.

     

    President Obama’s rebalance or pivot to the Pacific is struggling.

    There have been some successes. Ever-loyal Australia signed up to US marines in Darwin and there may be more ‘cooperation’ to come!. There have been new US military agreements with the Philippines and Vietnam.

    But there have been some important downsides, particularly as China has responded to what it sees as intrusion in to its historic area of influence.

    Most significantly, President Obama’s proposed twelve-member Trans-Pacific Partnership pact, which deliberately excluded China, is in peril and will probably fail. (more…)

  • China and the South China Sea

    Last weekend Geraldine Doogue interviewed Richard Woolcott and Geoff Raby on the recent controversies about Chinese influence in Australia. Richard Woolcott was formerly Head of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and President of the UN Security Council. Geoff Raby was formerly Australian Ambassador to China.

    In this interview, both Richard Woolcott and Geoff Raby pointed to the need for a more balanced consideration of Chinese growing influence in the world. They highlighted that China is reacting to the declared US ‘pivot to Asia’ and to provocative US naval activities.

    Sam Dastyari may have been unwise in many things, but I think he was correct in pointing out that we should not involve ourselves in the dispute between China and the US over the South China Sea.

    See link ABC Saturday Extra interview:  https://radio.abc.net.au/programitem/pgml6mQJb6?play=true

    John Menadue

     

  • JOHN TULLOH: Vladimir Putin reaches back to the past to define his and Russia’s future.

     

    Tsar Vladimir Putin plots his place in Russian history.

    It would appear that Vladimir Putin’s current modus operandi is aimed at defining his legacy. Ideally, he would like to be remembered as Vladimir the Great, the most illustrious Russian of his times. As those with the same honorific, Peter and Catherine, did, he is busy expanding his influence and trying to restore Russia to the feared and formidable country and head of an empire it once was. (more…)

  • NIALL McLAREN. The Dangerous Folly of the “War with China” Scenario.

     

     

    Nick Deane “reflected on the troubled waters of the South China Sea,” concluding that we need to pay close attention to what our military alliance with the US may drag us into. War between the US and China would necessarily involve us, but not necessarily to our advantage. While for ordinary citizens, such an eventuality would be horror beyond comprehension, it doesn’t seem to trouble some of our leaders intent on spending a fortune on a dozen submarines with the capacity to interdict shipping in China’s near-coastal waters. The advantages of such projection of military power are not immediately clear but have doubtless been carefully tallied. (more…)

  • ALISON BROINOWSKI. What was all that about?

     

    Afghan troops who were trained in Uruzgan until 2013 by Australian soldiers are now reportedly confined to barracks. More for their own safety than the protection of the province, it seems, because the Taliban have waited them out and are progressively taking back control of Uruzgan, just as contending forces have done in Afghanistan for centuries. After 41 Australian deaths and many more of Afghans, Australian military figures are casting about to make their loss seem worthwhile. Former General Peter Leahy, now at ANU, says if Australia had been able to rebuild Uruzgan that would have lent legitimacy to the Afghan government. http://ab.co/2ccmYA6 The Chief of Army, General Angus Campbell, on the other hand, says Australia’s contribution wasn’t just to Uruzgan, but to the coalition effort in the whole of Afghanistan. Either way, they assert, Australia’s losses were not in vain. (more…)

  • Defence & Australian Strategic Policy Institute – Joined at the Hip

    Following on John Menadue’s recent item in which he dissected the funding of Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) and the pervasive influence of the ‘Australia/US Defence and Intelligence Complex’ of which ASPI is a part, he questioned whether ASPI as a supposedly independent source of strategic advice could provide the advice necessary to get the balance right for Australia between the US and China.

    Andrew Farran argues that it is already too late because of the intertwining threads of our intelligence and military arrangements with the US, now inextricable. We have missed the opportunity to develop a force structure suited to our national strategic situation and interests at far less cost than will be incurred by partnering US strategic operations. In this regard ASPI has lost its original purpose and is not providing the independent strategic advice to government envisaged for it.  (more…)

  • TONY KEVIN. ‘Putin meets Turnbull’: an interesting encounter at Hangzhou.

     

    Chris Ullmann’s ABC News report on main outcomes for Australia of the Hangzhou G20 Summit led with an account of an impromptu ‘encounter’ between Malcolm Turnbull and Vladimir Putin. Maybe they bumped into one another in the hotel lift or corridors? We don’t know which side initiated this conversation, but it could be a positive step towards normalising Australian-Russian relations.** (more…)

  • NICK DEANE. Reflecting on Troubled Waters. South China Sea

     

    The dispute in the South China Sea should not, legitimately, involve Australia. We are only involved because we have such close military ties with the United States. War between the US and China is not inevitable, but dangerous, military escalation is taking place. If hostilities break out, the war will be on our doorstep. (more…)

  • WALTER HAMILTON. What’s in it for Putin?

     

    Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is pursuing a ‘fresh approach’ with Russia’s Vladimir Putin for resolving the territorial dispute that has prevented the two countries signing a peace treaty since World War Two. It is easy to see what Abe might hope to gain from a settlement, but no breakthrough can be expected unless it fits in with Putin’s own calculations. (more…)

  • JULIA BAIRD. Australia’s Gulag Archipelago.

    In Dante’s view, the unfortunate souls who dwell in purgatory may suffer excruciating pain, but the promise of their final destination is clear: paradise. Those who languish on the remote, tiny islands — Manus and Nauru — that host Australia’s offshore immigration detention centers are not so lucky. (more…)

  • RICHARD WOOLCOTT. Do we need a White Paper on Australia’s foreign policy?

    A White Paper could be useful if it is agreed to by the key ministers of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Defence, and Immigration and Border Protection ; and consistently applied by the Cabinet.

    A major problem which I see is that we seem to be in a period of fairly intense political and bureaucratic infighting over Chinese activity, especially on the South China Sea. My concern is that there are serious divisions within the Coalition and also divisions within the ALP. (more…)

  • ROSS BURNS. Looking for an end-game in Syria.

     

    Newspaper commentary on the Syria conflict has long struggled to provide new insights into the conflict. However, in an analysis published over the weekend in the New York Times, Max Fisher, adopted the novel approach of asking academic experts to comment on how other civil wars came to an end to see if any served as a precedent for Syria. (more…)

  • MEREDITH BURGMANN. ASIO and dirty secrets.

    In commenting this week, Meredith Burgmann said that ‘my view is that the stories in my book (Dirty Secrets: Our ASIO Files. New South Wales Publishing, Sydney 2014) collectively represent ASIO as being improper, incompetent, irrelevant, inappropriate and intrusive.’

    The following are extracts from her book. (more…)

  • TONY KEVIN. A successful reawakening of serious Russian studies in Australia ?

     

    Doctor Dorothy Horsfield of Australian National University is to be congratulated for her vision and hard work in mounting the first serious academic Russian studies conference in Australia for many years, ‘Putin’s Russia in the Wake of the Cold War’, on 24-26 August, under the auspices of the Australian National University’s Humanities Research Centre in Canberra. (more…)

  • ALISON BROINOWSKI. A Foreign Affairs White Paper. What is there to inquire about?

     

    We have just had a Federal election, so now the inquiry season has begun. The government already has a Royal Commission inquiring into the detention of children in the Northern Territory, it wants a plebiscite on gay marriage, the inquiry into institutional child abuse is still running, and the Opposition wants one on the banks. (more…)