Asia Pacific Defense Report

The government and the Australian Submarine Agency are up to their usual tricks of minimising scrutiny by playing media favourites. Not only is this wrong in principle it’s a symptom of deeper problems in the ASA – and there will be a lot more coming out about that in the next few days. People who know what they are doing enjoy having their ideas challenged and it is generally the poor performers who prefer to hide. And with that in mind, our squabble with Army over the destruction of the Taipan helicopter fleet continues. Why does it matter any longer now that the damage has been done? Two reasons – this fiasco should never be repeated; and secondly, let’s have some accountability. Army have been concealing true support costs for years – and we blow the whistle on some of those. Finally, the General Purpose Frigate program and could we be seeing a tiny glimpse of sanity?

Unusually, we can start with two pieces of positive news. On August 22, Defence Industry Minister Pat Conroy announced that the government will spend $850 million on a factory in Newcastle that will produce Naval Strike Missiles and Joint Strike Missiles. These come from Norwegian company Kongsberg and will drastically improve the anti-ship capabilities of the ADF. This follows a decision to also manufacture GMLRS rounds locally for Army’s HIMARS launchers. After a slow start the GWEO is developing some momentum. On the next day, Defence Minister Richard Marles opened Hanwha’s armoured vehicle centre of excellence near Avalon airport. It will build Huntsman 155mm Self Propelled Howitzers and tracked Redback Infantry Fighting Vehicles – another positive for Australian manufacturing. Finally, the 3-way technology sharing agreement between the US, UK and Australia is already showing some major deficiencies. No surprise there.

The government has announced, in its usual over-the-top manner, reforms to the export licensing system between Australia, the US and the UK. While this is fine in principle, it is based on an absolute lie, namely that Australia exports $5 billion worth of military technology to those partner countries. This is a joke. We sell some F-35 components to the US and almost nothing to the UK. The true figure is likely to be one twentieth of the government’s claim. At the same time, former Minister for Foreign Affairs was giving a speech with the title: “AUKUS – the worst defence and foreign policy decision our country has made.” More to come on this. Then let’s talk a bit more about the advantages of nuclear propulsion versus conventional – and many of the claimed differences don’t stand up to rigorous scrutiny. Also technological advances are making the South China Sea too difficult to operate a crewed submarine in today – let alone 10 years from now.

There’s more AUKUS stupidity to talk about, with now a secret political deal with the US and UK to be factored in. It is so secret that Prime Minister Anthony Albanese doesn’t seem to have any idea what it’s about. There’s speculation that it could compel Australia to go to war with China over Taiwan – but that issue is more nuanced than most people understand. Or could it be about the storage in Australia of high level nuclear waste from other countries – which seems irrelevant since we will be storing many hundreds of tonnes of high level waste from our own decommissioned submarines. Why is the media incapable of asking obvious follow up questions? The only way left to reform the system is to start a new political party called Transparent Government and start taking seats off Labor, preferably including Corio, currently held by Richard Marles. Finally some wise words from David Sanger, one of the best and most knowledgeable national security journalists in the US.

A poor start from new CDF Admiral David Johnson, who told ABC News Breakfast television that every day sees an increase in ADF capability. The opposite appears to be the case with Navy in particular going backwards, followed by the Army – and for the next 10 years the RAAF isn’t receiving anything new thanks to budget restrictions. Spotted during Exercise Talisman Sabre – Defence Minister Richard Marles riding in an Italian NH90 helicopter, which is almost identical to the 45 Australian Taipans he ordered destroyed in September last year. Might he have had the thought “how come the Italians can support these helicopters when the Australian Army could not?” Then it looks like there’s a coordinated push back against criticism of AUKUS Pillar One, so we pour a bit more fuel over that particular fire. Finally an anecdote about Ministerial pomposity – or rather the lack of it – from the 1980s.

We have been at the Indian Ocean Defence and Security (IODS) conference in Perth – so plenty of naval things to talk about. First, ASA Head VADM Jonathon Mead refreshingly and honestly said that there were many obstacles to overcome before nuclear-powered submarines could be delivered, a nice change from the previous rhetoric that everything was fine. Speaking with well qualified industry people from the US and UK, the consensus is that Australia is already a decade behind where we need to be with factors such as training and infrastructure. Then a remarkable offer from the Korean government to deliver the first General Purpose Frigate by 2029 and the next two by 2030 if either Hyundai or Hanwha are selected. Finally, what do people not understand about the Luerssen corvette offer? It’s all about maintaining the Arafura supply chain and getting very rapid capability to the RAN. And we do a bit of character assassination along the way.

There are no new procurement disasters to talk about, so let’s do some big picture stuff. Why is it that two former Prime Ministers, one Labor and one Liberal – Malcolm Turnbull and Paul Keating – think that AUKUS Pillar One is a thoroughly bad idea, but Anthony Albanese and Scott Morrison are uncritically boosting it? Could it be explained by the different backgrounds they all have and whether or not they are able to apply critical thinking to major projects? Successfully completing an acquisition or winning a project involves a lot more than being enthusiastic about the result. It might be the case that the uncritical AUKUS mindset is beginning to infect other processes, such as the disastrous General Purpose Frigate acquisition.

We have to start with some words about the attempted assassination of Donald Trump and what that might mean for Australia. It almost certainly now means the re-election of someone who is profoundly pro-Russian, anti-European and with an ambivalent attitude towards the Asia-Pacific region. Australian politicians are so in thrall of the US that they constantly drone on about shared values, which are actually few and far between. The US remains our strongest security partner but we will have to do more for ourselves – after all the US previously withdrew from Asia as part of the Guam doctrine in the early 1970s. Related to this, last week there was a very important South Korea – Australia defence forum in Canberra. This was an initiative from the ROK and included offers made at Ministerial level for cooperation on cyber, uninhabited systems – and a remarkable initiative to co-develop and jointly fund a space port. Defence officials should be on their way to Seoul right now to follow up on this.

We start with an overview of recent and ongoing Defence procurement disasters – not to bore people but as a reminder that there is something seriously wrong with how the system functions. Defence Minister Richard Marles continues to think that everything is fine when in fact it is not. Another concern is the amount of misinformation coming from Defence officials – and we aren’t talking about the occasional slip of the tongue. Testimony has been given to Senate Estimates that is just plain provably wrong on multiple topics. A few words about psychology and how it is that objectively stupid decisions such as destroying and burying Taipan helicopters can gain Ministerial endorsement rather than be sent back to the drawing board. To lighten the mood – an anecdote from the time when we had a Minister who was capable of thinking objectively and believing the evidence of his own eyes rather than the official nonsense he was told.