Login
iscover
The year 2024 was big for Australia’s Defence and national security debate and defence industry. In this top five, we will cover the most popular geopolitics and policy stories of the year.
The Indo-Pacific region is experiencing an era of profound geopolitical, strategic, and economic transformation, marked by growing instability and heightened tensions.
As a critical nexus of global trade, economic activity, and security interests, the Indo-Pacific has become a contested arena where great power rivalry, territorial disputes, and shifting alliances shape the regional order. This rapidly evolving landscape poses significant challenges to Australian policymakers, demanding nuanced and adaptive approaches to safeguard national interests.
At the heart of this volatility lies the intensifying strategic competition between the United States and China. China's assertive actions in the South China Sea, military modernisation, and efforts to expand its influence through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative have heightened regional tensions.
Concurrently, the United States seeks to counterbalance China's rise through deepened alliances and partnerships, exemplified by initiatives such as the AUKUS security pact and the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad). This rivalry complicates Australia's strategic calculus, forcing policymakers to navigate a delicate balance between its major trading partner, China, and its principal security ally, the United States.
Economic pressures compound these challenges. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed vulnerabilities in global supply chains, prompting nations to rethink their economic dependencies. Australia's heavy reliance on exports to China has underscored its exposure to economic coercion, as evidenced by trade disputes and tariffs imposed on Australian goods.
Diversifying trade relationships while sustaining economic growth is a pressing imperative for policymakers grappling with an increasingly protectionist and fragmented global economy.
Moreover, non-traditional security threats such as climate change, cyber attacks, and transnational crime add layers of complexity to Australia's security environment. Rising sea levels and extreme weather events threaten regional stability, particularly in vulnerable Pacific Island nations, necessitating robust engagement and support from Australia.
Simultaneously, the growing sophistication of cyber threats underscores the need for resilient digital infrastructure and proactive policy measures.
For Australian policymakers, the deteriorating regional landscape demands a recalibration of national strategies. This includes strengthening defence capabilities, enhancing multilateral co-operation, and fostering regional stability through diplomacy and development assistance.
As the Indo-Pacific evolves, Australia's ability to anticipate and respond to these challenges will be pivotal in shaping its security, prosperity, and standing in the region.
"Don't assume we will win" discusses the dangers of complacency in the face of evolving global challenges. It highlights the importance of acknowledging the complexities of modern conflicts and the necessity for continuous adaptation and preparedness.
Far from the optimistic notion that "the good guys always win," a sentiment often instilled from a young age, Australia and its allies will need to overcome this perspective that can lead to a false sense of security, overlooking the multifaceted nature of contemporary warfare. Rather we need a strategy that emphasises that assuming victory without a comprehensive understanding of the adversary's capabilities and strategies is a perilous approach.
The piece underscores the necessity for critical thinking and a realistic assessment of potential threats. It advocates for a strategic mindset that considers various scenarios and prepares for unforeseen challenges. By acknowledging the possibility of defeat, policymakers and military leaders can develop more robust strategies, ensuring that all contingencies are addressed.
In conclusion, the article serves as a cautionary reminder against overconfidence. It calls for a balanced perspective that combines optimism with pragmatism, urging a thorough evaluation of risks and a commitment to continuous improvement in defence strategies. This approach is vital for maintaining national security and effectively responding to the dynamic nature of global conflicts.
2. Defence of Australia: An isolationist fantasy, old and tired dream we struggle to wake from
Australia's longstanding "Defence of Australia" (DoA) doctrine, labelling it an outdated and isolationist approach that inadequately addresses contemporary security challenges.
Historically, the DoA doctrine has emphasied the protection of Australia's northern approaches, operating under the assumption that geographic isolation and the "tyranny of distance" would shield the nation from potential adversaries. This strategy has led to a focus on defending the Australian mainland, often at the expense of engaging in broader regional and global security dynamics.
The article argues that this inward-looking stance is increasingly untenable in the face of modern threats, such as cyber warfare, long-range missile capabilities, and the strategic ambitions of regional powers like China.
These developments render geographic isolation less effective as a defensive measure, necessitating a more proactive and outward-facing defence strategy.
Critics of the DoA doctrine advocate for a shift towards greater integration with international allies and a more active role in regional security affairs. This includes participating in collective security arrangements, enhancing power projection capabilities, and investing in advanced technologies to counter emerging threats. Such a transformation would require a significant re-evaluation of Australia's defence policies, force structure, and strategic priorities.
The article concludes by urging Australian policymakers to abandon the isolationist mindset embodied by the DoA doctrine. It calls for a comprehensive reassessment of national defence strategies to ensure they are aligned with the realities of the current geopolitical environment, thereby enabling Australia to effectively contribute to and benefit from a stable and secure regional order.
3. Becoming ‘incoercible’: How does Australia ensure its sovereignty from great power coercion?
Australia's traditional reliance on geographic isolation is insufficient in the face of modern threats, such as cyber warfare and economic coercion. To counter these challenges, the article suggests that Australia should enhance its self-reliance by investing in advanced defence capabilities, including long-range strike weapons and robust cyber defences.
Additionally, the piece highlights the importance of strengthening alliances and partnerships, particularly with nations that share similar values and strategic interests. Collaborative efforts, such as joint military exercises and intelligence sharing, are presented as means to bolster Australia's resilience against coercion.
The article also emphasises the need for economic diversification to reduce vulnerability to economic pressure from any single nation. By expanding trade relationships and developing domestic industries, Australia can mitigate the risks associated with economic coercion.
Only by embracing a comprehensive approach that combines military preparedness, diplomatic engagement, and economic resilience to ensure Australia's sovereignty can ensure that the country remains inviolate in an era of great power competition.
4. Rise or cannibalise: Experts agree Australia must lift defence spend to 3% of GDP
In light of escalating regional tensions and the evolving global security landscape, there is a growing consensus among experts that Australia should increase its defence spending to 3 per cent of GDP.
Historically, during the late Cold War period, Australia's defence expenditure approached this 3 per cent threshold, enabling the development of robust military capabilities.
In the 2024–25 Budget, the Australian government announced a significant increase in defence funding, allocating $764.6 billion over the next decade to support a more capable and self-reliant Defence Force.
Despite this substantial investment, projections indicate that defence spending will reach approximately 2.3 per cent of GDP by 2033–34, falling short of the advocated 3 per cent target.
Advocates for increased spending argue that a 3 per cent allocation is essential to address modern security challenges, including cyber threats, regional power dynamics, and the need for advanced military technology. They caution that without this commitment, Australia may face strategic vulnerabilities, potentially compromising national security and its ability to effectively contribute to regional stability.
Conversely, critics express concerns about the economic implications of such an increase, particularly in the context of other pressing national priorities. They emphasise the importance of a balanced approach that ensures fiscal responsibility while addressing security needs.
The debate over appropriate defence spending levels continues, with policymakers weighing the necessity of enhanced military capabilities against economic constraints. Achieving a consensus on this issue will be pivotal in shaping Australia's future defence posture and its role within the regional and global security environment.
Senator J.D. Vance, the incoming US Vice President, has emphasised that American military support should be contingent upon allied nations upholding US values, particularly freedom of speech. This stance raises questions about the future of AUKUS, especially in light of Australia's recent legislative efforts to combat misinformation, which some critics argue could impinge upon free speech rights.
The article explores concerns that a Trump administration might reassess or even withdraw from international agreements like AUKUS if partner nations are perceived to contravene fundamental American principles. However, it also notes that key figures within the Trump team have expressed support for the pact, viewing it as a means to bolster collective security and share defence burdens more equitably.
Australian officials have sought to reassure stakeholders of their commitment to both the AUKUS agreement and the preservation of democratic freedoms, aiming to balance national security interests with the protection of civil liberties. The article underscores the importance of diplomatic engagement and policy alignment among AUKUS members to ensure the partnership's durability amid changing political landscapes.
In conclusion, while the incoming US administration's emphasis on aligning military assistance with American values introduces a layer of complexity to international partnerships, the foundational objectives of AUKUS in enhancing regional security suggest that, with careful navigation, the alliance can endure potential challenges posed by shifts in US foreign policy priorities.
Get involved with the discussion and let us know your thoughts on Australia’s future role and position in the Indo-Pacific region and what you would like to see from Australia’s political leaders in terms of partisan and bipartisan agenda setting in the comments section below, or get in touch at
