Australian Defence Preparedness - Are we falling short?
MEDIA RELEASE
Australia’s military capacity is arguably at a level now that is it almost unable to maintain a sustained commitment to any serious conflict, and urgent action is required by the Government to place the nation’s Defence forces on a proper footing befitting our changing strategic circumstances.
This is the view of independent consultant and former RAAF officer Peter Robinson, a specialist in military preparedness, mobilisation and risk, outlined in a paper received by the Returned & Services League’s (RSL) Defence and National Security Committee.
Mr Robinson writes that decades of underfunding and ongoing Defence bureaucracy have wasted resources and left Australia with an excessively top-heavy military structure overburdened by administration and grossly inefficient at delivering value for money capability outcomes.
He says even with current Defence expenditure, considered inadequate by many Defence analysts and well below the level demanded by the United States and agreed by NATO, Australia does not match the outcomes of either a comparable friend or a likely foe.
“Conflict, by its very nature, is a highly competitive endeavour. As such, a comparative analysis provides a powerful benchmark against foes and peers alike to determine how effective Australia is at developing military strength within the inevitable budget constraints faced as a nation,” Mr Robinson writes.
“Our Defence expenditure is roughly half that of Russia’s (based on 2021 pre-Ukraine war figures) yet we would optimistically be described as one-tenth as capable.
“When compared with Italy, a western nation of similar economic scale and military expenditure, Australia again falls notably short in terms of output, with Italy having three times the military personnel and 50 per cent more defence kit and equipment despite spending 13 per cent less.
“Israel, with an economy less than one third the size of Australia’s, spends almost the same in actual dollars as us yet has significantly greater armed forces and equipment as evidenced by the current conflicts with Iran and Hamas.”
Mr Robinson writes that the time for prevaricating is over. The geopolitical environment has undergone rapid changes over the past decade, and the world is now more unstable than at any point since the 1940s.
“The West is facing the near-term threat of major conflict across a multitude of geographies the likes of which the world has not experienced since the 1940s. The United States is placing mounting pressure on us as a nation to lift Defence spending to three per cent of GDP rapidly and to be better prepared for the potentially ‘imminent’ conflict to come.
“Australia will be expected to proactively engage in the upcoming turmoil and contribute meaningfully as a true middle power.”
Mr Robinson said with some $55 billion each year currently expended on Defence, Australia deserved a more muscular military force.
“This is a vast sum of money that should produce a formidable capability readiness outcome. Ironically, it is the constant push over decades for Defence to be more efficient that has shunted the department further down a path of grossly inefficient shared services and thatched bureaucracy under the specious promise of reduced duplication and harmonisation of support.
“Defence bureaucracy has been allowed to flourish unchecked for decades and needs a deep, dramatic reset to allow an agile, flexible, scalable military capability to be developed and employed by our professional war-fighters.
Australia has the only Western military jointly run by a bureaucrat. Defence is foremost a military department, and the excessive influence of the public service culture needs to be addressed.”
Mr Robinson said there needs to be a singular, military head of Defence reporting to the Minister and the creation of a gradient in the organisation that reflects the primary purpose of the Department of Defence: to produce military capability to defend Australia’s interests.
“The levers and controls over budgets and staff must be transferred back to the Service Chiefs to raise, train and sustain our Defence forces.
“Our military depth must be bolstered in association with a cultural shift that emphasises a sense of urgency and increased risk appetite underpinned by empowered decision-making and transfer of capability levers.
“The pendulum needs to swing back to being a military organisation predominantly staffed by those who wear a uniform: individuals who can be held to account and can be deployed/posted at short notice,” Mr Robinson said.
The RSL’s Defence and National Security Committee will now review Mr Robinson’s paper and provide advice to the RSL’s National Board.
