{"id":66222,"date":"2021-08-05T14:30:09","date_gmt":"2021-08-05T04:30:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?p=66222"},"modified":"2021-08-05T13:36:25","modified_gmt":"2021-08-05T03:36:25","slug":"setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build\/","title":{"rendered":"Setting clear priorities for the ADF requires ruthless decisions on the force we build"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/figure>\n

Wargaming of US, Australian and other partner militaries in conflict with the People\u2019s Liberation Army after China attacks Taiwan shows the allied forces lose<\/a>. That means our force structures need to change fast. Scenarios for that potential conflict seem to be showing just that.<\/p>\n

This matters. Telling ourselves Taiwan doesn\u2019t matter is both wrong and dangerous\u2014because Beijing successfully using force against Taiwan would mean seizure of a vibrant democratic population in the Indo-Pacific (like ours!) and would also enable China to project aggressive military power much more easily, and further, in Australia\u2019s region, licensed by its success with Taiwan. And the kinds of military conflict that would happen around and over Taiwan have plenty of parallels for other conflicts across the archipelagic and maritime region that is Southeast Asia and the Indo-Pacific.<\/p>\n

The wargames show that the approach to building and using US, Australian and other partner forces that\u2019s central to Australia\u2019s $270 billion integrated investment plan<\/a> produces militaries that are more likely to lose than win against the PLA.<\/p>\n

That is a nasty shock to planned defence investments here in Australia which shows they need to be revisited.<\/p>\n

But it\u2019s not surprising, because the \u2018future\u2019 Australian Defence Force that\u2019s being bought with the government\u2019s $270 billion is the same force that was laid out in the 2009<\/a> defence white paper, gloriously unaffected by changes in technology since then, and unaffected by the rise of China\u2019s military as the defining priority threat to Australia\u2019s security in the military realm.<\/p>\n

The success of China\u2019s anti-access\/area-denial<\/a> strategy has produced a very dense missile threat around Taiwan and at increasing distances from the Chinese mainland that can target concentrations of allied ships, planes and bases. And naval taskforces including Australia\u2019s air warfare destroyers as part of larger Australian or combined Australian\u2013US taskforces now look vulnerable. That\u2019s partly because of the platforms themselves, but also because the concept for using those platforms involves concentrating them into taskforces and groups that are then targets. That\u2019s what repeated wargaming shows no longer works.<\/p>\n

Interestingly, the wargame outcomes fit with the much clearer priorities for Australia\u2019s military that are in the government\u2019s defence strategic update released one year ago<\/a> by Prime Minister Scott Morrison. The update moved defence planning from having multiple equal priorities to making the dominant priority our region\u2014the Indo Pacific\u2014where, for Australia, all military threat roads lead to Beijing.<\/p>\n

But the force structure plan released on the same day remained on autopilot, with a bit of this and a bit of that to give the government \u2018options\u2019 in an uncertain world. It was still based on responding to the previous multiple but equal priorities in the 2009 and 2013<\/a> Defence White Papers.<\/p>\n

So, the planned force structure Defence is building now is in direct tension with the ruthlessly clear priority the government gave Defence a year ago\u2014and it sets Australia up to suffer large combat losses<\/a> and perhaps be defeated as part of a US-led response to Chinese military operations in our region. Such a force is also unlikely to deter Chinese aggression and prevent conflict.<\/p>\n

What should be done? Not a lengthy and ponderous new \u2018force structure review\u2019 that will take two years to do and one or two more to wend its way through Defence and government decision-making. That would be an effective bureaucratic response to delay change while current approaches proceed, as fans of Yes, Minister<\/em> might know.<\/p>\n

Instead, it\u2019s useful to think about what investment decisions are about to be made and revisit why they are being made. That\u2019s because allocating just over 2% of GDP for our military doesn\u2019t buy all that much and every big choice rules out many other choices. So, any forthcoming big investments that don\u2019t align with the clear priority on deterring aggression in our region should be ended to make room for what can.<\/p>\n

The next big decision Defence is going to offer up to the government out of the $270 billion integrated investment program is the $27 billion infantry fighting vehicle program, with government being asked to \u2018downselect\u2019 to either a Korean or German vehicle to be built here in Australia.<\/p>\n

That mega-project will acquire up to 450 large armoured vehicles<\/a> with tracks and a gun turret that most non-military observers would describe as tanks. The Koreans and Germans design and build large armoured vehicles because they have serious direct military threats for which these large, heavily protected vehicles may be decisive, with North Korea and Russia being the clear planning priorities.<\/p>\n

But for Australia, the 450 infantry fighting vehicles look like the ghosts of Christmas past. They would have been ideal in Afghanistan or Iraq, but it\u2019s hard to see them as a priority for deterring or opposing Chinese military power in the Indo-Pacific, unless we\u2019re planning to send the ADF to fight alongside the Indian Armed Forces on the high-altitude India\u2013China border. And I don\u2019t think that\u2019s the plan.<\/p>\n

Cancelling this shortly to be considered $27 billion project won\u2019t leave our army personnel unprotected in unexpected stabilisation missions in places like Papua New Guinea, the South Pacific or elsewhere.<\/p>\n

The army already has the world-class Bushmaster protected mobility vehicles that saved scores of lives in Afghanistan against lethal IEDs and stacked landmines, and it\u2019s already buying 200 heavily armoured vehicles<\/a> that are infantry fighting vehicles by another name through the contract Rheinmetall won a few years ago. It\u2019s also buying the smaller Hawkei protected vehicle in numbers. So, for anyone saying the government still needs \u2018options\u2019, it has them. Just not the option to put a heavily armoured combat brigade into Mosul, Baghdad or Kabul.<\/p>\n

Cancelling a $27 billion project because it isn\u2019t relevant to the challenge of deterring China would send a surprising signal to Beijing\u2014and that matters too. Australia, our US ally and other deep partners like Japan, the Five Eyes partners and India as part of the Quad have all been comfortably predictable in Beijing\u2019s eyes.<\/p>\n

The forces we are building fit a predictable pattern and develop slowly, and we\u2019re simply not showing the ability to embrace the obvious imperative to shift from large, expensive crewed systems that take years to build and can\u2019t be replaced if lost in conflict. That predictable pattern is a huge advantage to the Chinese strategists and technologists: they know what to plan around, and are doing it rather effectively.<\/p>\n

But would an Australian decision matter much, given the weight of the US military\u2019s role in any conflict with China? Yes. For a start, $27 billion is enough to buy things that matter when it comes to deterring Beijing\u2019s military adventurism. As an example, five new large uncrewed undersea vessels, such as the Boeing Orca<\/a>, would cost around $300 million and be delivered less than three years after they were ordered. New underwater weapon systems like these would make a direct contribution to changing the outcomes of wargames in which the US, Australia and others face the PLA. As would fast-tracking plans to buy anti-ship and other missiles the army can operate from highly mobile, small-footprint forces.<\/p>\n

For those yelling that buying things doesn\u2019t help without new concepts for how to use them, that\u2019s true. But it\u2019s much easier to develop new concepts for how to use things you actually have than it is to do so for hypothetical things you might get your hands on at some hazy future time.\u00a0 As an example, in World War I the development of concepts for airpower accelerated massively, far beyond the hypothetical thoughts of militaries, through operational use of planes.<\/p>\n

In the US\u2013Australia alliance relationship, the symbolism of Australia\u2019s government taking a big decision to redirect Defence\u2019s focus and funds to new capabilities that can contribute to deterring Beijing would inject much-needed momentum into our technological and capability cooperation.<\/p>\n

It\u2019d also inject urgency into the parallel force structure debates happening in the US: what proud American will enjoy Australia doing something they know they need to but can\u2019t bring themselves to do?<\/p>\n

The sooner this happens, the more secure Australia and our region will be. If we proceed on autopilot with the force we have in the works, we\u2019re living in the past and planning to fail\u2014and that\u2019s no plan at all.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Wargaming of US, Australian and other partner militaries in conflict with the People\u2019s Liberation Army after China attacks Taiwan shows the allied forces lose. That means our force structures need to change fast. Scenarios for …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":766,"featured_media":66226,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mi_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[44,2795,279],"class_list":["post-66222","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-general","tag-australian-defence-force","tag-defence-strategic-update","tag-force-structure"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nSetting clear priorities for the ADF requires ruthless decisions on the force we build | The Strategist<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Setting clear priorities for the ADF requires ruthless decisions on the force we build | The Strategist\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Wargaming of US, Australian and other partner militaries in conflict with the People\u2019s Liberation Army after China attacks Taiwan shows the allied forces lose. That means our force structures need to change fast. Scenarios for ...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"The Strategist\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/ASPI.org\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2021-08-05T04:30:09+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-08-05T03:36:25+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/20210617army8620637_0522.t610a1041.m1200.x7OOw464hBK-oXHGk-e1628129036715.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"900\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"601\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Michael Shoebridge\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@ASPI_org\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@ASPI_org\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Michael Shoebridge\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/\",\"name\":\"The Strategist\",\"description\":\"ASPI's analysis and commentary site\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\"},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/20210617army8620637_0522.t610a1041.m1200.x7OOw464hBK-oXHGk-e1628129036715.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/20210617army8620637_0522.t610a1041.m1200.x7OOw464hBK-oXHGk-e1628129036715.jpg\",\"width\":900,\"height\":601},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build\/\",\"name\":\"Setting clear priorities for the ADF requires ruthless decisions on the force we build | The Strategist\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build\/#primaryimage\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-08-05T04:30:09+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-08-05T03:36:25+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/b7802124e14835ff19b5c244e962849f\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Setting clear priorities for the ADF requires ruthless decisions on the force we build\"}]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/b7802124e14835ff19b5c244e962849f\",\"name\":\"Michael Shoebridge\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9ad669e65739d5a3f4bbc0e839d8a6b8?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9ad669e65739d5a3f4bbc0e839d8a6b8?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Michael Shoebridge\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author\/michael-shoebridge\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Setting clear priorities for the ADF requires ruthless decisions on the force we build | The Strategist","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Setting clear priorities for the ADF requires ruthless decisions on the force we build | The Strategist","og_description":"Wargaming of US, Australian and other partner militaries in conflict with the People\u2019s Liberation Army after China attacks Taiwan shows the allied forces lose. That means our force structures need to change fast. Scenarios for ...","og_url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build\/","og_site_name":"The Strategist","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/ASPI.org","article_published_time":"2021-08-05T04:30:09+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-08-05T03:36:25+00:00","og_image":[{"width":900,"height":601,"url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/20210617army8620637_0522.t610a1041.m1200.x7OOw464hBK-oXHGk-e1628129036715.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Michael Shoebridge","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@ASPI_org","twitter_site":"@ASPI_org","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Michael Shoebridge","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/","name":"The Strategist","description":"ASPI's analysis and commentary site","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-AU"},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-AU","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/20210617army8620637_0522.t610a1041.m1200.x7OOw464hBK-oXHGk-e1628129036715.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/20210617army8620637_0522.t610a1041.m1200.x7OOw464hBK-oXHGk-e1628129036715.jpg","width":900,"height":601},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build\/","url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build\/","name":"Setting clear priorities for the ADF requires ruthless decisions on the force we build | The Strategist","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build\/#primaryimage"},"datePublished":"2021-08-05T04:30:09+00:00","dateModified":"2021-08-05T03:36:25+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/b7802124e14835ff19b5c244e962849f"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-AU","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/setting-clear-priorities-for-the-adf-requires-ruthless-decisions-on-the-force-we-build\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Setting clear priorities for the ADF requires ruthless decisions on the force we build"}]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/b7802124e14835ff19b5c244e962849f","name":"Michael Shoebridge","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-AU","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9ad669e65739d5a3f4bbc0e839d8a6b8?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9ad669e65739d5a3f4bbc0e839d8a6b8?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Michael Shoebridge"},"url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author\/michael-shoebridge\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66222"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/766"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=66222"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66222\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":66227,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66222\/revisions\/66227"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/66226"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=66222"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=66222"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=66222"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}