The new Chief of the Defence Force, Admiral David Johnston, has given his first media interview since taking on the top job.
From my inbox
Former Chief of Army Lieutenant General (Ret’d) Peter Leahy and American Special Forces officer John Powers have issued a stark warning, declaring that Australia is at risk of becoming a “strategic liability” to the United States. They stress the urgent need for Australia to change course to secure its strategic position.
The past two years have seen significant developments in Australia’s defence and national security, marked by the release of the 2023 Defence Strategic Review, the 2024 National Defence Strategy, the Integrated Investment Program, and the Independent Analysis into the Navy’s Surface Combatant Fleet. These documents outline a new vision for Australia’s defence capabilities.
Critics argue that despite these comprehensive reviews, Australia’s defence remains totally inadequate. The rapidly changing regional and global security landscape demands more than just strategic documents; it requires immediate and tangible improvements in military readiness and capability.
Australia’s “slowly, slowly” approach to defence reform not only leaves the nation vulnerable but also strains its critical security partnership with the United States. Leahy and Powers highlight this issue in their article “Defence flaws make Australia a ‘strategic liability'” in The Australian, questioning Australia’s preparedness for future conflicts and its ability to act independently.
Leahy and Powers pose critical questions for policymakers and the public: Are we ready for future battlefields? Will we be seen as a valuable partner or a strategic liability? Can Australia defend itself independently, or will it rely on US support? These questions underscore the urgent need for a national conversation about Australia’s defence strategy.
Despite Australia’s historic role in supporting the post-World War II order, there has been a worrying trend of complacency and inadequate response to emerging threats. Leahy and Powers argue that Australia’s current military capabilities are insufficient for immediate combat, presenting significant strategic risks.
The Albanese government’s strategic documents emphasize long-term goals and future capabilities, often at the expense of immediate readiness. This approach is problematic given the reduced “warning time” for potential conflicts. Testimonies from recent Defence estimates hearings reveal serious shortfalls in Australia’s military capabilities, including a lack of long-range fire systems, armoured vehicles, and sufficient live-fire training.
Leahy and Powers call for a dramatic shift in government and public attitudes towards defence. They stress the need for immediate improvements in the Australian Defence Force’s combat readiness to prevent becoming a strategic liability. This requires a whole-of-nation effort, engaging the public and industry in bolstering national defence.
Australia must balance its role as a strategic partner with its national interests and capacity as a regional power. Successive leaders have failed to adequately prepare for the current global challenges, but it is not too late to pivot and strengthen Australia’s defence posture. By embracing the realities of the world and committing to substantial defence reforms, Australia can secure its strategic future and maintain its critical alliances.
CLICK LINK to view these fascinating facts about our world.
Summary of ABC News Story
The Albanese Australian government has detailed its plan to compensate the families of individuals who were found to have been unlawfully killed or abused by Australian special forces in Afghanistan. This move comes in response to one of the key recommendations from the 2020 Brereton report, which found “credible information” suggesting that Australian Defence Force (ADF) personnel were involved in serious crimes, including the “murder” of 39 prisoners and civilians between 2005 and 2016.
In regulations quietly published on Thursday, a new Afghanistan Inquiry Compensation Advocate will be responsible for assessing claims referred by the Chief of the Defence Force (CDF), Admiral David Johnston. The criteria for these claims include that the claimant must be “reasonably likely” to be a victim of assault or property damage, or a family member of someone unlawfully killed. Additionally, the claimant must not be a member of a terrorist organization.
Once the claim is considered, the Advocate will report their recommendation to Admiral Johnston. The final decision, however, lies with the CDF. Should Admiral Johnston’s decision differ from the Advocate’s recommendation, he is required to inform Defence Minister Richard Marles with at least 15 days’ notice.
The identity of the Advocate has not yet been announced, but the regulations specify that they will be appointed by Mr. Marles on a part-time basis. A spokesperson for the Defence Minister emphasized the government’s commitment to fully implementing the Brereton report’s recommendations, including establishing a compensation pathway.
Opposition Home Affairs spokesman James Paterson is awaiting further government briefings, while Greens Defence spokesman David Shoebridge expressed concern over the CDF’s authority to overrule the Advocate’s advice.
One critical question remains: How can compensation be paid to victims if no soldier has been found guilty of any war crimes? The government’s approach to addressing this paradox will likely be a subject of debate as further announcements regarding the Afghanistan Inquiry report are expected in the coming months.
The primary unspoken threat is an aggressive China, a topic avoided in official discourse. This avoidance is understandable for now but will soon be unsustainable as the public becomes more informed.
The challenge of dealing with China is reminiscent of past geopolitical threats like Imperial Germany and the Soviet Union. There’s a current need to heed these historical lessons. History will judge whether the warning signs were acted upon or ignored. The current evidence suggests that a war with China is a credible prospect, making decision-making critical.
An Indo-Pacific war would be one of the most anticipated strategic events, yet operational or tactical surprise attacks cannot be discounted, as shown by Israel’s surprise by Hamas in October 2023. Calls to enhance warning capabilities are sensible, as indicators and warning (I&W) systems should monitor signs of China’s military readiness and other preparatory moves.
Historically, surprise attacks like Pearl Harbor and the Cuban Missile Crisis have shown the importance of robust warning systems. The intelligence process is inherently probabilistic, and while predicting war remains complex, improvements in data analysis and AI could enhance predictive capabilities. Despite these advances, uncertainty will always remain.
Policymakers need to consider the probabilities seriously. The historical assumption that economic interdependence prevents war is flawed. War often results from calculated risks by aggressive powers, not accidental missteps.
In Australia’s intelligence model, assessments should guide policy without being distorted by political convenience. Our political leaders need to integrate intelligence with their strategic vision, preparing for potential conflicts based on informed conjecture rather than certainties.
Given China’s strategic ambitions and the volatile geopolitical landscape, Australia’s leaders must weigh intelligence assessments carefully. Diplomatic efforts should continue alongside military preparedness to navigate the risks of confrontation with China. Ensuring that public discourse includes independent strategic assessments could help inform and prepare our nation for potential future conflicts.
Frontline Opinion
NUDITY: I was driving with my three young children one warm summer evening when a woman in the convertible ahead of us stood up and waved. She was stark naked! As I was reeling from the shock, I heard my 5-year-old shout from the back seat, ‘Mom, that lady isn’t wearing a seat belt!’
OPINIONS: On the first day of school, a first grader handed his teacher a note from his mother. The note read, ‘The opinions expressed by this child are not necessarily those of his parents ..’
KETCHUP: A woman was trying hard to get the ketchup out of the jar… During her struggle the phone rang so she asked her 4-year-old daughter to answer the phone… ‘Mommy can’t come to the phone to talk to you right now She’s hitting the bottle.
MORE NUDITY: A little boy got lost at the YMCA and found himself in the women’s locker room. When he was spotted, the room burst into shrieks, with ladies grabbing towels and running for cover. The little boy watched in amazement and then asked, ‘What’s the matter, haven’t you ever seen a little boy before?’
POLICE # 1: While taking a routine vandalism report at an elementary school, I was interrupted by a little girl about 6 years old. Looking up and down at my uniform, she asked, ‘Are you a cop? Yes,’ I answered and continued writing the report. My mother said if I ever needed help, I should ask the police. Is that right?’ ‘Yes, that’s right,’ I told her. ‘Well, then,’ she said as she extended her foot toward me, ‘would you please tie my shoe?’
POLICE #2: It was the end of the day when I parked my police van in front of the station. As I gathered my equipment, my K-9 partner, Jake, was barking, and I saw a little boy staring in at me. ‘Is that a dog you got back there?’ he asked. ‘It sure is,’ I replied. Puzzled, the boy looked at me and then towards the back of the van. Finally, he said, ‘What’d he do?
ELDERLY: While working for an organization that delivers lunches to elderly shut-ins, I used to take my 4-year-old daughter on my afternoon rounds. She was unfailingly intrigued by the various appliances of old age, particularly the canes, walkers and wheelchairs. One day I found her staring at a pair of false teeth soaking in a glass. As I braced myself for the inevitable barrage of questions, she merely turned and whispered, ‘The tooth fairy will never believe this!’
DRESS-UP: A little girl was watching her parents dress for a party. When she saw her dad donning his tuxedo, she warned, ‘Daddy, you shouldn’t wear that suit.’ ‘And why not, darling?’ ‘You know that it always gives you a headache the next morning.’
DEATH: While walking along the sidewalk in front of his church, our minister heard the intoning of a prayer that nearly made his collar wilt. Apparently, his 5-year-old son and his playmates had found a dead robin. Feeling that proper burial should be performed, they had secured a small box and cotton batting, then dug a hole and made ready for the disposal of the deceased. The minister’s son was chosen to say the appropriate prayers and with sonorous dignity intoned his version of what he thought his father always said: ‘Glory be unto the father, and unto the Son, and into the hole he goes.’
SCHOOL: A little girl had just finished her first week of school. ‘I’m just wasting my time,’ she said to her mother. ‘I can’t read, I can’t write, and they won’t let me talk!’
BIBLE: A little boy opened the big family Bible. He was fascinated as he fingered through the old pages. Suddenly, something fell out of the Bible. He picked up the object and looked at it. What he saw was an old leaf that had been pressed in between the pages. ‘Mama, look what I found,’ the boy called out. ‘What have you got there, dear?’ With astonishment in the young boy’s voice, he answered, ‘I think it’s Adam’s underwear!’
In the summer of 1969 Australian army forces saw themselves fighting house to house in an urban setting for the first time. This is the story of Aussies In Vietnam: The Battle at Binh Ba – 1969. The Battle of Binh Ba (6 June 1969 to 8 June 1969) would be fought in the village and nearby hamlets of Duc My and Duc Trung, as well as in the surrounding rubber plantations. Fierce house to house fighting and hand to hand combat, exceptionally led by the top Australian army commanders at the time won the Aussies a decisive victory losing only one soldier. Using archival photos and videos, custom map animations, historical maps, and charts, we explore some of the most amazing and lesser known strategic and tactical missions in history.
Banks, social media platforms, and telecommunications companies will soon be financially accountable for scam-related losses incurred by consumers under new government regulations.
Assistant Treasurer Stephen Jones announced at the National Press Club on July 31 that codes enforcing stricter obligations on these stakeholders will be implemented. “If they drop the ball and a victim loses money, they’ll be liable to compensate the victim,” Jones said. Liability may be shared among multiple businesses involved.
The government is investing over $67 million this year in combating scams, with the centrepiece being a scams code framework and new mandatory industry codes. These codes will require banks to strengthen controls around bank transfers, and to report and respond to scams. Telecommunications companies must block known scammers and share intelligence, while social media platforms need to implement stronger anti-scam measures.
Jones emphasized the need for real-time intelligence sharing among stakeholders to prevent scams. He criticized social media platforms for allowing scams to proliferate, noting that scam losses from these platforms increased by 17% in 2023.
The Australian Banking Association (ABA) has questioned whether banks should be solely responsible for compensating customers for scams originating from other sources. ABA’s CEO Anna Bligh called for a systemic approach to break the scamming chain, noting that scams often start on phones, laptops, or through SMS or search engines.
Canada has become the fifth NATO country to test above-the-horizon lasers for countering drone threats without a geographic backdrop. From May 27 to June 21, 2024, Boeing and AIM Defence successfully conducted these tests during the IDEaS program’s CUAS Sandbox at DRDC’s Suffield Research Centre.
Careful coordination with air traffic, space operations, and the International Space Station ensured the safety of the tests. The National Defence Laser Safety Office played a key role by defining safety templates and establishing a coordination process with the 3rd Canadian Space Division and the U.S. Space Force.
Matt Ceh, a defence scientist at DRDC Suffield Research Centre, highlighted that lasers offer a cost-effective, expedient way to counter drones with minimal collateral damage compared to guns. He emphasized the importance of research trials for providing science-based advice to the Department of National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces.
The Sandbox aimed to advance counter-drone technologies in response to evolving drone threats. Innovators received unique testing facilities and feedback from military experts, helping them develop their technologies to meet the real-world needs of the CAF.
DRDC Suffield has hosted three IDEaS Sandboxes in 2019, 2022, and 2024, providing a vast experimental proving ground for iterative testing and demonstration. The most recent Sandbox featured 15 innovators from five countries testing counter-drone technologies and receiving feedback from experts, including the CAF, US Department of Defence, and RCMP.
A Collins Class submarine at Henderson Marine Complex, Western Australia. (Australian DoD)
US Naval Warfare post
Australia has made a significant commitment to the longevity of its Collins-class submarines, pledging at least AUD 2.2 billion (USD 1.44 billion) for sustainment work. A government statement released on July 27 details that this funding is part of a broader AUD 4 to 5 billion commitment to maintain the Collins-class as a potent strike and deterrence capability.
The Defence Ministry has faced challenges in determining the extent of work needed to keep the Collins-class operational until the expected arrival of American-built Virginia-class submarines in the 2030s. Originally planned for retirement by 2026, the Collins boats’ operational life has been extended due to the AUKUS agreement, which has raised concerns about a potential capability gap. U.S. Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin has pledged to ensure America helps plug any gap.
With the government’s total commitment of AUD 4 to 5 billion for the Collins program, after allocating AUD 2.2 billion for sustainment, approximately AUD 1.8 to 2.8 billion remains for further life extension efforts. This is less than previously anticipated, as the Labor Party government of Anthony Albanese has decided to drop several expensive upgrades. A June statement noted that the Collins submarines would not be fitted with Tomahawk cruise missiles or an optronics electro-optical mast.
The four-year contract for this work has been awarded to ASC Pty Ltd, a government-owned company established to build the Collins-class. Work on HMAS Farncomb, the first Collins submarine to be rebuilt, is scheduled to begin in 2026.
The announcement also highlights the importance of preserving a skilled workforce capable of working on the future SSN AUKUS submarines once Australia starts building its own nuclear-powered boats. “This new contract further ensures these workers have certainty in Australia’s national naval shipbuilding and sustainment enterprise and helps to grow the workforce required to build and sustain Australia’s future nuclear-powered submarines,” stated Finance Minister Sen. Katy Gallagher.