According to the terms of reference Defence Security Review is now required to ensure that Defence has the right capabilities that are postured to meet the growing strategic challenges that Australia and its partner countries will face in the world in coming years.
This article first published 13 September 2022, has been updated.
The remit of the Defence Strategic Review is to consider the priority of investment in Defence capabilities and assess the Australian Defence Force’s structure, posture and preparedness in order to optimise Defence capability and posture to meet the nation’s security challenges over the period 2023-24 to 2032-33 and beyond.
Worryingly, the government has announced that both the interim report delivered to the government by the independent leads at the beginning of November, and the ‘public submissions’ invited for the review, will not be released to the public.
There are few more important matters that government deals with than Australia’s national security. Principles of government transparency and participatory democracy demand that the public should see these inputs into government decisionmaking on the future of Australia’s defence policy.
Pearls and Irritations is not aware of any defendable case made by the government to justify keeping the public submissions or interim report of the Defence Strategic Review secret.
We are running a series of articles that focus on the key issues of the Defence Strategic Review (DSR) which is headed by Sir Angus Houston and the Hon. Stephen Smith. Our articles put a lens on the changing world order – from uni-polar to multi-polar; the risks of our strategic relationships with the USA in particular and with AUKUS, and the ongoing fallacy that China is a threat to Australia.
You can find our series of articles compiled here:
**Author: Brian Toohey**
The Defence Strategic Review - we need to urgently reduce conflicts and global warming
Cabinet needs to insist Marles return to Labors previous support for an independent foreign policy and recognise there is no guarantee an arms build-up wont lead to a calamitous war. Crucially, the Albanese government needs to give a clear priority to helping reduce conflicts and global warming that cause horrendous suffering to innocent people around the globe.
**Author: Dennis Argall**
The Defence Strategic Review must not confine itself to more of the same but address a new world
The government is conducting a Defence Strategic Review: an independently-led review that will consider Defences force posture and force structure. The terms of reference are narrow. What is needed, what this Defence Review may not be able to do, is a review of Australias overall strategic circumstances. Courage is needed to choose between allocation of resources to what makes Australia strong and healthy as a nation on the one hand, and deeper spending on dangerous pointy toys on the other.
**Author: Teow Loon Ti**
The Defence Strategic Review: Is China the real enemy?
China is not Australias enemy. If it is an enemy, and Australia continues to trade with China as it does, it reflects a schizophrenic attitude that we have to sort out first before spending vast amounts of money preparing to fight China. In preparing our Defence Force, there is no room for complacency. Neither is there room for wild imaginings of the type constantly being trotted out by hawks and the mainstream media.
**Author: David Solomon**
The Defence Strategic Review: Can we rely on the US?
Strategy: a plan designed to achieve a particular long-term aim. The strategic defence review is presumably intended to produce a plan that will guide decisions by the new Labor government on the acquisition of weapons and the use of other resources (such as people) to protect Australia against future threats to its people, its territory and its interests.
**Author: Mike Gilligan**
The Defence Strategic Review: Understanding Australias existing defence capability is critical
At this time, Australia should be able to rely on its own defence of the nations sea and air approaches, operating from infrastructure here. We have no reason to require US armed intervention for our security. That is a significant milestone coming after some fifty years of single-minded capital and activity programs. An example of tenacious public policy delivering big, complex outcomes.
**Author: Mark Beeson**
The Defence Strategic Review: How not to think about security
In both Australia and China strategic debates are dominated by specialists with similar views, a situation epitomised by the forthcoming Defence Strategic Review. A fixation with traditional threats wastes resources, increases the risk of conflict, and makes addressing the immediate danger posed by climate change even more difficult.
**Author: Jocelyn Chey**
The Defence Strategic Review: China is not a military threat
Australias defence policy is based on an assumed China Threat. If this assumption is maintained, it will be used to justify increased defence spending and a closer defence engagement with the United States and other like-minded countries, including Quad and AUKUS partners.
**Author: Mike Gilligan**
Defence Strategic Review - Is defending Australia dead?
The last decade of Australias defence policy has swung from successful focus on our own defence, by ourself, to one heavily influenced by the US strategic determination to dominate China militarily. Thereby conservative governments have invited risk to our nation needlessly and been wrong-headed enough to subsidise it.
**Author: Mike Gilligan**
The Defence Strategic Review: AUKUS is the wrong submarine for Australian needs
Any new submarine for defending Australia should be built around our experience. Our needs are idiosyncratic. The Defence Strategic Review should find that Australias defence interests would be served only by a new submarine designed for Australias peculiar northern waters. If we cannot have submarines designed for our conditions, the platform should be removed from our force structure.
The views expressed in this article may or may not reflect those of Pearls and Irritations.
