Some spending cannot be questioned

The euphemisms were flying when Australia’s Defence Minister Richard Marles announced last week that an extra $50 billion would be spent on our military over the next decade, and that $72.8 billion of already announced spending would be redirected.

It’s one year since the Albanese Government released its Defence Strategic Review, which Mr Marles described as an attempt to go back to fundamentals and respond strategically to ‘the prospect of major conflict in the region that directly threatens our national interest’, while never explaining what that meant, exactly.

Now we have the political response, attached to dollar figures. If previous defence spending blowouts are anything to go by, this represents a fraction of the actual price to be paid by future taxpayers.

In practice, Richard Marles’ concept of a more ‘focused’ defence force appears to mean keeping the bulk of our human-based forces close to Australia, while ‘projecting’ our technological weaponry (cyber, drones, submarines and now also missiles) beyond the country, with a view to defending shipping lanes, and the interests of our primary military partner, the United States of America, if not those of our primary trading partner, China.

Once upon a time, there were Ministries of War, and projecting was called attacking, but we live in more delicate/hypocritical times, and so Deputy Prime Minister Marles continued in his address to the National Press Club.

Strategy of denial

He spoke about a ‘strategy of denial’, which seems to be about scaring our neighbours off from approaching our northern borders, instead of the traditional Australian approach of having our military mostly based in the more comfortable south.

He said part of this plan was to ‘look at ways in which we can recruit from among certain non-Australian citizens to serve in the ADF’, with the sector currently unable to compete with other industries to get the required number of people in uniform. Gurkhas, anyone?

Ignoring the many clouds hanging over the AUKUS concept (another $368 billion), Mr Marles spoke confidently about nuclear submarines rolling off the production line and into the Australian Navy in the early 2040s, saying ‘this platform will give an adversary pause for thought and hold their assets at risk further from our shores.’ (China already has at least six nuclear submarines, along with 50 other subs).

Richard Marles went on to speak about ordering new frigates, long range naval missiles, and 42 high mobility artillery rocket systems for the army, extending their tactical range from 30 km to beyond 500 km. The RAAF won’t be left out in the new toys department, gaining longer range and higher tech missiles, with Australia also set to build its own guided weapons, in conjunction with major arms manufacturers such as Lockheed Martin.

Under Minister Marles’ vision, the Australian Army is set to become a much more amphibious force, with air and sea-based drone technology to also be prioritised. All in all, he said that this would be ‘the largest sustained growth in the defence budget since the Second World War’.

With the rest of his speech given over to attacking the Liberals’ record on defence, their response was also predictable; too much military spending is never enough.

Who or what is the enemy?

One page in the 2023 Defense Strategic Review discussed climate change, but the likelihood of massed movements of poor, desperate, dispossessed people moving from the global Equator to the north and south as the situation worsens doesn’t seem to rank highly in Labor’s concerns, even as their fossil fuel policies continue to make this situation more likely.

Here in Australia, the most obvious role for the military going forward is to assist with fires, floods and other ‘natural’ disasters. No amount of long range missiles will help there.

In spite of the patriotic language of Minister Marles, it’s been noted that many of the things on his shopping list will benefit our allies and their needs more obviously than ours, with much Australian wealth flowing overseas in the short term and the defence benefits to be seen only in the distant future, if at all.

Unfortunately, the massive cost over-runs of large defence projects don’t just happen under Liberal governments, but seem to always accompany major military procurements and changes of direction.

Another consistency is the revolving door between government and multi-national military hardware companies, with the latest announcement from Minister Marles no doubt welcomed by the many former politicians from both major parties who now occupy well-paid private roles in the military industrial complex, including Scott Morrison, Christopher Pyne, Joel Fitzgibbon and Brendan Nelson.

Yes, Australia does need a military, but it’s hard not to be cynical about the timing of this announcement, in the leadup to Anzac Day. At this time of year, even more than usual, peace doesn’t stand a chance. Increased defence spending cannot be questioned.

Originally from Canberra, David Lowe is an award-winning film-maker, writer and photographer with particular interests in the environment and politics. He’s known for his campaigning work with Cloudcatcher Media.

Long ago, he did work experience in Parliament House with Mungo MacCallum.