At the beginning of July, Australia’s Prime Minister Scott Morrison declared that “our region is in the midst of the most consequential strategic realignment since the Second World War.” He wrote that in the introduction to his government’s “Defence Strategic Update” and “Force Structure Plan,” which many are hailing as a fundamental shift in Australia’s strategic approach. ...
Canberra has signaled its intent to neutralize Beijing’s emerging power projection systems by using its own area denial capabilities to “hold adversary forces and infrastructure at risk further from Australia.” That is why Australian plans call for “submarines, advanced long-range strike weapons, remotely piloted combat aircraft, sea-mining and offensive cyber capabilities.” Taken together, these acquisitions have the potential to constrict Beijing’s ability to project power by turning China’s strategy of anti-access and area denial on its head.
I personally see continuity in Australia's defense posture:
This isn't new and it will leverage American military power to defend Australia.
At one time it was clear that Australia could not--absent a decision to spend the money--be a shield and pivot point to allow American forces to deploy to and maneuver between the Pacific and Indian Oceans.
(And Darwin is the center of the joint shield.)
More recently I was confused about Australian doubts about their defense needs. I thought the threat environment had been pretty stable--and obvious.
What does seem new is that post-Xi Jinping Flu pandemic, Australia is no longer confused about whether it should draw closer to China at America's expense.
Australia chose fellow free democracy America and chose to fund their choice.
Remember, at one time Australia had F-111 medium-range bombers in their arsenal for long-range strike. Striking an approaching enemy is kind of obvious for Australia.
And America really has pivoted to the Pacific. Strength may not be greater, but as a percent our forces are more committed to Asia; and INDOPACOM has priority on our best weapons. This shift has been a constant since the end of the Cold War, with Obama simply naming the shift openly.
The authors in that initial article call on America to work with Australia:
American leaders should pay close attention to Australia’s new approach. Canberra’s strategic shift has the potential to significantly change Australian capabilities, geographic orientation, and regional commitments. It could also fundamentally alter the dynamics and responsibilities within the Australian-U.S. alliance.
But I don't quite see the worries about American interest. It is in Australia's interest to be strong enough to shield and host American reinforcements should China directly threaten Australia. If Australia can do that, America will work with Australia. [NOTE: The last sentence was added later to clarify my intent.]
If this is a revolution for Australia, I think it has just turned 360 degrees.
