The world has entered a new military age and Australia must "re-posture", the first major review of the nation’s defence forces in a generation has concluded.
Australia is entering the "missile age", and is no longer as protected by its geography or the limited ability of other nations to project power, according to the landmark Defence Strategic Review.
Former defence minister Stephen Smith and former defence chief Sir Angus Houston were tasked with the Defence Strategic Review, and determined modern warfare has "radically reduced” Australia’s geographic benefits and the nation's regional advantage.
"In the contemporary strategic era, we cannot rely on geography or warning time … more countries are able to project combat power across greater ranges in all five domains: maritime, land, air, space and cyber," the reviewers found.
The reviewers have also called an end to the long-standing assumption Australia would have a decade’s warning to build up before a direct conflict.
More than any other service, the army will undergo major changes and be re-equipped to operate missile technology, which is expected to increase in range out to several hundreds of kilometres.
The federal government said it had agreed to the review's recommendations, and flagged it would have to increase defence spending above already committed increases in coming years.
Professor Smith and Sir Angus specifically laid out the threat China posed to the region, and the consequence that had for Australia’s defences, which have been focused on "low-level regional threats".
"China’s military build up is now the largest and most ambitious of any country since the end of the Second World War … this build up is occurring without transparency or reassurance to the Indo-Pacific region of China’s strategic intent."
"As a consequence, for the first time in 80 years, we must go back to fundamentals, to take a first-principles approach as to how we manage and seek to avoid the highest level of strategic risk we now face as a nation: The prospect of major conflict in the region that directly threatens our national interest."
Defence Minister Richard Marles said the government was "recasting the mission of the Australian Defence Force".
"In the circumstances that we now face, that Defence posture is no longer fit for purpose," Mr Marles said.
"We need to have a defence force [that] has the capacity to engage in 'impactful projection'."
The Defence Strategic Review is the most significant re-posturing of Australia’s armed forces since the 1986 Dibb Review.
'Hardening the north'
The review reshapes Australia’s strategy, redefining the role of army in the overall makeup of Australia’s defence forces, giving more prominence to naval defences and "hardening” Australia’s northern ports and bases.
Defence’s focus will shift to Australia’s north and the seas, as army becomes more focused on land-to-maritime capability, including through long-range strike power, while planned projects for infantry vehicles are significantly reduced.
The federal government will spend $19 billion to implement immediate recommendations from the review, paid for in part by rescoping or cancellation of other projects.
However, Professor Smith and Sir Angus found the previous government had committed to $42 billion in unfunded Defence projects, on top of the billions that would be required to equip Australia with nuclear-powered submarines under the AUKUS security pact with the United Kingdom and United States.
The new plan is for $7.8 billion worth of existing defence projects to be "reprioritised" through reduction in scope, delays and cancellations to help fund new priorities, but the government expects Defence’s overall expenses to grow above their current trajectory over the next decade.
Defence Industry Minister Pat Conroy said the reprioritised funding would give the army capacity to project power.
"At the end of this process, we'll go from an Australian army where the maximum range of its weapons is 40km, to being able to fire missiles, initially, over 300km," Mr Conroy said.
"And, with the acquisition of the precision strike missile, ranges in excess of 500km."
Mr Conroy also outlined a shift from pursuing "perfect" military procurement towards rapid acquisition of "minimum viable capability", acknowledging a number of projects that had run years late and billions of dollars over budget.
The review recommended immediate investment in submarines, developing long-range missile capability, upgrading northern base operations, lifting capacity to rapidly integrate new technologies, growing the defence workforce and deepening partnerships in the Indo-Pacific.
However, a major component to determine the future shape of Australia’s naval fleet will be decided later this year in a "short, sharp" review to be led by US Navy Vice Admiral William H Hilarides.
Meanwhile, a number of projects will be scrapped or scaled down, including the reduction of Australia’s planned land infantry vehicles from 450 to 129, and delays to a number of barracks upgrades as Defence’s focus shifts northwards.
Climate change threatening to 'overwhelm' ADF
The review also warned that the acceleration of climate change risked “overwhelming” Defence, as nations increasingly grew reliant on defence forces for disaster relief and humanitarian assistance.
It said state and local government must be prepared to respond to “all but the most extreme domestic disaster[s]” themselves, with Defence available as a last resort, or else it threatened to detract from its "primary objective": defending Australia.
"We know that one of the national security issues we are dealing with is climate change," Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said.
"There will need to be further consideration of how we deal with these natural disasters."
Mr Albanese said he was confident Australia was right to re-posture, and paid credit to those who helped prepare the review.
"Tomorrow, of course, we will commemorate through Anzac Day, all of those men and women who serve in uniform, to defend our nation, to defend our sovereignty and our freedom," he said.
"We thank those who have done that in the past, but we also honour those who have done it today."
Coalition critical of government's plan
Shadow Defence Minister Andrew Hastie said the government had deployed "tricky politics" in releasing the review on the eve of Anzac Day.
He said the government had failed to outline new spending or a clear strategy.
"We think the government has failed today," he said.
"This was an important test for the government.
"What we're seeing is just cuts and degradation of army capability."
Defence analysts believe there will be many who are "rightly concerned" about some incoming changes to the nation's army.
The Australian Strategic Policy Institute's Bec Shrimpton said while there were many positive findings, a balance was needed to achieve an integrated force.
"There's a balance to be struck here between making army more agile and nimble — more like something of a US Marine Corps, for example — and maintaining those classic army capabilities that you need for conventional land warfare," she said.
"And frankly, we do still need those."
