Australia is being propelled into taking a more active strategic role in the Asia-Pacific, a power-projecting gambit that is driving a massive overhaul of its naval capabilities.
The Royal Australian Navy is now preparing and re-equipping in the midst of its largest refit since World War II, a modernization drive that will see it take delivery of a new ship every 18 to 24 months over the next two decades.
The naval vision: a modern fleet of amphibious Landing Helicopter Dock ships, destroyers, frigates, offshore patrol vessels and 12 new future submarines. The Navy has already replaced and upgraded all of its three helicopter types over the last five years.
Under the 2017 Naval Shipbuilding Plan, Canberra is committed to invest around A$90 billion (US$65 billion) in new ships and submarines, another A$1 billion (US$723 million) in modern shipyard infrastructure, and up to A$62 million (US$44.8 million) to develop a trained shipbuilding workforce.
With that fast and expensive build-up, Australia’s strategic objectives and interests are under rising scrutiny.
Faced with US President Donald Trump’s “America First” rhetoric and China’s perceived expansionist intent, most notably in the contested South China Sea, Australia is filling at least some of the strategic vacuum created by Trump’s ambiguous commitment to the region’s security.
Australia’s defense alliance with the US is still strong, to be sure, but Trump’s conflicted statements and fast-shifting policies have somewhat turned that dynamic on its head.
Instead of providing support to the much stronger and better-equipped US Navy, Australia is now being cajoled to act on Washington’s behalf as a check and balance on China’s rising maritime ambitions.
The shift has generated a measure of controversy in Australia, particularly among the strong pro-China lobby, which has questioned Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s government’s apparent decision to take America’s side in its intensifying economic and strategic rivalry with China.
None of that dissent, however, is likely to halt the naval build-up. Indeed, there is another strong lobby group which believes that the Australian Navy needs to be even larger, and that the much vaunted shipbuilding program is politically important to shore up declining manufacturing jobs.
Proponents of a larger Navy say that even with the new ships and equipment that Australia’s posture will remain defensive, though it should be able to deliver forward defense and project Australian power into the region when necessary.
This will require increasing defense spending from the current 2% of gross domestic product (GDP), a proposal that is gaining support both within government and opposition.
Former Prime Minister Tony Abbott has often found himself out-of-step with prevailing opinions, but his recent comments that the Australia’s Navy should be “enlarged and strengthened” have struck a chord.
Abbott foresees a world in which Australian ships and submarines spend time operating from Singapore “if they are more readily to be where they could be needed” and has urged the rapid enhancement of the existing submarine force. Australia, he says, can’t afford to wait 15 years to get its budgeted 12 new “future submarines” into service.
The Future Submarine Program, outlined in a 2009 Defense White Paper, aims to provide Australia with a new and more potent defense with greater range, longer patrol endurance and increased capabilities – including anti-submarine warfare, surveillance and reconnaissance, and electronic warfare – beyond its current Collins Class submarines.
Given that the Australian government is now largely committed to siding against China in the South China Sea and wider Pacific, there is a clear role for the Navy in maintaining a regional presence while reminding small nations lured by China’s Belt and Road Initiative that there is still a need for balancing of powers.
It is a highly fluid situation, to say the least. In April, three Australian warships were challenged in the South China Sea as China conducted major naval maneuvers. Australia has lent diplomatic support to the US’s freedom of navigation operations in the area.
Yet this month it was announced that China was invited to send ships to participate in Australia’s premier Kakadu multilateral naval exercises, apparently to the US’s chagrin.
China is expected to participate in a range of activities including passage exercises, inter-ship communications and replenishment activities and sea-training maneuvers, but not live-fire drills, according to a statement from Australian Defense Minister Marise Payne.
It is yet to be seen if this is sign of an Australia-China bilateral thaw, or rather a case of keeping potential enemies close to observe their hardware and capabilities. Payne said China and Australia have built a “productive” defense relationship that “facilitates transparency and builds trust.”
Twenty-six nations will take part in the exercises later this month off Australia’s strategic northern coast.
Australia’s recent Defense White Paper makes the point that by 2020 China’s Navy will have more than 70 submarines, and that in the next two decades half of the world’s submarines will be operating in the Asia-Pacific.
That puts some of Australia’s recent strategic decision-making in context. A fleet of 12 Future Submarines is twice the size of its current Collins Class fleet. Australia has just announced a A$35 billion (US$25.3 billion) investment in the British BAE Type 26 frigate, viewed as one of the most capable anti-submarine ships in the world.
While these ships might be extremely capable, Australia will not have enough of them to seriously counterbalance China, which is why regional defense alliances will become even more important.
Australia’s Navy is accustomed to exercising in task force groups with the US Navy, but it has less experience in doing so with regional allies where it may be required to take the lead in future.
Perhaps this is something Australian politicians might consider as they ponder the implications of Trump’s policy, and what that means for how they deploy and develop their Navy.
The mouse also roared.
Caramba, the mouse that roared!
" Australia flexes bigger naval muscles at China"
LOL! All china has to do is stop buying their iron ore and LNG and the deputy sheriffs will be left holding their d*cks in their hands.No need to waste a single bullet.
All this spending for modern military sinews will go waste unless Australia gets into some sort of official or unofficial pact with few big boys of Indo-Pacific region!
small boy showing off what they have??LOL
What a load of crap.Trump is doing more to push back against China than any president in my 46 years on earth.Austraila has gotten the message that the days of America protecting the world is over and it’s time to pull your weight
No vision or wisdom from the part of Australia… seems to be purely driven by nostalgia for British Empire.
Surely, China can buy all the iron ore, coals and LNG it’s needed from America !
I’m happy to pay a little more tax, for us to stand tall, and won’t be pushed around by a regional bully ????
12 submarines? Oh really? Its not even enough to cover Australia’s coastline. And against over China’s 60 submarines and growing?
Arthur Micol
The second picture is clearly an American Battleship, complete with American crew.
How about New Zealand, South America, or Africa?
Nguyen Ken But you also hate the USA ?
I guess you can get them from the Uighurs or Tibetans, they just LOOOOVE China
Australian…. big muscles, China (Puny Little Navy) small weapons ?
And 2 aircraft carriers, 1 from Russia… no Aus has nothing to fear from the Puny Little Navy
Aus has always pulled it’s weight, read up on Pine Gap.
Yashad Rizvi Oh hello Yashad. Good morning to you. Actually that 1 is from Ukraine NOT Russia. And so in comparison to US 12 aircraft carriers, yes it is puny. But you can tell me how many countries in the world has 2 aircraft carriers? India still has not commisioned its 2nd carrier. And tell me how many aircraft carriers does Australia have or plan to have? China have 4 Type 55 destroyers in the water now, the largest in the world after the US Zumwalt which by the water is still having problems. So in terms of Navy capability, the PLAN is not far off the US but certainly it has a way to catch up with US aircraft carriers. You would be chuffed to know that they 3rd one is being built now and it will provide ground breaking EMALS catapult which the US is still struggling to make it work, on a nuclear powered carrier. Thats why the latest Gerald Ford class carrier is being delayed until they get that technology right. Coming back to Australia, the biggest ship has a displacement of 7,000 tons while the Chinese Type 55 is 13,000 tons and it is of stealth design. Australia has 6 diesel electric submarines while China has 5 nuclear submarines and more than 50 deisel electric submarines. Read more Yashad. This is an article comparing the Chinese Navy with US. Dont even think about comparing with Australia. https://www.newsweek.com/how-does-chinas-navy-compare-us-897209
I think you are scared of their bigger weapons
KS Chin SO you agree it’s the Puny Little Navy
Yashad Rizvi Haha you have a great interpretation of English. By any standards, its easily the 2nd biggest Navy after US. The gap is closing fast! So if you interpret that as puny, I forgive you as it is not your native tongue.
Che… 你是一個典型的欺負和卑鄙的小人物。你給中國一個壞名聲。你應該為器官移植射擊。
LMAO read comments..here is a few facts of Life for the Chinese people saying there ships are great blah blah blah….like everything China makes …they are shit hence why you produce Such large numbers….also your wanna be military had not won a war in modern history only thing your army has been good for is target target practice..much like your navy . Dont buy our resorses fine will hurt in short term but as someone said we are not the only suppliers …well your not the only buyers I’d much rather have less to do with China as you are dogs. Sly and sneaky cowards that steal their tech cause they are too stupid…our navy is not large but make no mistake our navy is big enough to give you a bloody nose you would soon forget…China is acting much like Japan before ww2….take note China because your reality check is coming!…and unlike Chinese Australians don’t back down …ask any nation that has been dumb enough to fight us….we are good at war…bring it …your overpopulted any way …be happy to see a lot less Chinese scum ..and you are scum…your the shit stain on the world’s pants …middle kingdom my ass haha …oh keep sending chinese females here we love using them as whores in our brothels hahaha…
Nguyen Nguyen He’s a chinese troll, a wumao. You, my old mate, are welcome.
KS Chin I was refering to the small weapons.
Yashad Rizvi Good morning. Still thrashing a dead horse? How do you measure weapons? Small weapons? You refer to small calibre guns? You mean Australian army all carries those humongous arms that Sylvester Stallone carries on hollywood posters? In number of weapons for sure China have more. They have a bigger army. For big weapons? Which one you refer to? You are still living in WWII. Only ships with missiles are built. The biggest is the single Zumwalt in US but they are having trouble commisioning it. Next biggest is the Type 55 in China in which 4 are in the water now. By chance are you referring to that humongous railgun which can demolish a building without explosives? Guess what US doesnt have one and for sure Australia wont have one either. China is testing one now on its battleship so you can say its got the biggest gun. If you mean cannons on ships, guess what, they dont build those battleships anymore. Totally obsolete. So enlighten me. Which weapon are you referring to that bigger?