smh, The capacity for big deployments of Australian troops overseas for large operations has been significantly enhanced after the Federal Government agreed to buy two amphibious ships and up to 100 tanks.
The defence capability blueprint, published yesterday, also calls for the purchase of three air warfare destroyers to defend those troops and ships from aerial attack as well as high-tech communications equipment.
But the new capability had to be achieved at no extra cost, so the Government has balanced that spending with a suite of savings, most notably the early retirement of the F-111 jets, two guided-missile frigates and two mine-hunters.
The Government foreshadowed an extra $30 billion in spending – in current dollar terms – over 10 years in its 2000 Defence Capability Plan.
The Defence Minister, Robert Hill, said: “There are new threats in terms of global terrorism, new threats associated with the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and . . . a deteriorating situation in some instances in our region.”
He said the changes meant the ADF could “respond to each of these situations as requested by government”.
The first expression of this new doctrine was Australia's participation in the Iraq war. The deployment of troops and police to the Solomon Islands also reflected concerns about security. Both occurred after the doctrine was articulated.
Senator Hill said lessons from these operations had guided the changes to defence capability.
The decision to buy two large amphibious ships or helicopter carriers stemmed from inadequacies revealed in the deployments to East Timor and the Solomons.
The Chief of Navy, Vice-Admiral Chris Ritchie, said the ships would be 20,000 tonnes or greater and have the capacity to accommodate a battalion of troops and their equipment below deck and five to six helicopters on deck.
Australia has not possessed warships of that size since the ill-fated aircraft carrier HMAS Melbourne was decommissioned in 1982.
Meanwhile, the Iraq war – during which Abrams tanks dominated – convinced the Government of the need to buy new tanks.
Alan Dupont, a defence analyst at the Australian National University, said the purchase of the big ships and tanks showed that the Government was moving away from the Defence of Australia doctrine “narrowly defined”.
“The tanks mean they have ramped up the power of the army and the ability to protect itself. The amphibious ships mean they can move troops and tanks quickly, and in one hit,” he said. “The decision to increase the amphibious capability is very significant.”
The air warfare destroyers will give Australia a limited missile defence capability, reflecting the threat from long-range missiles to troops and hardware operating in a theatre of war.
The decision to retire the F-111s from 2010 highlights the cost of maintaining the ageing but capable strike fighters. However, the Government insists that upgraded FA/18 Hornets will be sufficient to fill the long-range strike role until the joint strike fighter is introduced in 2015.
The decision not to spend more on the military came as a surprise, but highlights concerns that Defence has poor financial management.
Aldo Borgu, of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, said the axing of the navy frigates and mine-hunters in exchange for the bigger amphibious ships would leave the navy with fewer but larger ships. “That effects our ability to run concurrent operations and that's a worrying thing,” he said.
