ADF General discussion thread

MARKMILES77

Active Member
Excellent speech by Kim Beazley. Very wide ranging.
Discusses everything from Australian Tantulum in WW2 radars, to his attempt to get an 8 boat Collins Class fleet rather than the six boat fleet which was ultimately obtained. Most interestingly compares the current strategic situation to that that existed in the 1930s.
Suggests we have little time and should be hardening bases and stockpiling missiles.


Screen Shot 2021-12-24 at 1.35.27 pm.png
 
There is an article in this morning's Sydney Morning Herald ‘Very interested’: Israel eyes closer security ties with Australia about a free trade agreement with Israel and their desire for closer security ties with Australia and links to the Five Eyes partners.
I am curious how this sits with the recent issues over security issues with Israeli equipment and our battle management systems which I understand to have forced a massive change to our systems and the withdrawal of certain equipment
Is all forgiven or was it a storm in a teacup?
 

DDG38

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
There is an article in this morning's Sydney Morning Herald ‘Very interested’: Israel eyes closer security ties with Australia about a free trade agreement with Israel and their desire for closer security ties with Australia and links to the Five Eyes partners.
I am curious how this sits with the recent issues over security issues with Israeli equipment and our battle management systems which I understand to have forced a massive change to our systems and the withdrawal of certain equipment
Is all forgiven or was it a storm in a teacup?
There was very good reason for the security issues raised with the BMS and there are even larger security issues with Israel's intel capability so they can wish all they like but I can't see much change in current arrangements when it comes to the 5EYES community.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
There was very good reason for the security issues raised with the BMS and there are even larger security issues with Israel's intel capability so they can wish all they like but I can't see much change in current arrangements when it comes to the 5EYES community.
Yes I think Israel is to mercenary to be let anywhere near FVEY. I would put them in the same class as the French in that regard and FVEY tend to keep the French at half arms length WRT sensitive equipment and material. Israel will have to be kept at full arms length from FVEY. WRT to additions to FVEY, I can only think of three nations, Japan, Germany and Singapore.
 

aussienscale

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro

swerve

Super Moderator
Yes I think Israel is to mercenary to be let anywhere near FVEY. I would put them in the same class as the French in that regard and FVEY tend to keep the French at half arms length WRT sensitive equipment and material. Israel will have to be kept at full arms length from FVEY. WRT to additions to FVEY, I can only think of three nations, Japan, Germany and Singapore.
Netherlands?
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
Not sure. Don't want it to get to large because it becomes unwieldy and prone to leaks. It also gets to the point where every man and his dog will be added. The dog I don't mind because generally they are far more intelligent than their human, woof.
I have mentioned this before, but it really does need repeating. One of the major characteristics of the FVEY's or 5I's intelligence-sharing nations is that the partner nations, namely the ABCA alliance plus NZ, have not (at least officially) engaged in intelligence operations against one another in the modern era. As a result, the five nations have a level of shared trust between each other which does not seem to exist with other nations, since other nations have carried out intel activities and/or operations against one or more FVEY's partners.

IIRC French and German intelligence had been (and might still be) known to go through the things of visiting or traveling foreign business and technical people to see what industrial secrets could be learned. Israel is known to have had intel agents in the US, including a US intel analyst. I am uncertain about both Singapore and Japan, but I would not be surprised if there have been at least some level of state-supported industrial espionage on the part of post-WWII Japan.

As for suggestions about both the Netherlands and Norway, I also do not know about them, but I would not dismiss the possibility that their respective intel services have acted against at least one FVEY's member, with the UK being the most likely target IMO.
 

Pusser01

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Yes I think Israel is to mercenary to be let anywhere near FVEY. I would put them in the same class as the French in that regard and FVEY tend to keep the French at half arms length WRT sensitive equipment and material. Israel will have to be kept at full arms length from FVEY. WRT to additions to FVEY, I can only think of three nations, Japan, Germany and Singapore.
When I was in the RAN during the mid-00's, we were regularly briefed to be wary about Singaporean intelligence gathering when we visited or operated with them. Cheers.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
As for suggestions about both the Netherlands and Norway, I also do not know about them, but I would not dismiss the possibility that their respective intel services have acted against at least one FVEY's member, with the UK being the most likely target IMO.
The Netherlands used to participate in the RN's submarine commander training course (Perisher), helping to teach officers of other navies. When the RN disposed of all its SSKs, the RNLN took over running the non-nuclear side of the course. Parts of it are run in Scottish & Norwegian waters.
 

spoz

The Bunker Group
And for many years RAN officers attended it to qualify for submarine command. Not sure if they still do.
 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
The issue with Netherlands and Norway, is what do they offer in terms of capability that doesn't exist a few km away in the UK? It would then confuse the UK's role and split it. Neither country has spectacular inteligence agencies, of size or capability of the UK.

As good as relations are between Australia, UK, US, NZ, Canada and Singapore, Singapore isn't officially aligned with the US. They are technically non-aligned. There are some things you keep secret, even from aligned nations, things they perhaps don't want to be involved in or know about. Morals, worldview, and tolerance are something generally aligned with FVEY. FVEY is more than just getting along with each other, your interests have to align perfectly in almost all areas.

Israel and France are great examples of allies that sometimes do their own thing and have a different world view and see the value of some things very differently.

Sub commanders do go to perisher, however, outcomes and purposes are a bit different, I've heard it isn't as ruthless. Australia currently has at least one ex-Perisher instructor as a Sub commander.

The Japanese forces agreement is very significant. I wouldn't be surprised to see a new age of much closer integration between the JSDF and the ADF. Extensive secondments, joint exercises, temporary basing, even possibly weapons and weapon integration etc.
 

DDG38

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
As good as relations are between Australia, UK, US, NZ, Canada and Singapore, Singapore isn't officially aligned with the US. They are technically non-aligned. There are some things you keep secret, even from aligned nations, things they perhaps don't want to be involved in or know about. Morals, worldview, and tolerance are something generally aligned with FVEY. FVEY is more than just getting along with each other, your interests have to align perfectly in almost all areas.
Absolutely spot on, and to add one more thing to this point : Trust. 5EYES is first and foremost an intelligence _sharing_ partnership that includes such things as bespoke national systems and sources that have taken decades to build and share with trusted partners. Something you don't just hand over to secondary countries you don't have the same relationship with.
For further reading on this relationship, highly recommend "You Cannot Surge Trust" by Gary E Weir.
 

Vivendi

Active Member
The issue with Netherlands and Norway, is what do they offer in terms of capability that doesn't exist a few km away in the UK? It would then confuse the UK's role and split it. Neither country has spectacular inteligence agencies, of size or capability of the UK.
I beg to differ. I don't know about the Netherlands, but Norway does have some niche intelligence capabilities that are highly valued by the US (and by the UK also of course). Norwegian intelligence services has a long and very strong relationship with the US services, going back to WW2. Norway was one of the founding members of NATO.

Of course Norwegian intelligence services are tiny compared to e.g. the UK, but they are known to deliver high quality and critical intelligence, in some specific areas. Two well known and well published examples are the listening stations in Northern Norway, as well as the spy ship Marjata, serviced and operated by Norwegians. The intel is of course shared with the US and other allies.

Slightly less known is that Norway also has other capacities than the spy ship and some radars up north. A leak some years a go revealed that Norwegian military intelligence services participated in major SIGINT operations targeting Afghanistan. These are some examples, who knows what else they are doing in the shadows?
 

vonnoobie

Well-Known Member
I would be cautious in saying for any certainty what any nation could or couldn't do/provide in the intelligence world. Those roles and capabilities by there very nature are some of if not the most guarded secrets in a respective nations arsenal.

Saying Norway being so small that what could it provide is equivalent to asking why new Zealand is even a part of 5 eyes when they are even smaller in almost every regard.

It's not the size of a nation's assets that matter but rather the quality of the intelligence and how much we trust one another.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I beg to differ. I don't know about the Netherlands, but Norway does have some niche intelligence capabilities that are highly valued by the US (and by the UK also of course). Norwegian intelligence services has a long and very strong relationship with the US services, going back to WW2. Norway was one of the founding members of NATO.

Of course Norwegian intelligence services are tiny compared to e.g. the UK, but they are known to deliver high quality and critical intelligence, in some specific areas. Two well known and well published examples are the listening stations in Northern Norway, as well as the spy ship Marjata, serviced and operated by Norwegians. The intel is of course shared with the US and other allies.

Slightly less known is that Norway also has other capacities than the spy ship and some radars up north. A leak some years a go revealed that Norwegian military intelligence services participated in major SIGINT operations targeting Afghanistan. These are some examples, who knows what else they are doing in the shadows?
Yes but FVEY is at another level and is global in focus. Norway already contributes intelligence to NATO and that will find its way to FVEY via Canada, UK, or US. Also as I see it there is no requirement for more than two European nations to be included within FVEY. The UK is already a member and that leaves room for one other. However before adding another European nation I would be wanting Japan added first, and then probably Singapore. Why Singapore? Because they will have the best intelligence operation between Jerusalem and Beijing. I wouldn't be surprised if they are as good as, if not better than Mossad.

However this is all moot because this is only a hypothetical discussion.
I would be cautious in saying for any certainty what any nation could or couldn't do/provide in the intelligence world. Those roles and capabilities by there very nature are some of if not the most guarded secrets in a respective nations arsenal.

Saying Norway being so small that what could it provide is equivalent to asking why new Zealand is even a part of 5 eyes when they are even smaller in almost every regard.

It's not the size of a nation's assets that matter but rather the quality of the intelligence and how much we trust one another.
Definitely and a note to people who question NZs participation in FVEY. Each partner has their own area of responsibility. Within the Southern Hemisphere Australia has one particularly large geographical area of responsibility, and NZ has another particularly large area of responsibility as plus HF, satellite coms and fibre intel, although not much HF traffic these days.
 

Vivendi

Active Member
Yes but FVEY is at another level and is global in focus. Norway already contributes intelligence to NATO and that will find its way to FVEY via Canada, UK, or US. Also as I see it there is no requirement for more than two European nations to be included within FVEY. The UK is already a member and that leaves room for one other. However before adding another European nation I would be wanting Japan added first, and then probably Singapore. Why Singapore? Because they will have the best intelligence operation between Jerusalem and Beijing. I wouldn't be surprised if they are as good as, if not better than Mossad.

However this is all moot because this is only a hypothetical discussion.

Definitely and a note to people who question NZs participation in FVEY. Each partner has their own area of responsibility. Within the Southern Hemisphere Australia has one particularly large geographical area of responsibility, and NZ has another particularly large area of responsibility as plus HF, satellite coms and fibre intel, although not much HF traffic these days.
Norway contributes significant SIGINT about the Arctic region directly to the US, only a fraction of this goes to NATO. Anyway, Norway may not be a fit for an extended 5-EYE for other reasons. I suspect it's not a major issue for Norway, since we have already a separate extensive intelligence agreement with the US, and also with the UK.
 
Top