Defence Strategic Review 2022
The Albanese Government has announced details of a Defence Strategic Review, including the Terms of Reference and the independent leads who will conduct the review for government.
Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence Richard Marles said that in 2020, the Defence Strategic Update identified that changes in Australia’s strategic environment were accelerating more rapidly than predicted in the 2012 Force Posture Review.
“This necessitates an immediate analysis of where and how Defence assets and personnel are best positioned to protect Australia and its national interests,” Mr Marles said.
“It also requires an assessment of Defence’s force structure and integrated investment program.
“Exploring how our capabilities can better integrate and operate with the United States, the United Kingdom and other key partners will also be an important element of the review.”
“In 2020, the Defence Strategic Update identified that changes in Australia’s strategic environment are accelerating more rapidly than predicted in the 2012 Force Posture Review.
“As our national security landscape changes, it is vital that our defence force remains positioned to meet our global and regional security challenges.
“To meet these challenges, the Review will examine force structure, force posture and preparedness, and investment prioritisation, to ensure Defence has the right capabilities to meet our growing strategic needs.
“This is a large task, and it is for this reason we have appointed two eminent leads to conduct the Review; former Minister for Defence, Professor the Hon Stephen Smith and former Chief of the Defence Force, Air Chief Marshal Sir Angus Houston AK AFC (Ret’d).”
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said this work would help ensure that the Australian Defence Force was well positioned to meet the nation’s security challenges over the next decade and beyond.
“Professor Smith and Sir Angus bring a unique blend of knowledge and experience to their role as independent leads,” Mr Albanese said.
“Their depth of expertise will be invaluable in informing the Review.
“[My] government is committed to ensuring it has a capable and sustainable Australian Defence Force, which is informed with the best possible strategic assessments.
“As independent leads, Professor Smith and Sir Angus will ensure the Review’s recommendations to government meet this criteria.”
Professor Smith and Sir Angus will deliver the review and its recommendations to government in early 2023.
Submissions to the review from all interested parties are welcome until noon AEST, Sunday 30 October 2022.
For more information or to submit a paper for consideration as part of the review, visit www.defence.gov.au/about/reviews-inquiries.
A copy of the Terms of Reference can be found here.
.
.
.
.
Lets have a REVIEW! code for : Lets have Cuts
Hey Ed, might be time to run an updated article on the threats we all face from foreign interests in asymmetrical warfare in the cyber zone and how foreign powers seek to undermine societal cohesion through disinformation and weaken operational readiness.
I would suggest in these uncertain times you’re back on operational service in the Defence information business.
Cheers
Hey Joe B.
Or you could just call it a difference of opinion.
Peace.
Attention all commenters – if you don’t like what someone else says or thinks, by all means attack the message – not the person.
I can only continue to support Neutrality for Australia.
China’s 2A/AD system proves we can defend ourselves effectively and cheaply, without the need for a US Alliance.
This would save many hundreds, if not thousands of Australian Service members lives, both on Active Service and after, from the damage of being in such unnecessary and immoral Wars.
Neutrality for Australia!
DUTY FIRST.
CUTS CUTS CUTS, its a well worn path and they have form and lets face it China is paying for it with bags of cash to the usual suspects in the Unions.
Is this simply a smoke screen or search for reasons for yet another Labor cut to the defence budget. Past performance indicates future performance.
you may well be right if this clause from the review terms of reference is any indication! “The Review must consider all elements of the Integrated Investment Program and provide
recommendations for the Program’s reprioritisation, particularly in light of recently announced
large-scale projects……..”
This is not a review to enhance. It is a review to where we can cut the mist resources from. Instead of cutting, more needs to be spent . God help us because we can’t help ourselves.
I fear yet another “White Paper” is going to come out of this – where they will adopt the recommendations that are of interest to them and shelve the other parts that are unpopular or too expensive for them. Defence Minister Marles is really trying to get a good outcome for the defence of Australia, but he is going up against an entrenched Dept of Defence bureaucracy in Canberra. God help us.
I fear that our heavy army firepower – M1 and SP Guns will be cancelled. This will be a huge capability gap if god forbid we have to fight on home soil.
Reply to PJ c/s 7a
Where and who do you expect we would use these M1’s and SP Guns against?
Are we going to load it all up and go to Taiwan?
Or are we going to truck it all North or West to some invasion landing point?
Or will the M1’s and SP Guns rust out from never being used like our Leopards did?
DUTY FIRST.
Be careful who you engage with PJ especially those with defeatist agenda’s they’re usually from the other side.
Reply to Joe B.
Just a few things to point out in your arguments.
Neutrality doesn’t equal Defeatism.
Switzerland is a good example. They have used their Geography to their Strategic advantage, just like Australia could and should.
Different viewpoints don’t equate to being your Enemy.
While this is the Nub of current US Policy. ”You’re either with us, or against us”.
It’s meant if we don’t completely go along with US Policy, they will consider us an Enemy.
An Enemy to be brought down and destroyed, like Iraq, Syria, Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, ad infinitum.
It’s obviously a short-sighted and self destructive stand that is currently biting all of the US Allies on the arse, e.g. Europe v Russia, and Australia v China.
Will the Yanks want Australia to commit economic suicide with China to further US Policy aims?
You can (and they have) bet your House on it!
Neutrality is not weakness, it is Strength.
Peace.