Defence challenges demand arming up and preparation

It is not quite a war footing yet. But after years of rising concerns about Australia’s strategic situation, US Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell’s blunt warning about the “enormous peril” of the times we live in cuts through. In a first for any US administration, Dr Campbell told foreign editor Greg Sheridan during the Australian American Leadership Dialogue this week that events of recent years have suggested China actively is seeking to establish a military base in the South Pacific. That development would be catastrophic for Australian and New Zealand security, but Washington and Canberra have shied away from publicly calling out Beijing’s intentions. “They’re looking across the Pacific,” Dr Campbell said. “This is something where we’re never going to be able to rest.” China’s interests in the South Pacific also included fishing resources and “nodes on the ground”, places for resupply and power projection. On the positive side, he noted the success of AUKUS in progressing research and military technologies.

For Australia, the imperatives are clear. The purchase of the Australian Defence Force’s first armed drones, announced this week, is a good step. But ADF personnel and bases will be vulnerable to missile attack for at least another decade, Ben Packham wrote this week, unless the government finds the money for air defence systems. The defence budget is increasing, mainly through back-end loading. But more will be needed to weather the emerging strategic situation, necessitating a reordering of budget priorities away from heavy social spending. Policies to lift productivity and growth will matter more than ever,

Dr Campbell also underlined the threat posed by China’s strategic co-operation with the authoritarian regimes of Russia, Iran and North Korea. The relationship between dictators Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin, he said, was “the deepest strategic embrace”, based on 1950s nostalgia ideology and ’30s-style territorial ambitions.

It must be resisted. And against that background, the 75th NATO anniversary summit, which Anthony Albanese declined to attend, unfortunately, has been worthwhile. It has included commitments to bolster support for Ukraine and the announcement that the US will begin deploying longer-range missiles in Germany in 2026. But it has been dogged by discussion about increasing signs of Joe Biden’s cognitive incapacity in unscripted moments. At a crucial point in the world’s strategic balance, his stubborn intent, at 81, to recontest the presidency in November is undermining Western confidence. After his strong opening address earlier this week, read from a teleprompter, coverage of Mr Biden’s solo press conference on Friday morning AEST, his first in eight months, was overshadowed by his introduction of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as “president Putin”. He later referred to Kamala Harris as “vice-president Trump”.

When the history of this period is written, the judgment about Biden aides and Democrats who have covered up the situation for too long will be harsh. While the President digs in, the problem for Democrats who recognise that he needs to go is acute. They are loathe to risk public bloodletting or to wound him further. The issue has distracted attention from what should be an all-important campaign contest of ideas. On Monday, focus will shift to the Republican convention in Milwaukee. Donald Trump, too, and his running mate, to be announced, must also face scrutiny on the most treacherous strategic challenges facing the world since the Cuban missile crisis 60 years ago. As Dr Campbell says: “This is a time of enormous peril. It puts an enormous set of burdens on the US.’’