Defence must be a priority in changing world order

Australians deserve straight answers about two serious issues relating to the Chinese naval task group that held live-fire drills in international waters off our east coast last week. First, why did Anthony Albanese tell Australians that “notice was given” by the Chinese about the exercise when no advance warning was received? And second, is Chief of the Defence Force David Johnston correct when he says it is possible a nuclear submarine is accompanying the People’s Liberation Army-Navy ships, which currently are sailing south of Hobart? “I don’t know whether there is a submarine with them,” Admiral Johnston told Senate estimates on Wednesday. “It is possible.”

Given the fact civilian aircraft needed to be diverted from flight paths, it is alarming that the Defence Department learned of the Chinese drill only after a Virgin Australia pilot relayed a warning broadcast received in mid-air, as Ben Packham reports.

Admiral Johnston said Defence was told of the live-weapons drill about 10 minutes after the Virgin Australia flight relayed a Chinese radio broadcast it had received about it at about 9.58am. Commercial flights typically fly at 30,000 to 35,000 feet, which would put them at risk of the live firing, Australian and International Pilots Association vice-president Steve Cornell told Robyn Ironside last week. A New Zealand frigate also heard and passed on the radio warning through Defence channels but its notification didn’t come through to Defence until 11.01am.

The Prime Minister should have told Australians the facts and not fudged. Opposition home affairs spokesman James Paterson was right when he said the delayed notice meant there was no advance warning of the drill. “It’s not really notification of an upcoming exercise if we only find out about it after it has commenced, is it?” he said.

China’s belligerence is clear in its false claim that Australia made “unreasonable accusations” in a “hyped-up” response. In the circumstances, it has been unduly moderate. China’s regional aggression, just as an erratic Donald Trump has sidelined Ukraine to appease Russian tyrant Vladimir Putin, underlines why both sides of Australian politics should follow the lead of British Labour Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who is lifting defence spending from 2.3 per cent of GDP to 2.5 per cent to fast-track Britain’s military capability. Sir Keir also has pledged British peacekeeping troops as part of any peace deal on Ukraine. His ambition is to lift defence spending to 3 per cent of GDP after the next British election.

In contrast, in Senate estimates the Albanese government revealed that it planned almost no meaningful increase in the next few years – from 2.03 per cent this financial year to 2.02 per cent in 2026-27, 2.12 per cent in 2027-28 and 2.3 per cent in 2033-34, nine years from now. Not good enough, Prime Minister. Stepping up will be expensive. But Mr Albanese and Peter Dutton have a serious duty to reappraise defence spending and adjust other priorities as a central issue in the campaign.

Germany’s Chancellor-elect, Friedrich Merz, a long-time admirer of the US, has announced his “absolute priority will be to strengthen Europe as quickly as possible so that we can really achieve independence from the US”. The signals being received from the US, Mr Merz said, indicated that interest in Europe under Mr Trump was fading and “we must prepare for the worst”.

Apart from Poland (4.1 per cent of GDP), Estonia (3.4 per cent) and Latvia (3.2 per cent), other European countries including Sweden, Germany, Turkey and France (2.1 per cent) are, like Australia, far behind the proportion of GDP needed for defence.

Nearer to home, Mr Trump’s retreat from foreign aid will make it harder for Australia to prevent Pacific Islands nations turning to China for economic security. As Paul Kelly wrote on Wednesday, it would be a mistake for Australia to think “Trump’s strategic retreat from Europe is a prelude to a strategic step-up in Asia. It isn’t.”