Photo by Flickr user Leo, used under a CC license.

Yes, Australia can defend itself independently

Australia fears abandonment, but when it happens, Australia copes remarkably well. It can do so again in an era of fading American influence in Asia.

Sam Roggeveen

1 April 20255 min read

This is a lightly edited transcript of remarks delivered at the Sovereignty and Security Forum, held at the National Press Club in Canberra on 31 March. The event was convened and chaired by Australia’s former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull.

I’d like to start with a simple declaration: Australia can defend itself with a less reliable American alliance partner. In fact, Australia can defend itself even if there is no alliance at all.

I’d like to examine this issue in two ways: as a military problem and as a political one.

The military problem, it seems to me, is relatively straightforward. Australia is not that hard to defend. We are not Taiwan, or South Korea, or Israel, or Poland.

Throughout our history, Australia has had to grasp its independence by degrees. The steady retreat of American influence in Asia, now accelerated under Donald Trump, merely completes that evolution.

We don’t have an enemy on our doorstep. Beijing is closer to Berlin than it is to Sydney, and when it comes to using force against Australia, distance matters a great deal.

Being far away from threats remains a tremendous asset. The 2024 National Defence Strategy says, “Technology has already overturned one of Australia’s long-standing advantages – geography”.

But that is a substantial overstatement.

The Chinese naval flotilla that recently circumnavigated Australia had to make a journey of over 7,000 kilometres just to sit off the coast of Eden to conduct gunnery practice. In wartime, if it had not been sunk, it could have delivered at best a few dozen cruise missiles onto our landmass.

Now of course, in years to come the Chinese fleets will get bigger, and China will deploy new bombers, and more missiles. Australia’s task, therefore, is build its capacity to sink the ships and submarines that threaten us, and shoot down the incoming aircraft and missiles. That task will get harder as China’s power grows, but it is perfectly achievable for Australia, even without the alliance.

But the starting point must be to use distance to our advantage. At present, we’re treating it as a barrier to be overcome – that’s what AUKUS is about. I say, if China ever wants to threaten Australia, let the PLA cross that distance. Our task, when their ships and missiles and aircraft get close enough, is to cause them unacceptable damage.

I have called this an Echidna Strategy. Now, I grant, the echidna is a slightly ponderous, even comical, creature. But it is hardy. It’s a survivor. And it is perfectly adapted to its environment. With an Echidna Strategy, Australia looks benign and friendly to nations that mean us no harm, and spiky and indigestible to those that do.

But if the military problem is eminently solvable, that still leaves politics.

It seems we’re not content with the strategic gift handed to us by our favourable geography. We yearn to be relevant. We want to be with the Americans at the head table, and we fear being left out of their considerations.

We've always done the big things our own way: the Australian ballot, compulsory voting, federalism, superannuation, health, education, immigration, firearms. So why not defence? There’s no reason for Australia to lack self-confidence.

AUKUS is a symptom of this anxiety. After all, on the day AUKUS was announced, I doubt any fair-minded Australian observer would have said that the alliance was in trouble, and that a $368 billion gesture was required to rescue it. In fact, the alliance was already in rude health, as intimate as it had ever been.

So, when AUKUS was announced on 15 September 2021, it resembled a bizarre scene at an auction. The hammer had already come down, and the auctioneer had announced “sold to Australia”.

To which Australia responded, “Thank you, but we’d like to make another bid”.

I don’t want to be too glib. Reliance on great powers made sense for Australia. But not anymore. And I’m not referring to President Donald Trump. The two months of evidence accumulated so far suggests he simply won’t meet his treaty commitment to allies. But I would stress, it is only two months. We ought to consider more evidence than that.

The trouble for alliance supporters is that a longer historical gaze brings no more comfort, because we can see a long succession of unmet American promises to prioritise Asia. In the face of China’s dramatic military modernisation, the United States has done little. US forces deployed to Asia today are of roughly the same size as in 1991.

But let’s not blame the Americans. It is perfectly rational behaviour. Taking on China would be a daunting task, the hardest thing America has ever had to do as a great power. But it’s not an essential task, because the United States is a highly secure country which will remain perfectly safe even if China dominates Asia.

American power isn’t suddenly evaporating under Trump. The evidence has been clear for many years – the US is simply not committed to defending its position as the leading power in Asia. It’s just that previous administrations disguised this fact with pretty language about pivots and rebalances. Our political leaders were either fooled by this, or they chose to fool themselves.

Now the veil has been lifted and we are left to sort things out for ourselves. It won’t be the first time Australia has been forced to be free. The fall of Singapore, the “east of Suez” policy, the Guam Doctrine, the stillborn Pivot to Asia, the abandoned Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Throughout our history, Australia has had to grasp its independence by degrees. The steady retreat of American influence in Asia, now accelerated under Trump, merely completes that evolution.

But although Australia fears abandonment, when it actually happens, we cope with it remarkably well because we’re a sober, practical, problem-solving people. So, when I hear that Australia cannot defend itself without America, I detect not an argument about military capability or force structure, but a national timidity that is entirely at odds with what we have achieved as a nation.

We've always done the big things our own way: the Australian ballot, compulsory voting, federalism, superannuation, health, education, immigration, firearms. So why not defence? There’s no reason for Australia to lack self-confidence.

I began by saying that Australia can defend itself with a less reliable America. I end by saying that we must. There is no going back to late 20th century American dominance of Asia. This isn’t about Trump, and it isn’t a passing storm. America won’t return to “normal”.

We need to plan for a more independent, post-American, future not out of misplaced nationalism, and certainly not out of spite or animus towards the Americans. We should do it because we must.

About the author

Sam Roggeveen

Sam Roggeveen is Program Director of the Lowy Institute’s International Security Program. He is the author of The Echidna Strategy: Australia's Search for Power and Peace (Opens in new window), published by La Trobe University Press in 2023.

Topics

Australia Defence & security