Defence experts warn Australia's armed forces 'languishing', short on firepower due to 'deeply inadequate' military spending

Sky News AU

21 hours ago

Australia's defence force is weaker than it was before East Timor, is under armoured and short of firepower according to stinging analysis by two of the nation's leading defence experts.
With the Prime Minister heading to the G7 in Canada, defence analyst Peter Jennings and Retired Chief of Army, Peter Leahy have both given their thoughts on the AFD and how it stacks up.
A break down by Sky News of regional power players also lays out Australia's fragile capabilities despite numerous governments talking up potency, reliability and acquisitions.
'We are in a very dangerous strategic situation now,' said Peter Jennings, from Strategic Analysis Australia. It's a sentiment shared by Retired Lieutenant General, Peter Leahy.
'In the case of the Australian Army I was the Chief from 2002 to 2008. If I look at the army now it is smaller than what it was then. It's not as capable. It has less armoured protection and recruiting is really quite difficult,' said the former Chief.
A former senior naval officer who wished to remain anonymous affirmed the Royal Australian Navy was down on the missile firepower it had 30 years ago – leaving it short of ships and under-gunned.
With Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Europe rearming and the Chinese Communist Party intent on achieving hegemony in the region, armouries are growing, and defence budgets are being stretched.
This year the United States intends to spend (in Australian dollars) $1.56 trillion on defence. China stated spend is $375-billion although its estimated to more accurately be around $620 billion. It's acquired three aircraft carriers and the world's second largest air force in a little over decade. It's also expanding its nuclear arsenal and is amassing a bespoke fleet to potentially take the democratically governed islands of Taiwan.
Japan continues to ramp up its own defence spending, reportedly up nearly ten per-cent year on year to $105-billion. The sum is equal to one-point-eight percent of its GDP.
Australia will spend $59 billion. It's roughly two per-cent of GDP with an intention to reach two-point-four per cent by 2034.
'We are facing some difficult times,' said Peter Jennings. 'Up against that level of risk, our defence spending is deeply inadequate… We are just a tiny shade over two per-cent of GDP and you know, that I think was a peace time level spend.'
When it comes to combat airpower – fighters, bombers and long-range armed drones, America's force numbers around 3,276.
China's air fleet is estimated to be around 2750. It remains highly secretive around the number of long-range drones capable of inflicting damage.
Japan's defence force numbers 258. Indonesia's strike force is 116.
Australia's modest but capable strike force numbers 108.
The Department of Defence was specifically asked how many long-range armed drones Australia has acquired, but in its answer, didn't identify any.
It's concerning considering the state of the Royal Australian Navy, which critics believe lags a decade behind in acquisition.
Australia operates on a 'three to one' rotation policy meaning its force needs to be divided by three. Consequently, it aims to have two submarines, one destroyer and two frigates available for deployment. Although Australia's two resupply ships are both currently out of action tethering the navy even closer to shore.
When it comes to soldiers and marines, China's fighting force numbers more than a million. Indonesia stands around 300,000. Australia's active duty force has shrunken to 28,500.
'The ADF is a professional organisation, sadly I think it's languishing,' said Peter Leahy.
'There's a really solid debate that says we need to spend more money on defence and I agree entirely. But I agree with the Prime Minister and others that it's not just a sum we need to spend, we need to be careful about what we want. How we acquire and how we introduce it into services.
'Everybody is saying it's the most catastrophic circumstances since before the second world war (and) we need to do something …. Action is required.'
The former Army Chief dismissed the notion Australians should be scared.
'I don't think there's any reason to be scared …. (but) the public need to be concerned that people are thinking about this.'
Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese has publicly sidestepped – if not rebuffed - America's request for Australia to urgently increase the nation's defence spending to three-point-five per cent of GDP, saying 'I think that Australia should decide what we spend on Australia's defence. As simple as that.'
'It's very clear that the Americans think our defence spend is deeply inadequate,' said Peter Jennings. '(US Defense Secretary) Pete Hegseth in Singapore said we should lift it from two per- cent to three-and-a-half per cent. That's a massive increase … So, I think the signal, not particularly coded from the United States is we need to do a lot better.'
Former Prime Minister Scott Morrison recently told this reporter, 'We've got to be looking at three per cent. We should be at two-and-a-half per cent as quickly as possible. You know, I'd be saying three-per cent by 2030 … and it's not like we haven't been there before.'
Though, it's always easier to talk about where defence spending should be than decide where taxes should increase or what must be cut.
In the Second World War Australia's defence spend climbed towards 35 per cent of GDP. It's nothing if not an indication of the financial cost of conflict when diplomacy fails.
When it came to opposition, Peter Jennings rebuffed suggestion the outcry amounted to warmongering.
'With the biggest war in Europe since the Second World War, with the Middle East in flame, with China not hiding the fact that it's becoming increasingly aggressive to all of its neighbours, circumnavigating Australia with some of its best military equipment. How could anyone think we are in a benign period and we don't have to worry about these developments,' he said.
'Il's plain for all to see, it's not like you need to have some special security clearance to understand what's going on. We can't afford to be in denial about it,' he said.