And we continue to progress our core capabilities, including the future submarines, the AWDs, the LHDs, the naval combat helicopters, the Joint Strike Fighter, the Caribou replacements, vehicles for Army, Chinooks and maritime patrol.
Well, if Defence and/or this Government were honestly concerned about "maritime patrol", we would have the successful Howard plan for illegal boats in action. Granted; more of an attitude and less platform specific. However, Smith mentioning platforms in excess is a plan to fail; but moving right along.
The intelligentsia, policy wonks, senior Defence leaders or other self-important actors, pay pretty poor attention to something that continues to put major weapons system buys at risk. Over and over again:
An Analysis of Defence Materiel Organisation Major Projects Management and What Needs to be Fixed
Australia's Failing Defence Structure and Management Methodology
I do have one additional theory of why Defence thinking in Australia is in such a bad way.
1 comment:
Eric, a little bit in MinDef Smith's speech makes surprising sense.
The unaffordable Howard Government long range big spend vision out to 2030 involved a 10 year Defence Capability Plan which Fitzgibbon later sensibly pulled back to the 4 year forward estimates process for Federal Government budgeting. Defence industry protested and Combet reinstated the 10 year DCP; but it has now been quietly pulled back to 4 years and a new 6 year Defence Capability Guide annexed, which might be termed an 'in pencil' projection. However, the influence of defence industry on DoD is obvious with them insisting that the DCP was updated preceding development of DWP2013.
Both major political parties talk glibly about the impossible primary aim of militarily defending Australia against armed attack, yet there are supposedly 60,000 illegal immigrants who presently cannot be found! Smith says that will still be the unachievable priority in DWP2013 (in lieu of more realistic affordable deterrence capacity); but continuing the absurd Force 2030 notion envisages the ADF not being adequately equipped for another 18 years. No mention of course in MinDef's speech regarding all of the capability gaps created and emerging through flawed planning nor the need to maintain continual adequate and credible military preparedness, which ought to be absolute priority.
Bending of the ADF toward a virtual 'Peace Corps' culture seems destined to continue considering this statement: 'Our respective military forces must be postured to respond in a timely and effective way to the range of contingencies that may arise in our region, in particular humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.'
Perhaps of greater concern is the bent of the Gillard Government toward creating small so-called 'expert groups' to determine crucial aspects of policy. How can 2 former Secretaries of Defence and a business leader have adequate military appreciation to decide matters regarding future force disposition and structures?
Instead of sticking with a hugely cumbersome bureaucratic process to generate an updated policy over a couple of years, it would be expeditious to task a more independent agency like the Lowy Institute to compile a draft document in say 100 days. That organisation embraces some talented former military types.
Consider this bit of wisdom:
'Commanders should be counselled chiefly by persons of known talent, by those who have made the art of war their particular study, and whose knowledge is derived from experience, by those who are present at the scene of action, who see the enemy, who see the advantages that occasions offer, and who, like people embarked in the same ship, are sharers of the danger.'
If, therefore, anyone thinks himself qualified to give advice respecting the war which I am to conduct - let him not refuse the assistance to the State, but let him come with me into Macedonia.
He shall be furnished with a ship, a tent, even his travelling charges will be defrayed, but if he thinks this is too much trouble, and prefers the repose of a city life to the toils of war, let him not on land assume the office of a pilot. The city in itself furnished abundance of topics for conversation. Let it confine its passion for talking to its own precincts and rest assured that we shall pay no attention to any councils but such as shall be framed within our camp.' - General Lucius A. Paulus (229?-160 B.C.) Rome.
Alas; Australia does not seem to have that calibre of military chiefs these days and General Lucius could have been referring to Canberra in lieu of Rome more than 2,000 years hence.
Post a Comment