Australians should reject the new Defence White Paper, here is why

Many alleged experts and political types are bloviating on the "strong message" with the new Defence White Paper.

The poor quality of this paper is on par with the last one in 20013 and an equally bad one in 2009.

In other words, Operation: WISHFUL THINKING.

Australia does need Defence White Papers, but they should have realilsm attached.

1. The idea that the Entrenched Defence Bureacracy needs more money when what we generously give them is grossly mismanaged needs examination by our elected officials. Two percent of GDP spend on Defence is nothing more than a bad Internet meme. Defence gets what it gets, in the Federal budget (in this entitlement society in deep federal debt) after other needs are met. Australia invests around $44B in Defence each year. The 4th biggest spender in the budget. Around $12B is in veterans affairs (an output of defence activity) and the rest in defence activity. That includes around 180 flag-ranks for such a tiny military. Versaille in Canberra.

2. Defective weapons systems applenty. We have the F-35, which will get shot down against real threats. Australia will not maintain regional air superiority.  Obsolete-to-the-threat air warfare destroyers sold to us as a $5B-$6B spend now tracking toward $10B...for 3 ships. The helicopter roadmap is a disaster. Tigers are useless (bye-bye in the 2020s for no return on investment). The MRH-90 still has serious project flaws. The M-1 tank, was just a really bad idea.That is the short list.

3. Poor strategy. The idea that new submarines will survive a shooting war in the South China Sea. Without proper air cover where the U.S. is in deep trouble, enemy anti-submarine aircraft and other anti-submarine assets--in numbers--will make life difficult. Don't expect the submarines to return. This is also a problem closer to home as our own RAAF replacement can't keep enemy anti-submarine aircraft as far away as we would like. Air power has always been linked to submarine effectiveness.

4. More poor strategy. We only have enough fossil fuel reserves to last a few weeks. How easy is that for one of our defence officials that does game theory on enemy strategy? Glass houses. Don't go trying to dish it out if you can't take it. The enemy always gets a vote.

5. Leadership is based on institutionalized group-think, the Dunning-Kruger Effect and normalization of deviance (the truth must be somewhere in between). Just as bad: self before service.  This leadership, more times than not, refuses to apply existing, government risk analysis on big projects. That in part is why they fail.

Australia deserves a good defence. But it should be backed up by solid rational thinking. The last good, Defence White Paper was in 2000.

Our elected officials should be wondering why that is the case.

This new Defence White Paper, has no credible worth.

.