Surely, there could not be a more urgent or appropriate moment to rethink the defence strategies best suited to the real-world threats facing Australia. Our current approaches, shaped by colonial legacies and Cold War mindsets, are unlikely to survive a frank and honest appraisal of their fitness for today’s world.
If we begin by acknowledging the realities of the second quarter of the 21st century, and the kinds of events that might threaten Australia’s sovereignty and welfare, the true nature of our risks becomes clearer. A rough assessment of potential threats by impact and likelihood might look like this:
- Belligerent nation with territorial ambitions — Catastrophic, but highly unlikely
- Belligerent nation targeting Australia due to alliance-based enmity — Severe, and increasingly foreseeable
- State or non-state actors attacking infrastructure or inciting social division — Damaging and highly likely
- Natural or human-made disaster — Ranging from very bad to catastrophic, and inevitable
Who Really Threatens Australia?
Considering the first category, we must ask: is there a belligerent nation with territorial ambitions over Australia for reasons other than our alignment with its geopolitical rival?
Our closest ally points to China. Yet China is also our largest trading partner—reliant on our raw materials, providing us with finished goods, and maintaining a trade balance in our favour. Despite tensions, there is little government or public pressure to curtail this mutually beneficial relationship.
Imagining how China could benefit from directly governing Australia stretches credibility. The logistical and economic costs alone would be astronomical. The greater threat to our sovereignty stems not from direct aggression, but from the increasing militarisation of the Pacific, driven by Cold War mentalities and rigid ideologies around Taiwan.
The China–Taiwan question is a matter for Beijing and Taipei to resolve. It should not automatically draw in Canberra. The unqualified alignment with U.S. interests undermines Australia’s credibility in the region—especially as our record includes morally dubious and strategically disastrous wars from Vietnam to Iraq, and now a reluctance to confront our allies’ support for the Netanyahu government’s actions.
AUKUS: A Strategic Blunder?
And then there’s AUKUS. Did we really agree to pay the U.S. $375 billion for three second-hand submarines that, if delivered in the mid-2030s, will already be nearing the end of their useful life? Earlier this year, we made the first $500 million payment—an act that felt less like a strategic investment and more like a tribute from a vassal state.
As American democracy struggles with internal division, corporate overreach, and political dysfunction, we must ask: are we still aligning with a like-minded power—or with one whose values increasingly diverge from our own?
The Case for Strategic Neutrality
In this exceptionally unstable period, it is time to pivot. We should consider neutrality not as an abdication of responsibility, but as a strategic choice to protect our sovereignty. The Cold War dynamics of the Northern Hemisphere no longer apply to the Australia of today.
Seventy-five years ago, most Australians were of Anglo-Celtic Christian descent. That figure is now heading toward 50%. People of 232 nationalities now call Australia home—many fleeing war, persecution, or failed states. Our cultural ties, trade, and daily life are increasingly intertwined with Asia, not Europe. On our streets, in our shops, in our kitchens, and on our devices, Asia has become far more relevant and alluring than our “old friends” ever were.
It may be time for a diplomatic divorce.
Cybersecurity and Social Resilience
Decoupling from Cold War alliances might reduce the risk of entanglement in armed conflict, but it won’t protect us from cyber threats—likely the most immediate and disruptive danger we face. These threats come from both state actors, seeking economic or political advantage, and non-state actors, from ideological extremists to criminal syndicates.
Here, reorienting defence spending toward cybersecurity, resilience, and social cohesion offers a better return. It also creates dual-purpose benefits—protecting both national defence and everyday society. Investments in digital infrastructure, education, and rapid-response capabilities will strengthen Australia more than submarines designed for open-ocean warfare ever could.
Climate Crisis as National Security Threat
Natural disasters are inevitable—and growing in intensity and frequency. From fires to floods, the climate crisis is a national security issue. The architecture of response is already in place: a pyramid that begins with neighbours and volunteers, rising through local services to state agencies, and culminating in the ADF.
If we shift our mindset from preparing for distant wars to preparing for real, recurring emergencies, we could reallocate defence spending toward disaster-readiness and community resilience—while still maintaining a robust capability that can be deployed in both civil and defence roles.
Technology, Industry, and Relevance
The supposed benefit of Cold War alliances in technology transfer no longer holds. Australia’s rejection of a nuclear future limits our ability to benefit from U.S. defence industry investments. Meanwhile, Asia is surging ahead in AI, cybersecurity, and drone technology.
If we want a future-oriented industrial base, it’s time to align with those at the technological frontier, and build partnerships with relevant regional players, not just nostalgic ones.
A Sovereign, Future-Facing Australia
This fundamental shift in how we perceive threats and allocate resources has deep implications: for our defence institutions, international relationships, economic strategies, and even the career paths of those serving in government, military, and industry. But it could also open the door to more diverse opportunities, better aligned with a changing world.
As Rumi, the Persian poet, once said:
“Stop acting so small. You are the universe in ecstatic motion.”
Surely, the time has come to stop being the junior partner, blindly loyal in archaic rivalries. It’s time for Australia to chart an independent, confident, and thoughtful course—where our sovereignty, security, and identity come first.
Rumi also wrote:
“Seek out those who fan your flames.”
Here’s hoping these ideas spark something in you.
Dora Colnet 