For over a century, Australia’s defence posture has been defined by reliance on a dominant global ally—initially the United Kingdom and, more recently, the United States. This dependency has only deepened in recent years, with the introduction of the AUKUS agreement further binding Australia’s defence strategy to that of the United States. However, there is growing concern that such alignment may compromise Australia’s sovereignty and strategic autonomy.
A more forward-thinking and innovative approach would consider alternative strategies that strengthen national defence without requiring dependence on external powers. In particular, a reassessment of current plans to acquire costly nuclear-powered submarines and build under-equipped warships could pave the way for a more sustainable and independent defence framework.
Central to this reimagined strategy is the concept of the “strategic defensive,” a military philosophy with historical roots that offers a more appropriate defence model for a country like Australia. Unlike offensive military doctrines that aim to defeat adversaries outright, the strategic defensive focuses on preventing an aggressor from achieving its objectives. This approach is particularly well-suited to so-called “status quo states”—nations that are content with their current geopolitical standing and have no interest in territorial expansion or aggression.
Australia fits this description. It seeks security and stability, not dominance or intervention. From this standpoint, its defence policy should aim to preserve the existing state of affairs rather than prepare for offensive operations abroad.
There are compelling military and technological reasons to adopt a strategic defensive posture. Historically, defence has been recognized as the stronger position in warfare. Defenders benefit from familiar terrain and established supply lines, while attackers must project force over distance, often into unknown or hostile environments. Military analysts generally agree that an attacker must have a significant numerical advantage—often a three-to-one ratio—to successfully overcome a defender.
Geography further favours Australia’s defensive potential. Surrounded by vast oceanic distances, the continent is naturally protected by what has been described as a “wide water moat.” This makes any attempt at invasion or direct military action against Australia extremely complex and costly for a potential adversary.
Modern military technologies enhance the advantages of a strategic defensive strategy. Long-range precision missiles, autonomous drones, and advanced surveillance systems offer Australia the means to create a comprehensive defence network capable of detecting and neutralizing threats before they reach its shores. Rather than investing heavily in a small number of manned submarines and warships—expensive assets, slow to build, and vulnerable to modern weaponry—Australia could deploy thousands of cost-effective, uncrewed systems and land-based missile launchers.
Such a shift in strategy also aligns with global military trends, which suggest that the era of large, manned naval fleets may be nearing its end. Advances in strike technology and sensor capabilities now allow for effective control of maritime spaces from land-based systems. As a result, Australia could more efficiently secure its maritime borders using a distributed network of autonomous vehicles and missile platforms.
Despite the commitments made under the AUKUS agreement, it is not too late for Australian policymakers to reconsider the country’s defence direction. Continuing to rely on a foreign power for national security comes with significant financial costs and potential entanglements in external conflicts. More alarmingly, it may expose Australia to becoming a strategic target in the event of major geopolitical tensions, particularly between the United States and China.
By adopting a strategic defensive philosophy, Australia has the opportunity to craft a security strategy that is both effective and independent. What is required is political leadership with the vision and courage to challenge conventional thinking and chart a new course for the nation’s defence
