Defence

The Big Picture

The future of warfighting

The inaugural Joint Future Warfighting Conference was held in Canberra in April, Minister for Defence, Senator the Hon Robert Hill, gave the keynote address.

I recognize that Australians have earned a proud reputation in war. And from my experience, in witnessing operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, today's warfighters are as capable and professional as those of previous generations.

As Minister for Defence I don't often get to speak about warfighting - or the application of organized force in combat. The warfighting I engage in is more a war of words. Warfighting in terms of lethal force is better left to military professionals.

However in my executive responsibility I do have a say in when our warfighters are asked to go to war. I do have a responsibility to ensure that they have been properly trained. I must ensure that they are as well equipped as the nation can afford. I also accept a responsibility to ensure that their families are well supported.

There is no more important or difficult decision for a government than deciding whether to commit forces to military operations. It requires a clear understanding of the national interests, in the strategic circumstances of the day, that demand the use of force - with all its inherent risks.

These are decisions that are only made after the most careful consideration and the elimination of all other options.

There is no doubt that we are living in a time where there has been a blurring between traditional military "warfighting" and broader national security issues.

Today's threats primarily relate to terrorism and extremism, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, missile systems and other unconventional and asymmetric capabilities, transnational crime, piracy and illegality including people smuggling, resource extraction, money transfers and biological threats.

Warfighting capabilities are one of the assets we can use to combat these threats - but more often than not the response will also require other resources.

Thus the warfighter is seen as a part of the solution but not the whole. This is not to downplay the importance of the warfighter. Defeating terrorism required us to send special forces to Afghanistan to take on the enemy at source - to destroy its command, training camps and weapon caches but it also required a multi agency, multi functioned and multi national response to build capability in friendly states closer to home in South East Asia.

In tackling the issue of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of those who use them both as a threat and in war we sent military forces to Iraq. Our warfighters helped bring down the regime of Saddam Hussein and remove that perceived threat, but we recognize that to remove the broader threats associated with WMD requires much more than a military response.

Similarly with peacekeeping, nation building or nation salvaging and border protection, warfighting skills and particularly the training and discipline that lie behind them are part of the solution. And the ADF has had much experience and considerable success in all these tasks in recent years. And I don't think the demand is about to change.

But there is also always the possibility conventional threat. Whilst we don't see conventional threat to Australia or Australian interests now or in the foreseeable future, today's strategic environment is one of uncertainty and unpredictability.

Herein lies the distinction. Whilst there is an important role for the warfighter in helping defeat the threats we do face today it is only the warfighter that can effectively respond to a conventional threat.

And we know that a strong military capability takes years to build. In fact our warfighting capability lies in the legacy of the generations that have gone before (to which I earlier referred) to the doctrine and culture that has stood the test of time, to a willingness to adapt and meet new military challenges, and a constant upgrading of military capability.

So we don't develop a war fighting capacity in order to provide humanitarian relief. But we do know that well trained warfighters can respond in ways no other agency can. We saw it in the first response to the recent tsunami - the speed of deployment, the command structure, the logistics support, the appropriate platforms in the air and the sea, the discipline - and in the case of the ADF, the goodwill as well. All contributed to a remarkable response and considerable success.

So whilst we expect calls upon the ADF to be other than a response to a conventional military threat, we still see our first responsibility to be to continue to build the warfighting capability of a nation. That is the capability which can't be substituted.

That's why we are committed to new generations of aircraft, ships, tanks and other fighting platforms. That is why the primary focus of our training will remain war fighting. That is why we choose commanders and not managers.

And in doctrine, training and equipment we accept that military capacity everywhere is on the rise. Globalization is having an equalizing effect. It is much harder to maintain a technological edge than it once was.

We recognize that jointness within the force has a multiplier effect. For maximum output the force must be seen as a whole. And as we've seen, most warfighting of the future will be in coalitions. So we must be interoperable - in form and in practice. And this does not just apply to high-end warfighting - our response in Bougainville, in East Timor, in the Solomon Islands, to the tsunami were all in collaboration with friends and allies. I have no doubt that this situation will continue.

In conclusion, I want to reflect on our recent farewell, from Darwin, of our warfighters to Al Muthanna province in Iraq. They have been trained to fight. They are equipped to fight. But their job is to defend and provide training. In the former case, if called upon to defend they can apply significant military force. They will do that in the capable, disciplined and professional way of the warfighter. In training the Iraqi Security Forces they will also instill military values and responsibility. In their contribution to nation building they might encounter criminals, insurgents or even Jihad. Their training will allow them to deal with all such threats and, like previous generations of warfighters, they will do Australia proud.

Senator the Hon Robert Hill Minister for Defence Leader of the Government in the Senate

[ top of page ]