n - Eureka Street

THE N ATION: 3BRIAN TOOHEYIndefensible spendingL , H owARD GovceNMWT HAS discoveced ' newthreat to national security in order to justify spendingbillions on high-tech weaponry. Not only is the threatfar worse than anything imagined at the height of theCold War, it is so insidious that it is no use trying tolook for potential enemies in the guise of individualcountries.The n ew threat is growing prosperity in our neighbourhood-something only the naive see as a goodthing for all concerned. Not only is economic growtha bad thing for Australia's security, it now turns outthe Cold War was really a good thing. Although theseviews may seem rather eccentric, they are presentedas self-evident truths in the 'Strategic Settings' sectionof the Defence Efficiency Review conducted by aformer Defence D epartment scientist, Dr MalcolmMcintosh, assisted by the former National Party Senatorfor Queensland, John Stone.N evertheless, the Defence Minister,Ian McLachlan, strongly endorsed theMcintosh Report when it was releasedin mid-April, especially its recommendation for increases in militaryspending which could soon consume an extra $600million a year, or considerably more than the entirebudget for the ABC. McLachlan says he has a shoppinglist of over 40 new weapons systems, headed byn ew early warning and control aircraft. Buying fourof these planes would undoubtedly be of use if theRAAF needed to choreograph a dogfight over Darwin,but it would also leave no change out of $2 billion.McLachlan also wants to modernise the F1-11 bomberswhich a former deputy head of the Defence Department,Alan Wrigley, has recommended b escrapped on the grounds of cost. An F1-ll boring ahole in the sky burns more than $30,000 worth offuel per hour- more than many people earn in a yearin a 'real job'.Australia has by far the most capable blue waternavy and airforce in the immediate region. InvadingAustralia would be a staggering task. Only the UScould do so at present, and then only with grea tdifficulty. Even assuming the desire, no one in theregion would be remotely capable of doing so fordecades to come. Nor is there any plausible evidencethat the dangers posed by lower levels of military conflicthas increased.Yet the Mcintosh Report asserts that 'the risk ofa conflict threatening Australia's vital interests ... hasgrown in recent years'. The main support for thisclaim is the bald assertion that the 'end of the ColdWar has made our regional strategic circumstancesmore complex, uncertain and demanding'. Even if thisw ere true-and there is n o evidence that it is-Mcintosh does not bother to explain why it follows thatthe region has become more dangerous for Australia.For a start, the prospect of global nuclear war has receded,to our benefit as well as that of the rest of the globe.Oblivious to the irony, m any of the sam e peoplewho once saw the Cold War as a rationale for moremilitary spending today claim that it was really astabilising influence now sorely missed. This isnostalgic nonsense. The supposedly benign balanceimposed by the Cold War did not stop the terriblelosses suffered in the Korean or Vietnam wars, nor invarious wars on the Indian sub-continent. Indonesiastill invaded East Timor. China attacked Vietnam. Fora while, ~e was som e prospectthat ~ commumst reg1mes. might have em erged in------- Indonesia, Malaysia,'~" ·/"-~ ~ The Philippines and else­""t,...._,.~~:J--~~where. Now there isnone.Is Mcintosh seriously suggestingthat Australia's strategic circumstanceshave deteriorated as a result? The answer is yesand the culprit is economic growth in the region.According to Mcintosh, 'As our relative economicposition declines, it will become h arder for Australiato retain the relative military advantage on which oursecurity from armed attack has ultimately depended'.As a result, much more spending on weaponry isneeded 'if we are to remain confident thatwe could defeat any credible attack' .W HJLE IT IS TRUE THAT CAPABILITIES of our neighboursare growing, a good case can be made-in the absenceof anns control agreements-that this actuallyimproves our overall strategic circumstances.Mcintosh, however, takes us back to the days in whichAsia was seen as a 'dead frontier', to borrow the titleof a book by Graeme Cheeseman and Robert Bruce inwhich all our neighbours w ere lumped together as athreat.Few would argue that Australia has becom e lesssecure because the US has bought a new version ofthe Stealth bomber. Yet Mcintosh assumes that ourstrategic situation has deteriorated because Singaporeis getting a new air-to-air missile, or Malaysia isbuying much better submarines in order to counterthe threat obviously created by the far superiorsubmarine capability being acquired by Australia.For a Government supposedly committed to 'fiscalconsolidation', rarely has a proposal for such profligatespending being presented on such flimsy grounds. •Brian Toohey is a freelance journalist.VOLUME 7 N UMBER 4 • EUREKA STREET 27