The RSL Defence and National Security Committee has just published its Occasional Paper No. 1, by John Blaxland*: Adapting to poly-crisis, a Proposed Australian National Security Strategy. The abstract and introduction follows with a link to the whole paper at the end.
We face a poly-crisis involving overlapping demands relating to changing climate; cleaner, greener industry; stretched health services; deepening geopolitical shifts; accelerating technological transformation, increasingly autonomous systems; and growing challenges in governing cosmopolitan societies.
War, famine and disease, daily in the headlines, make for an uncertain future while politicians struggle to rise above the tyranny of the urgent. This paper argues that in response An Australian National Security Strategy is needed to harness national resources, mindful of desired ends, available means and ways open to achieve them. The desired ends must address physical safety, social and educational needs as well as our liberal, democratic, and inclusive values, while seeking to pursue health and happiness.
The means to achieve this include the nation’s geography, natural resources, industrial capacity, military preparedness, population, character, morale, quality of government, and quality of diplomacy. These national assets are significant, yet finite, requiring careful stewardship. Efficiently and effectively using the means available to achieve the desired ends involves reconciling the nation’s history (largely Anglo-European, yet cosmopolitan) with its geography (an ancient, island continent, on the edge of Asia). Fear, honour and interests shape a country’s foreign, trade and security policy, not least for Australia and its neighbours and partners.
Australian governments tend to weigh up crisis response choices on three criteria: (1) proximity and necessity (the closer, the more pressing a response); (2) alliance and regional partner concerns (with risks and benefits); and (3) risk tolerance. With challenges growing in frequency and severity, a substantial national response is required. Inter-disciplinary work is helping on some emerging challenges. Balancing risks and rewards is key to fostering a resilient society.
An incentivised scheme for national and community service would help ensure critical response organisations are adequately crewed. The scheme for Australian volunteers to work internationally could also be expanded, notably in Southeast Asia and the Pacific.
Working with Pacific partners is key to alleviate suffering, strengthen security and stability and further Australia’s interests. A grand compact for shared governance, should be implemented, designed for local conditions and building on the Pacific Island Forum.
Collaboration with the consensus-constrained Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has its uses and limitations – including over the Myanmar crisis. A sub-regional governance and security cooperation body could sweeten regional ties and address festering security concerns.
This framework requires further consultation on (a) the challenges, (b) Australia’s national power, and (c) a plan to formulate ways to use the means available to achieve desired ends.
That plan must account for the nation’s history and its geography, its cosmopolitan composition, established security and economic ties, and shared interests with its neighbours, and traditional security partners and allies.
*John Blaxland is Professor of International Security and Intelligence Studies at the Australian National University, where he is currently appointed as Director of its North America Liaison Office. A former military officer, he is the author of a range of books on military history, intelligence and international security. He is also a member of the RSL Defence and National Security Committee, an honorary appointment.
The full paper is here.
