ELLEN RANSLEY: Why Federal election and Donald Trump loom as case for the defence

Defence won’t be front-of-mind for many voters when they’re at the ballot box, but Donald Trump’s return to the White House has cast a khaki tinge on Australia’s upcoming Federal election.

Washington have made clear partners like Australia should increase their defence spend to at least three per cent GDP, especially because we face a “far more powerful challenger” in China.

It’s reportedly prompted consideration by the Coalition to spend an additional $15 billion a year on defence to bring expenditure to 2.5 per cent of GDP by 2029. Shadow defence minister Andrew Hastie wouldn’t confirm what the final number would look like, only that a Coalition Government “will increase spending above its current levels”.

The Albanese Government, who have spent an extra $50b on defence since coming to power, are on track to spend about 2 per cent GDP this year (about $56B) on defence, growing to 2.33 per cent by 2034.

Neither approach is perfect. A rapid ramp up of defence spending would likely require some considerable borrowing, experts say, which could mean increased taxes down the road.

But the current plan “will not work”, Strategic Analysis Australia director Michael Shoebridge says, cautioning it is a “three per cent GDP plan funded at two per cent”.

“Australia needs to be spending three per cent now to even afford all the plans and capabilities it’s already got on the books,” he told The Nightly.

He says it would be “absurd” if it turns out it has taken “coercion from Washington” to adequately fund defence.

“One of the reasons we need to increase defence spending is to be able to do more for ourselves in the face of a less reliable America. How absurd is it to be pressured by a less reliable America to do what we need to do, given a less reliable America,” he said.

“We need to be investing in our own security for our own purposes and not needing to be blackmailed by Washington.”

“Blackmail” or not, it’s triggered a pre-election political maelstrom.

To find extra money to grow the defence budget, ASPI senior fellow David Uren says nips and tucks around the edges and cuts elsewhere will only go so far.

“Historic experience shows that very few countries succeed in financing a military build-up by cutting expenditure elsewhere … I don’t think you can finance a major national security priority by nips and tucks and cuts here and there,” he said.

Shadow treasurer Angus Taylor on Wednesday said to increase defence spending, “you have a strong economy”.

“A bigger economy can afford a bigger spend on defence. It’s that simple,” he said.

But Mr Uren suggests in reality, it might not be that simple, and some money will need to be borrowed to fund expanding the defence budget so significantly.

That would require some loosening of budget rules in the short-term. Writing in The Strategist, he said the Labor strategy of limiting spending growth until government debt is on a downward trajectory, and using tax revenue improvements to pay down the debt was “not ironclad and allows for exceptions”.

Somewhere down the line however, taxes may need to increase to pay down that debt.

To help taxpayers digest that outcome, experts caution against throwing money at the problem and hoping it will stick.

As Mr Uren says, “you can’t just shower money on defence – it will likely disappear with nothing much to show for it”.

The Defence Strategic Review made Australia’s priorities clear, and the Government has often referred to this landmark piece of work in announcements made over the last few years.

But words and actions aren’t necessarily matching up, with Mr Shoebridge pointing to Defence Minister Richard Marles’ admission this week that the life-of-type-extension for the ageing Collins-class submarines will be pared back. That has the potential to leave Australia vulnerable at a time of increasing strategic uncertainty.

“It’s extraordinary we have a growing defence budget, and we’ve got a weaker military. What an absurd, perverse result,” Mr Shoebridge said.

He says the most obvious capabilities to be spending money on right now are the new weapons of war.

Things like armed and unarmed long-range unmanned submarines, medium range aerial vehicles capable of loitering surveillance – which could keep tabs on hypothetical Chinese flotillas circumnavigating the country, as well as armed drones, and our own missiles.

No matter how much extra the defence budget is bolstered by, Shoebridge cautions it will mean nothing if the Government doesn’t fix foundational issues.

“If the budget goes up to 2.5 or three per cent of GDP but we leave the defence department unchanged, then we will not get results. The current structure of the defence department is absurdly top heavy – so much so we have more admirals than we do surface combatants,” Mr Shoebridge said.

Mr Marles says the Coalition can’t be trusted with the Defence Force.

“(They) had promised $42b worth of spending (in government) without putting a single dollar behind it… They had 28 different projects running a combined 97 years over time,” he said.

“Right now, we’ve put $50b of additional spending over the next decade into the Budget… words are cheap here.”

Whichever way the election goes, the second Trump era demands it will ultimately be actions that matter.