Australia is heading into an election at a time of ongoing global deterioration, experts say, prompting questions about its defence approach and level of spending.
The re-election of United States President Donald Trump and circumnavigating Australia have brought the country's national interests into focus.
On Thursday, Opposition leader Peter Dutton also in order to get the US tariffs announced by Trump lifted.
Beyond these incursions into the campaign, defence has not featured greatly in either party's election pitch so far.
Albert Palazzo, a military historian and adjunct professor at the University of NSW, said he wasn't expecting to hear much more on the issue.
But Jennifer Parker, an expert associate at the Australian National University's National Security College, thinks the subject should still be a talking point.
"Certainly, I think neither major political party wants it to be [a big issue]. We are not [yet] seeing huge policies on defence coming out," she told SBS News.
"But the thing is, we have weeks to go between now and 3 May, and the world is fundamentally changing at a rapid pace."
Both experts have raised questions about Australia's defence spending and whether it's sufficient to cover gaps in capabilities and protect the country's interests.
Australia's 'difficult circumstance'
Parker who has served for more than 20 years with the Royal Australian Navy, said Australia is in "quite a difficult circumstance" that dates back many years.
"We recognised as early as the 2009 and 2006 [defence] white papers that the world was starting to change ... in terms of the post-World War Two order," she said, referring to documents from the defence department that outline long-term plans for the country's defence.
"That also coincided with the rise of China in terms of China's military power, which in the last 10 years has rapidly developed."
Parker said this manifested in the region through aggression in the South China Sea and "increased aggression" towards Taiwan.
"Then, in the last couple of years, that's against the backdrop of Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine and what has been happening in the Middle East," she said.
'A foolish or risky undertaking'
Recently, Trump has , cast doubt on his allies, and .
This has prompted some commentary about the US being an unreliable ally — including from Palazzo, who was formerly the director of war studies for the Australian Army.
"We're putting all our reliance on some kind of promise from the US, both to provide for our security and to provide us with nuclear-powered submarines," he said, referring to the , under which Australia will acquire nuclear-powered submarines.
"This is quite a foolish or risky undertaking on our part and on our political leaders because they should know that whatever the US is promising is only as good as long as it is in the interests of the US."
Parker said the global environment is "deteriorating" year on year. But when it comes to fundamental changes for Australia, she said "the jury is out".
"There are a lot of people who say that the relationship between Europe and the US, and [the US and Ukraine] means they're an unreliable ally. But I don't think that's what we're seeing in the US-Australia alliance right now," she said.
"Actually, what we're seeing is more a reinforcement of that alliance."
Speaking about the Australian-US relationship in a radio interview last month, Defence Minister Richard Marles described the US alliance as "very central to our national security, our foreign relations".
He said the relationships with other countries in the Pacific region were also profoundly important.
"We need to have our own abilities, our own military capability, but we really need to be working very closely with the countries that surround us as well."
Defence Minister Richard Marles said the relationship with the US has been central to Australia's national security. Source: AAP / Lukas Coch
Parker said the Chinese military has developed a "blue-water" naval capability over the last decade.
She said it is "uncommon" to see operations in Australia's vicinity but questioned whether it has changed the country's strategic circumstances.
"It's probably just reinforced what those who were watching closely already knew about China's capability," she said.
Australia's defence strategy
Last year, the government following the release of a strategic review in 2023, which found the Australian Defence Force (ADF) was "not fully fit for purpose".
The review outlined a strategy of "denial", which was adopted by the government.
"This strategy … is the idea that we want to deter other countries from interfering ... with our key interests," Parker said.
"We want to convince them that if they chose to interfere, there would be a significant consequence for them."
Among the strategy's priorities was acquiring submarines through the AUKUS agreement, enhancing long-range strike capabilities, strengthening northern bases, improving the growth and retention of the workforce, boosting innovation and prioritising partnerships in the Indo-Pacific.
At the time, Marles reiterated that Australia "no longer has the luxury of a ten-year window of strategic warning for conflict". This long-standing assumption was dropped in the previous government's 2020 strategic update.
'There's been no change'
Palazzo said Australia's defence approach "[is not] fit for purpose at all", and it's based on developing a force that is "designed to work with the Americans" and is not in line with "the changing character of war and where military technology is going".
"There's absolutely been no change. We've been following the same security policy since Federation 124 years ago, in which Australia looks to a great power to take responsibility for providing Australia's defence," he said.
"Originally that was the UK; now it's the US."
Parker said while Australia benefits from the US relationship, including the capabilities that we acquire, "we've allowed our defence capabilities to atrophy".
"We have reduced our self-reliance within the alliance concept. I certainly think that we need to look at bolstering our capabilities to do certain missions independently of the US."
When it comes to capabilities that Australia can afford, Parker said there are a "significant" number of gaps.
"Whether that be in our navy — not having enough ships, mine warfare vessels or in our ability to defend ourselves against ballistic missiles (which we've seen used in Europe and the Middle East over the last 12 months) and a number of other capabilities," he said.
"This becomes the challenge: how do you address that through defence spending?"
Australia's defence budget
Australia's defence spending is measured relative to gross domestic product (GDP) which means it can go up or down if inflation increases or decreases.
In last month's the government allocated $58.99 billion in total for defence in 2025-26.
Spending currently hovers just above 2 per cent. The government forecasts this will exceed 2.3 per cent by the early 2030s.
The government earmarked $58.99 billion for defence in the 2025-26 financial year in last month's pre-election federal budget. Source: SBS News
Around $11.1 billion will go towards speeding up the delivery of the Navy's surface combatant fleet and expanding the shipbuilding industry.
But Parker does not think this is new money, pointing out the $5.7 billion dated back to 2016 commitments — a large proportion of which has been eroded by inflation.
She said the only change had been the government bringing forward $1 billion in this year's budget to "enable defence to acquire capabilities faster".
Is defence spending enough?
Given Australia's current spending levels, Parker said the ADF realistically "is never going to be able to be in that position to defend our vital interests".
"That's capabilities like mine warfare, ballistic missile defence," she said. "There is a need to address these capabilities, which means more money."
While increased spending is the "main handbrake" to Australia acquiring the military capability it needs, she said it's not the only answer.
"There are [also] processes, structural issues and workforce issues."
What has the Coalition said?
In his budget reply, Opposition leader Peter Dutton said the Coalition will announce a "significant funding commitment to defence" during the election campaign.
So far, the Coalition has pledged an initial $3 billion to add a fourth squadron — some 28 aircraft — to the nation's F-35A fleet. If elected, it said it would aim to begin delivering the aircraft within the next five years.
Opposition leader Peter Dutton said in his budget reply that the Coalition will announce a "significant funding commitment to defence" this election campaign. Source: AAP / Lukas Coch
In comments widely reported by local media, Trump's pick for head of policy at the US defence department, Elbridge Colby, last month called for Australia's spending to rise to at least 3 per cent of GDP.
Speaking on Thursday, after Trump announced a "historic" executive order introducing "reciprocal" tariffs on countries throughout the world, Dutton hinted at Australia's critical minerals and defence relationship being a bargaining chip to see these dropped.
"We have enormous capacity to contribute to the United States in a very uncertain time and providing assurances in relation to their surface fleet and subsurface fleet — all that is something that Australia brings to the table," he told reporters.
Asked about whether Australia should leverage its military cooperation with the US, Parker said the tariffs should be kept in perspective.
"It would be dangerous ground to start trading off the defence elements of the relationship for tariffs," she said.
"We've got to keep in perspective that US exports are a small proportion of our economy, and our defence and national security is fundamentally underpinned — and has been since 1951 — by our alliance with the US."
Is GDP an effective marker?
Parker said GDP can be a useful metric to compare spending levels — particularly the "historic" investment touted by the government last year. But she argues spending isn't at record highs relative to GDP.
When it comes to how much we should spend, she said: "I think the way we should think about that is, what are the capabilities that we need? Where are the gaps and how much is it going to cost?"
In contrast, Palazzo believes Australia "could probably spend less than what is on the planning curve right now".
He argues the government should "think differently" and adopt a "strategic defensive philosophy" that would involve focusing "all our assets at protecting Australia".
