Australia should begin setting up a marine corps to tackle any potential conflict in the Indo-Pacific where amphibious warfare could take centre stage, according to a defence industry expert.
Lincoln Parker, chair of the Liberal Party’s Defence and National Security Policy Branch, said Australia could learn from Japan and the United States in setting up the fourth branch of its armed forces.
“The next conflicts for Australia are not going to be in the Middle East on vast deserts and flat lands, or in Europe like World War II. It’s going to be more like our campaigns in the Pacific in World War II,” Parker, who has 20 years’ experience in defence research and technology, told The Epoch Times.
The Australian Defence Force (ADF), which consists of an army, air force, and navy, was “not very effective” for the oceans and islands of the Indo-Pacific, he added.
“A marine corps is an amphibious operational unit that can operate across the maritime environment and project force effectively,” he said. “If you look at our region of the world, they’re full of Pacific islands, all the way around Australia and up through the South China Sea, and that’s where—if China’s aggression continues on its current trajectory—we will need to operate.”
Parker said the U.S. Marine Corps had completely changed its doctrine to adjust to fighting in the region and to contend with ongoing aggression from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
“They got rid of all their tanks, their capital equipment, and focused on asymmetric warfare, with small fighting units with short and medium-range missiles that can be deployed across islands,” he said. “And that’s what we need to do.”
U.S. marines already carry out regular rotations in Australia’s northern base around Darwin—a resource that could be used to help instruct and train a marine force, Parker said.
The military expansion has been a major policy focus for the Morrison government over the past few years amid increasing tensions in the region.
“If push came to shove and we could free up a lot of money by not having tanks—or not as many tanks—then that’s the route I would go,” Parker said.
Concerns have also been raised over the delivery of Australia’s new frigates and submarines (slated 10–15-year delivery times) and “capability gaps”—the gap between the introduction of new hardware, and when old hardware is retired.
“After a production line of six defence ministers in this government—and two goes at landing on a (submarine) model—we now have no contract for any submarine, and a looming submarine-shaped capability gap,” he said.
Parker expressed similar concerns saying the government needed to do everything to ensure Australia was not vulnerable.
“We need submarines. Are there possibilities for us to lease or buy off-the-shelf?” he said. “There are a bunch of Los Angeles-class submarines (in the U.S. Navy) due to be retired or refitted.”
“Could we do a deal with the Americans whereby we lease one of their submarines—they crew half of it, and we crew the other half so we can get trained up? Then we have one or two LA-class submarines operating out of Australia,” he added.
“I think it would provide us with capability in a much shorter amount of time and at least have our adversaries thinking twice.”
