Australia has unveiled the largest strategic shift in its navy posture for the reason that second world conflict to adapt to China’s navy build-up within the area and the “rise of the missile age”.

The Defence Spending Assessment, Australia’s largest navy strategic overhaul in many years, warned that the emergence of “main energy strategic competitors” within the Indo-Pacific had altered the nation’s strategic circumstances.

“Now not is our alliance companion, the US, the unipolar chief of the Indo-Pacific. Intense China-United States competitors is the defining characteristic of our area and our time,” the report mentioned.

“China’s navy build-up is now the most important and most bold of any nation for the reason that finish of the second world conflict,” mentioned the report, which was written by Angus Houston, the previous head of Australia’s defence pressure, and former defence minister Stephen Smith. It warned that the rivalry between the US and China “has the potential to threaten our pursuits, together with the potential for battle”.

Alongside the Aukus settlement, a trilateral defence partnership with the US and UK centred on nuclear-powered submarines, the overview is a part of a significant Australian authorities effort to overtake its navy technique and capabilities.

The report was commissioned by the Labor authorities, which was elected a 12 months in the past and had criticised an inefficient and disjointed strategy to navy spending and procurement over the previous decade.

The overview discovered that the character of the risk to Australia — which has lengthy relied on its geographic remoteness as a pure defence — had modified within the age of bettering missile know-how.

“The rise of the ‘missile age’ in fashionable warfare, crystallised by the proliferation of long-range precision strike weapons, has radically lowered Australia’s geographic advantages, the consolation of distance and our qualitative regional functionality edge,” it mentioned.

Richard Marles, defence minister and deputy prime minister of Australia, mentioned the nation’s defence posture was “not match for function” and required the armed forces to reshape their strategy.

Marles detailed plans to strengthen bases within the north of the nation and to enhance Australia’s deadly projection and long-range strike capabilities to guard its shoreline, commerce routes and pursuits within the area.

Sam Roggeveen, director of the Lowy Institute think-tank’s worldwide safety programme, mentioned the language within the report concerning “anti-access/space denial capabilities” confirmed that the Australian authorities had adopted phrases usually related to China’s strategic strategy.

He mentioned that though the rise of precision and hypersonic missiles raised considerations about Australia’s vulnerability, the price of such weapons meant the nation retained a pure safety benefit. “Distance remains to be Australia’s biggest defensive asset,” he mentioned.

The federal government additionally launched a “brief, sharp overview” of its maritime navy necessities following the Aukus deal. That overview might lead to a smaller variety of Hunter class frigates in-built South Australia by BAE Methods if it recommends that nuclear-powered submarines be complemented by smaller ships.

Marles mentioned it will not threaten Australia’s plans to reinvigorate its shipbuilding business in Adelaide and Perth.

The intention of the report is for Australia to have a extra built-in defence pressure, together with house and cyber capabilities, centered on probably the most severe contingencies.

The defence pivot is anticipated to price A$19bn (US$12.7bn) over the subsequent 4 years, although virtually A$8bn of funding will come from venture cancellations or revisions. Current plans to acquire 450 infantry autos from German and South Korean contractors have instantly been lowered, as has an order of howitzers.

Roggeveen mentioned the cancelled tasks — which slot in Australia’s conventional defence strategy — highlighted how the brand new stance was centered on denying China the power to dominate the area, which he described as an achievable technique.

“It’s a sign that we’re much less occupied with faraway navy adventures,” he mentioned.