Set for April, the strategy is supposed to set the course for our security, prosperity and standing in the world. Like the Sydney Harbour Bridge, it gets regular touch-ups. But the real question is whether this round of maintenance will strengthen the structure or slap on a thin coat of varnish.
Will the new strategy confront budget realities, speed up reform, and build trust with industry and the public? If it doesn’t, Australia risks another strategy that’s an internal exercise – pored over by officials, but leaving industry uncertain and the public unconvinced.
Same government, same script
The government that delivered Australia’s first National Defence Strategy in 2024 is still at the helm. That means a steady hand on the strategy’s direction: the Indo-Pacific front and centre, the Alliance with the United States the anchor. Recent events have made clear that Washington can jolt the system when it wants and without warning, but the basic point is unchanged: the Alliance isn’t up for grabs. Plus, rewriting the strategic playbook isn’t what this document is for.
So don’t expect a radical reframe. The main issue the strategy will deal with is whether this government can turn continuity into credible action, make decisions that actually deliver capability and regional effect, and spell out the trade-offs required to finance Australia’s security in the years ahead.
The money problem
The Integrated Investment Program (IIP) is the gravitational centre of the strategy. But when the strategy lands, Australians will get the big picture but not the nitty-gritty on dollars, scope or timing.
That’s a problem for Australian industry. It’s hard to plan, invest, or hire when the signals are vague. History suggests that when Defence won’t show the numbers, there aren’t any. Internal pressure is real, and global volatility is tightening the screws even harder. US spending is rising, multilateral ties are thinning, and major power competition is pushing costs up everywhere.
The next IIP will endeavour to break that cycle. Over-programming has become a bad habit and cost blowouts continue to shred credibility. If Defence wants industry to invest, it owes a plan with fewer rubbery numbers, more transparency, and a clear explanation of trade-offs.
Private capital, public need
Even if Defence gets the sums right, the budget won’t be enough in the near term. The ambition and urgency of Defence’s needs far outstrip what public monies can provide. Private capital – super funds, private equity – must be part of the answer.
The government needs to be upfront about how this money will be used (and where it can’t be), what risks are acceptable, and how the national interest will be protected.
Tell the story, earn the support
Bringing in private money won’t work without public trust. Australians are right to question why billions are spent on defence while schools, hospitals and the NDIS face pressure.
The new strategy can’t just defend spending. It needs to explain what defence investment delivers at home: jobs, technology and secure supply chains. And it needs to be clearer about our international partnerships. Australia relies on others for intelligence and technology we can’t generate alone. The government needs to explain that plainly. Better technology, stronger deterrence and more jobs are part of that story. If Defence can’t make that case, it risks losing what little public support it has.
How might the updated strategy take meaningful action?
- Fix the MSP Panel with a tiered contracting system so SMEs get a real shot, not just scraps from the big primes.
- Set aside uncrewed system buys for (truly) local designers and suppliers. Sovereign capability starts here.
- Mandate local content in sustainment for locally based platforms. Not lip service, but hard thresholds that keep jobs and skills in region.
- Unshackle defence tech fast-track funds to push dual-use tech from prototype to deployment. Universities and start-ups tell us they’re ready; government should challenge them to deliver.
Reform that moves
Even with private capital, Defence can’t deliver without reform. It’s not just about buying more equipment or announcing new projects. The real trick is moving from concept to delivery – fast.
This is about simplifying how Defence works at every level: giving leaders the power to make decisions, reducing process steps, building adaptable teams, and rewarding results over process.
Property and people, the perennial headache
Reform also isn’t just about speeding up processes; it’s also about fixing the foundations. Defence’s two biggest headaches, people and property, aren’t going away. The fate of Defence’s vast real estate portfolio is under the microscope. Selling off prime land could unlock billions, but if the process isn’t handled carefully, it risks trading away long-term flexibility for a quick sugar hit.
Just as messy, defence’s workforce is stretched in places and bloated in others. An overhaul is long overdue. The strategy needs to set out how Defence will prioritise people, invest in skills, and create careers that attract and keep talent.
Show us the plan not just the pitch
Defence spending is always under the microscope, but transparency has never been Defence’s strong suit. If the government wants this strategy to be more than another thin announcement, it needs to get practical: set out real timelines, and milestones, and let us see what’s actually happening. Defence doesn’t have to spill every secret, but it does need to show enough to earn trust and drive action.
It all means nothing without delivery
The 2026 National Defence Strategy will be judged by whether it set measured priorities, makes hard choices, and delivers real outcomes fast. Credibility and candour matter – on funding, reform, property, people, and the role of private capital. Above all, the government needs to show that ambition will be matched by delivery. If it does, it’ll be more than a fresh coat of paint
Alexandra Coates, Associate Director in our Defence & National Security team co-authored this article.
