Australia at a Strategic Crossroads: Key Insights from Peter Jennings
As the Middle East witnesses unprecedented upheaval with Israel’s ongoing strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities, veteran defense analyst Peter Jennings warns that Australia risks being left behind as a new strategic order emerges under President Trump’s leadership.
In a recent article published in The Australian and on the Strategic Analysis Australia website, Peter Jennings provided a very interesting analysis of the evolving global strategic situation and the challenges posed for the evollution of Australia’s own policies.
Jennings identifies what he calls the “Trump Doctrine” – a fundamental shift from traditional U.S. military strategy. Unlike previous administrations where Washington drove strategic objectives while allies provided supporting roles, Trump’s approach demands that allies lead military operations while America provides targeted support.
This doctrine emphasizes several key principles:
- Presidential Authority: Trump maintains sole decision-making power over military use, with even cabinet ministers having limited influence
- Strategic Ambiguity: The President keeps options open until the final moment
- Air Power Focus: Heavy reliance on missiles and air strikes rather than ground forces
- Unconventional Diplomacy: Social media serves as the primary tool for international communication
The implications are profound. As Jennings notes, Trump favors countries that “invest in their own security,” citing Poland, Israel, and the Gulf states as model allies.
The current Iran crisis represents the first major test of this doctrine. With Trump having given Iran 60 days to negotiate and that deadline having passed, the President now faces a critical decision on whether to strike Iran’s deeply buried Fordow nuclear facility – a target only American “bunker-buster” weapons can reach.
Jennings suggests this moment will determine not only Trump’s credibility as commander-in-chief but potentially trigger regime change in Iran. The combination of Israeli military pressure and internal Iranian discontent could create conditions for popular uprising, fundamentally altering Middle Eastern geopolitics.
The analysis highlights Israel’s remarkable military campaign as potentially rewriting warfare textbooks. Israel’s integration of drone operations, cyber warfare, intelligence gathering, and sabotage operations represents a new model of modern conflict that other nations – including potential adversaries – will study and potentially emulate.
This success may establish Israel as the Middle East’s dominant strategic power, potentially reviving the Abraham Accords with Saudi Arabia’s participation.
Most concerning for Australian interests, Jennings identifies three critical failures in Canberra’s approach to the alliance:
- Leadership Avoidance
Prime Minister Albanese’s reluctance to engage directly with Trump – including consideration of “hassling” the President about tariffs at NATO meetings – demonstrates a fundamental misreading of Trump’s character and expectations. The President “has no patience for weakness,” and Albanese’s avoidance strategy risks being interpreted as exactly that.
- Defense Spending Inadequacy
Australia is “comprehensively failing” to meet American expectations on defense investment. While specific GDP targets may be flexible, Australia is clearly not meeting the threshold Trump considers adequate for a serious ally.
- Middle East Policy Misalignment
Australia’s stance toward Israel conflicts with emerging U.S. strategic trends and damages Canberra’s position in Washington precisely when Middle Eastern dynamics are reshaping global alignments.
Perhaps most provocatively, Jennings challenges the Australian Defence Force to ask fundamental questions: “What if our potential enemies operated like Israel? And what if we did?”
He suggests these crucial questions about modern warfare capabilities – offensive cyber operations, long-range drone strikes, integrated intelligence operations – are likely “being held in a bunker deeper than the Fordow uranium centrifuges” if they’re being considered at all.
The convergence of Trump’s alliance expectations, Middle Eastern transformation, and evolving military technologies creates both unprecedented opportunities and serious risks for Australia.
Nations that demonstrate capability and commitment will find favor under the Trump Doctrine; those that don’t risk strategic marginalization.
As Jennings concludes, Australia’s failure to manage its most important relationship “is turning into pure farce” at precisely the moment when “major strategic changes” demand dramatically improved performance.
For Australia, the question isn’t just whether it can adapt to this new strategic environment, but whether it has the political will to make the substantial changes in defense spending, diplomatic engagement, and military capability that effective alliance partnership now requires.
The Trump Doctrine represents more than just a change in American foreign policy – it’s a fundamental restructuring of how global security partnerships operate.
Australia’s ability to recognize and adapt to this reality may well determine its strategic relevance in the period ahead.