RAND Report on Cyber War with China

In the RAND report "War with China: Thinking Through the Unthinkable" Gompert, Cevallos and  Garafola assume a regional conventional war, using ships, submarines, aircraft, spacecraft and also cyber-war. RAND is a US based think tank, which also has a Canberra Office.

The authors suggest that "Escalating cyberwarfare, while injurious to both sides, could worsen China’s economic problems and impede the government’s ability to control a restive population." (p. xiv). Also that "We also assume that China would not attack the U.S. homeland, except via cyberspace, given China’s minimal capability to do so with conventional weapons." (p. 11) and:

"In the future, cyberwarfare against military, dual-purpose, and civilian systems could figure importantly in a severely intense war. ... Whether with kinetic or nonkinetic (namely, cyber) weapons, the highest targeting priority for China would be U.S. strike platforms, bases, and force concentrations in the region." (p. 19). 

Also the report warns that cyber-attacks could escalate to nuclear war:

"... it is important for the United States to be aware of potentially dangerous ambiguities involved in attacks on targets that the Chinese could regard as strategic: attacks on missile launchers, even if intended only to degrade China’s theater-range missile capabilities; attacks on high-level military C2, even if intended only to degrade China’s conventional-operational capabilities; cyberwarfare attacks on strategic systems;" (p. 30)

The report warns of the cost of cyberwar and the difficulty of preventing it harming civilian systems which support military operations:

"Would both countries not be tempted to crash telecommunications or air-traffic control or energy-distribution systems that support fighting, or interfere with government-service networks?" (p. 49)

What this report fails to address is the effect of deliberate attack and collateral damage on other countries. Cyber-attacks are difficult to confine to one geographic area and will likely effect interconnected international systems and national and local ones well away from the conflict. In addition both sides may well make use of cyber-attacks on third countries, as a way to send a low risk political signal.

Transformation of US Emergency Management

Greetings from a meeting organized by the University of Sydney's "Interoperability for Extreme Events Research Group" (IEERG) where Bob Jensen from Strat3 LLC is speaking on how the transformation of US emergency management after Hurricane Katrina. He pointed out there was little comment after Hurricane Sandy because of the lessons learned from Katrina. The main thrust of this appears to be that the US Government took a more proactive role in preparing for disasters and coordinating state and local resources, rather than just responding afterwards. Bob pointed out this was not just a matter for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

One non-government response to Hurricane Katrina was the establishment of the Sahana Software Foundation in California. Sahana is free open source disaster management software developed in Sri Lanka for the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami. This was then offered world wide for free use in other disasters. Hurricane Katrina showed that software which could be run on the computers in local shelters (typically local schools) would be useful. In response the Foundation was set up to better work with US agencies (I am a member of the foundation).

Bob mentioned the importance of disaster management personnel having current training. This is an issue in Australia,  as the Australian Government announced in 2014 that its Mount Macedon emergency management training campus would close by mid-2015, to save money and be replaced by a Canberra based virtual "Australian Emergency Management Institute". On 12 August 2015, Michael Keenan, Federal Minister for Justice, announced that a "New partnership to deliver emergency management professional development", indicating that the new virtual institute was not in operation and not delivering training. The institute says "accredited training opportunities will be available in late 2015". Given that Australia is on a heightened state of terrorist alert and has recently suffered fatalities from brushfires it is of concern that the Australian government does not have in place emergency management training. The financial cost, let along the human cost of this cost cutting could be considerable.

Australia is fortunate in having formal national qualification standards in emergency management, including:

1. PUA60112: Advanced Diploma of Public Safety (Emergency Management)
2. PUA52312: Diploma of Public Safety (Emergency Management)
3. PUA42712: Certificate IV in Public Safety (Emergency Communications Centre Operations)
4. PUA33012: Certificate III in Public Safety (Emergency Communications Centre Operations)

The highest of these qualifications, the Advanced Diploma of Public Safety (Emergency Management), is offered by ten Registered Training Organizations. One of these is the Attorney-Generals Department Trading as: Australian Emergency Management Institute, AEMI. However, from discussions at the IEERG meeting it appears that the Attorney-Generals Department will no longer be delivering courses and will be instead working with RTOs.

Japan’s Ocean Surveillance of Chinese Submarines

All 162 pages of the book "The Tools of Owatatsumi: Japan’s Ocean Surveillance and Coastal Defence Capabilities" (Desmond Ball and Richard Tanter, ANU Press, 2015), are available free on-line. The book details the undersea and electronic intelligence systems run by Japan and the USA to detect Chinese military activities, particularly submarines. The authors suggest that wile effective this network is vulnerable to attack, leading to possible military escalation and use of nuclear weapons.

However, what the authors do not discuss is ways in which surveillance networks can be made less vulnerable with technological developments. Japan's manned coastal surveillance stations are, by their nature, prominently located along the coast and so vulnerable to attack. However, electronic surveillance can now be undertaken by miniaturized equipment operated by remote control, making it far less visible and vulnerable.

Table of Contents for The Tools of Owatatsumi:

• Preliminary pages
• Frontispiece
• Plates
• Acknowledgements
• Acronyms and Abbreviations

1. Introduction
2. Post-Cold War Intrusions into Japanese Waters
3. The JMSDF’s Ocean Surveillance Architecture
4. The Japanese Ground Self-Defense Force (JGSDF)
5. The Organisation of the JMSDF: The High Command, Fleet Bases and Regional Districts
6. Japanese Undersea Surveillance Systems, 1920–45
7. Technical Developments since 1945
8. US SOSUS Stations
9. JMSDF ELINT/Undersea Surveillance Stations
10. Airborne Ocean Surveillance
11. JMSDF SIGINT Collection and Ocean Surveillance Ships
12. The US Ocean Surveillance Information System (OSIS)
13. The Maritime Safety Agency (MSA)/ Japan Coast Guard (JCG)
14. Assessment of Japan’s Ocean Surveillance Capabilities

• Bibliography

From: Ball, Desmond & Tanter, Richard, (author.) (2015). The tools of Owatatsumi : Japan's ocean surveillance and coastal defence capabilities. Canberra ACT ANU Press. Retrieved from http://press.anu.edu.au/titles/the-tools-of-owatatsumi/

Ambassador's Innovation Roundtable in Canberra

Greetings from the "Ambassador's Innovation Roundtable" at the  Questacon science centre in Canberra. I am not exactly sure what this event is, as I was invited late yesterday (while sitting in a café at ANU). John Berry, U.S. Ambassador to Australia, is giving a welcome address, highlighting US innovations, but saying how they need to look beyond their boarders for innovation. Also present are student from Canberra schools, including those who build UAVs.

Unfortunately this event appears to consist of set piece speeches. This is a mode at odds with the message the event appears to be dedicated to: innovation. Innovation does not happen by someone standing at the front of the room talking, while several hundred people sit and listen. That is a format which universities used to use, but is now obsolete. For education and events, we now give all the attendees the opportunity to participate. The most extreme form of this is an unconference, where the participants decide the topic and get up to speak. It sounds chaotic, but works. I suggest that Australia and the USA's science leaders need to work in this new mode and would benifit from spending some time sitting, listening and learning, from the students.

The audience includes students who take part in UAV Otback Challenge,  a competition sponsored by aerospace companies to design an autonomous robotic aircraft (UAV) which will locate a survivor in the outback and drop a bottle of water to them. The organisations sponsoring this competition are obviously more interested in dropping bombs on terrorists, than water to survivors. So I suggest that the schools involved should take the opportunity to introduce a discussion of the ethics of dual use technology into their participation.

Here is the agenda for today:

Ambassador's Innovation Roundtable Agenda 

"In today's market, innovation is essential for success.... Investment in science, technology, and research is one of the most important guarantees we can make for our future and I believe this is one of the fundamental areas in which we as partners and friends should look to increase our cooperation." -- John Berry, U.S. Ambassador to Australia, National Press Club, June 25, 2014 0830

Participants (100 officials/business reps and 60 students) ...

0900 Opening -- Innovation and the U.S.-Australia Economic Relationship --Welcome by Questacon Director Graham Durant --Intro by U.S. Embassy Economic Counselor Matt Murray --Keynote Remarks by Ambassador Berry --Keynote Remarks by Chief Scientist Professor Ian Chubb --Keynote Remarks by TBC

0935 U.S.-Australia Innovation Success Stories: Business Partnerships Panel Discussion – 45 minutes Moderated by: American Chamber of Commerce Australia CEO Niels Marquardt Panelists: --Maureen Dougherty, President, Boeing Australia --Dr. Terry Stevenson, Chief Technology Officer, Raytheon --Christian Bennett, Vice President, BHP Billiton --Glenn Frankish, Technology Manager, Lockheed Martin --Kirby Anderson, Director of Gov't Affairs, General Electric Australia

1020 Networking -- Coffee & Tea Break (25 mins) 1045 Challenges to Promoting Innovation Cooperation in a Knowledge Economy: Paving the Way from R&D to Commercialization Panel Discussion – 45 minutes Moderated by: U.S. Embassy Economic Officer Mark Krumm Panelists: --Ros Harvey, Director, Sense-T --Dr. Mick Cardew-Hall, Pro Vice-Chancellor, Innovation, ANU --Dr. David Ireland, General Mgr, Int'l & Innovation Systems, CSIRO --Dr. Shiv Kalyanaraman, Chief Scientist, IBM Research Australia --Tim Fawcett, General Manager, Gov't Affairs & Policy, Cisco

1130 Emerging Ideas and Trends in Innovation – SMEs and Entrepreneurs Panel Discussion – 45 minutes Moderated by: Stuart Kohlhagen, Questacon Panelists: --Lindsey Grossman, Senior Manager, Public Policy, Intuit --Alan Noble, Engineering Director, Google --Sarah Vaughan, Director, Developer Experience, Microsoft --Ken Kroeger, CEO, Seeing Machines --Jim Minifie, Director, Productivity Growth Grattan Institute

1215 Closing Remarks & Vote of Thanks --U.S. Embassy Economic Counselor Matt Murray --Questacon Director Graham Durant 1230 Networking Lunch *sandwiches and drinks to be provided to participants in lobby

1330 Small Group of Students and Select Panelists Depart for Questacon Technology Learning Centre -- 60 Denison St., Deakin 1400 Student Forum: STEM Education and Future Opportunities Town Hall-style Moderated Discussion (by special invitation only) Venue: Questacon Technology Learning Centre (QTLC) 60 Denison St., Deakin Moderated by: Natalie Sullivan, Questacon Participants to Include: --U.S. Ambassador John Berry --Ishtar Vij (Google) --Jason Armstrong (Boeing) --Sarah Vaughan (Microsoft) --Katie Ford (Intel) --Mike Lovell (Northrop Grumman)

1500 Student Forum Concludes

Include Research and Education in Alliance 21 Conference

The "Australia US Alliance Conference in Canberra Australia-US: The Alliance in an Emerging Asia" ended last night with dinner in the Australian War Memorial (AWM). This was a slightly surreal experience, with a lone piper high up on the the AWM welcoming the delegates. Tables were set up underneath Lancaster Bomber "G" for George. My seat looked out on the bomb load, which was a little disconcerting (presumably these are inert). The harpist was next to a field gun. We all stood for the arrival of the Governor General and for the singing of the Australian and US national anthems by an opera singer.

The most useful part of the conference was a discussion at dinner with one of the students of the United State Studies Centre, who is on their way to study international relations in China. I suggest the organiser should reformat the next conference to allow for delegates to hear from researchers and students. This years conference had all the time devoted to politicians, senior academics and lobbyists. I suggest limiting speaking time for such "leaders" to one third of the event and devote a third to hearing about actual research and a third to hearing about educational initiatives and from the students.

Asymmetric Arms Race in Asia

The last session of the "Australia US Alliance Conference in Canberra Australia-US: The Alliance in an Emerging Asia" conference in Canberra today raised the issue of the current arms race under-way in East Asia  (streamed live online). One of the panellists suggested that when China has sufficient aircraft carriers it will use them to enforce its claims to territory in the East China Sea and this will cause difficulties for the USA's management of security in Asia. This assumes that China can learn to operate and protect the carriers, but if it can, there may be no role for the USA in managing security in Asia. It should be noted that Japan, South Korea and other countries in the region are building various small helicopter carriers and submarines, so China's role will not be undisputed. It may be in contrast that the USA's larger warships are not nimble enough to operate in this environment. While the US has a powerful military force, the loss of even one large carrier would be a significant military and political setback. In future conflicts it may not be clear who is attacking who, leaving the notionally stronger force unable to respond meaningfully. In this environment small carriers and conventional submarines may be more useful than large nuclear powered ones.

Renewable Energy in China and The US-Australian Alliance

Tanya Plibersek, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs is the first to mention renewable energy at the "Australia US Alliance Conference in Canberra Australia-US: The Alliance in an Emerging Asia" conference in Canberra today  (streamed live online). She pointed out that China has made renewable energy a priority. This made an interesting contrast to previous speakers at the conference who emphasised the effect of coal seam gas on energy exports from Australia and the USA. These speakers appeared to assume that China and other countries would be markets for Australian and US gas exports. However, it may be that Coal (particularly when used more efficiently with technology from CSIRO) will be sufficient while renewable energy production is expanded, supplemented by indigenous gas production.

Australian Higher Education as an Export

The "Australia US Alliance Conference in Canberra Australia-US: The Alliance in an Emerging Asia" conference in Canberra (streamed live online) has got onto the topic of education. One of the panel commented that while the USA has some excellent universities, the lower end of their institutions have problems. They also commented that Australia has quality education at the lower level and also high completion rates. There were concerns expressed about high Australian costs making our higher education sector less competitive and we have a lack of ICT and language students. This discussion was interesting but seemed to lack awareness of the e-learning revolution currently overtaking education. The discussion was a little like one about the cost of horse drawn wagons just as motor vehicles where about to render them obsolete.

There are some universities which have started making the change in the way education is provided. As an example, I have been teaching international masters students online at the Australian National University since 2009. More recently I have proposed teaching Chinese and Australian students online together.

Cloud Computing in Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiations

After lunch I was starting to doze off at the "Australia US Alliance Conference in Canberra Australia-US: The Alliance in an Emerging Asia" conference in Canberra (streamed live online). However, there was mention of "Cloud Computing" in Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations. Cloud computing allows data and processing to be provided online from a remote data centre. This is technically relatively easy to do with today's reliable fibre optic telecommunications and standards. However, it creates considerable regulatory issues. As an example, many government agencies and companies are subject to privacy rules. It may be easy and cheap to store your client's data in another country, but if that country does not have compatible privacy laws, it may be illegal. This applies not just to governments, but to banks, other financial institutions, universities, schools and other organisations.

In addition to the law the actual practises in countries need to be considered. As an example, there have been concerns over security agencies accessing data in US systems. The US government's response has been to reassure their citizens that these measures are targeting foreigners. However, those foreigners include the Australian government and citizens. Another example that Hong Kong has its own data protection laws, but their laws are subject to Chinese government security concerns. It therefore has to be assumed that data stored in cloud services hosted in Hong King and the USA will be read by both the US and Chinese governments.

Part of the discussion I found bizarre at the conference was that the Uber Taxi Application was discussed as a point of contention in international trade negotiations. It seemed odd that this very small application would be worth discussing in such negotiations. A far more significant issue would be trade protection for the manufacture of ships. The USA uses safety and security regulations to limit access to its markets for foreign shipyards. In return Australia has generous subsidies for Australian shipyards (although the current Australian government has made moves to buy more warships overseas).

Shale Gas Priority for US Australian Alliance

Julie Bishop, Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs, spent much of her speech at the "Australia US Alliance Conference in Canberra" today detailing the USA's technological, industrial and economic prowess. However, some of the claims made do not stand up to close scrutiny.

The minister mentioned the remarkable devlopment of shale gas in the USA and its rapidly reducing the country's dependence on imported oil. However, the minister did not mention problems with shale gas, including its the greenhouse gas contribution. This may limit or even reverse the expansion of the gas use.

Also, the Minister pointed out that the USA was the only country to have landed people on the moon. However, she did not mention that the USA currently has no capability to put personnel in orbit. The USA is currently dependent on Russia for access the the International Space Station. The only other country with manned space capability is China (with Russian derived technology). The USA's commercial space developments have the potential to again overtake other nations space development in the next few years, but that is in the future.

The Minister also mentioned US/Australian cooperation on cyber-security, but without detailing what resources are devoted to this effort. In my view, not only the rhetoric, but money and people needed to be devoted to cyber-security, cyber-warfare and information warfare.

Australia US Alliance Conference in Canberra

Greetings from the conference "Australia US Alliance Conference in Canberra Australia-US: The Alliance in an Emerging Asia" being held in Canberra today (and streamed live online). The conference was opened by John Berry, United States Ambassador to Australia. Also speaking will be Julie Bishop, Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs, David Johnston, Minister for Defence, Tanya Plibersek, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs, as well as assorted generals and former generals.

I am not quite sure why I received an invitation to this event (it is unlikely to be due to my proposal for equipping the Australian LHD ships with F-35B aircraft). The conference covers Asia in relation to energy and advanced manufacturing and I have a little to do with that teaching engineering and computing students from Asia and North America as well as Australia. In August I will be presenting a proposal for Chinese and Australian students to be trained together online.
.

Ambassador Berry mentioned the upcoming G20 meeting in Australia.  John E. Ruthrauff, talked on the G20 Summit at ANU yesterday.  Ambassador Berry also mentioned the Gladstone LNG project, funded by the USA and China, which he described as an example of cooperation an leadership between their countries.However, that project has been controversial, due to environmental concerns over the port development and the questionable climate change effect of LNG.

Daniel R. Russel, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, US Department of State mentioned tensions between China and other nation several times in his presentation.

The organisers of the  conference have invited Tweeting with hashtag #Alliance21 and the event is being streamed and some speakers are by video-conference from the USA.  However, apart from that the event is relatively low-tech and very highly structured. This contrasts with the high-tech events I attend which have the technology more integrated and are more interactive and fluid. I suggest that event organisers need to incorporate some un-conference features to make the events more interesting and productive.

The same online working approach is also one which the US and Australian defence forces are yet to learn. The Internet is now a primary field for warfare, both in terms of direct cyber-warefare, attacking systems online and in terms of propaganda campaigns. Wars can now be lost by not defending online systems and by not being able to present a credible online threat to deter attack. Wars can also be lost by not being able to present the appropriate perceptions via social media. Worryingly other nations have shown more interest in cyber-warfare and even small terrorist organisations have shown greater ability to use the Internet to further their views online than have the USA and Australia. I helped put an Australian military exercise online in 1995 and a joint US Australian Exercise online in 1997. Australia's ability to use the Internet to further strategic interests does not appear to have expanded appreciably in the following decade. I asked Major General Richard L. Simcock, II (Deputy Commander, US Marine Corps Forces, Pacific) about this and he responded that "cyber information warfare is the critical battle space of today".

---

Program

0830 MC INTRODUCTION Mr John Barron
WELCOME
Professor Bates Gill, Chief Executive Officer, the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney
The Honourable John Berry, United States Ambassador to Australia

0845 KEYNOTE VIAVIDEO LINK
Mr Daniel R. Russel, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, US Department of State
Introduced by Professor Bates Gill
0915 Major General Richard L. Simcock, II, Deputy Commander, US Marine Corps Forces, Pacific
Introduced by The Honourable Robert Hill AC

0945 RESOURCES AND ENERGY
Keynote address: Mr Roy Krzywosinski
Managing Director, Chevron Australia
Introduced by Mr Tony Wood
1005 Panel discussion
The Honourable Martin Ferguson AM, Director, BG Group/ Chair, Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association Advisory Board
Mr Ian Kemish AM, Strategic Advisor, Asia Pacific, ExxonMobil
Mr Roy Krzywosinski, Managing Director, Chevron Australia
Chair: Mr Tony Wood, Energy Program Director, Grattan Institute

1100 MORNING TEA

1115 KEYNOTE
The Honourable Julie Bishop MP, Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs
Introduced by Professor Bates Gill

1200 LUNCH

1230 TRADE AND INVESTMENT
Lunch Keynote address: The Honourable Andrew Robb MP, Australian Minister for Trade
Introduced by Professor Geoffrey Garrett
1310 Video address: Ambassador Michael Froman, United States Trade Representative, Executive Office of the President
1315 Panel discussion
Mr Grant Aldonas, Principal Managing Director, Split Rock International, Former US Undersecretary for International Trade
Mr Andrew L. Stoler, Consultant, international trade issues and negotiations, Former Deputy Director WTO, Former Executive Director, Institute for International Trade, University of Adelaide
Chair: Professor Geoffrey Garrett, Co-Director Alliance 21, Dean, Australian School of Business, University of NSW, Dean (Designate), The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania

1400 KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY / ADVANCED MANUFACTURING
Video interview:
Mr Jason Miller, Deputy Director, National Economic Council, The White House
Mr Kevin Kolevar, Vice President, Government Affairs and Public Policy, The Dow Chemical Company
Chair: The Honourable Robert Hill AC, Co-Director Alliance 21, Adjunct Professor in Sustainability, US Studies Centre, Former Australian Minister for Defence, Minister for the Environment, Ambassador to the UN
1415 Panel discussion
Mr Innes Willox, Group Chief Executive, Australian Industry Group
Mr John Pollaers, Chief Executive Officer, Pacific Brands, Chair, Advanced Manufacturing Council, Australia
Dr John Daley, Chief Executive Officer, Grattan Institute
Chair: The Honourable Robert Hill AC, Co-Director Alliance 21, Adjunct Professor in Sustainability, US Studies Centre, Former Australian Minister for Defence, Minister for the Environment, Ambassador to the UN

1530 AFTERNOON TEA

1545 POLITICS AND SECURITY IN AN EMERGING ASIA
Keynote address: The Honourable Tanya Plibersek MP, Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs and International Development
Introduced by Professor Russell Trood
1615 Panel discussion
Ambassador Karl Eikenberry, William J. Perry Fellow in International Security at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University, former US Ambassador to Afghanistan, retired US Army Lt. General
Mr Douglas H. Paal Vice President for Studies, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Former Director of the American Institute in Taiwan, former Senior Director for Asian Affairs and Special Assistant to the President, US National Security Council
Mr Allan Gyngell AO, Former Director-General, Office of National Assessments, Australia
Lieutenant General Peter Leahy, National Security Institute, University of Canberra, Former Chief of the Australian Army
Chair: Professor Russell Trood, School of Government and International Relations, Griffith University, Adjunct Professor, Defence and Security Program, US Studies Centre, Former Liberal Senator for Queensland

1715 CLOSE
Professor Bates Gill, Chief Executive Officer, the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney

1745 DEPART FOR AUSTRALIAN WAR MEMORIAL

DINNER WITH GUEST OF HONOUR THE GOVERNOR-GENERAL HIS EXCELLENCY GENERAL THE HONOURABLE SIR PETER COSGROVE AK MC (Retd)
Australian War Memorial

1800 DRINKS RECEPTION
1845 GUESTS SEATED
1910 PROFESSOR BATES GILL, Chief Executive Officer, the United States Studies Centre
Entrees served
1925 THE GOVERNOR-GENERAL, HIS EXCELLENCY GENERAL THE HONOURABLE SIR PETER COSGROVE AK MC (RETD)
1930 THE HONOURABLE DR BRENDAN NELSON, Director, Australian War Memorial
Mains served
1950 SENATOR THE HONOURABLE DAVID JOHNSTON
Minister for Defence and Senator for Western Australia, also officially representing the Honourable Tony Abbott MP, Prime Minister of Australia
2010 THE HONOURABLE ROBERT HILL AC, Co-Director Alliance 21, Adjunct Professor in Sustainability, US Studies Centre, Former Australian Minister for Defence, Minister for the Environment, Ambassador to the UN
2015 END OF FORMAL SPEECHES
Dessert served
2130 FINISH

Are US Drone Strikes Legal?

Professor Steven Ratner, University of Michigan Law School and Shahzad Akbar, Barrister, Foundation of Fundamental Rights (FFR) Pakistan, will discuss "Drone strikes, US policy and the law", at the Australian National University College of Law, in Canberra, 2 August 2013.

Steven Ratner: The United States government has offered a legal theory for the use of drones based primarily on the jus ad bellum concept of self-defense as well as jus in bello concepts of distinction and proportionality. The US position, now elaborated in a formal paper by the Obama Administration, combines traditional doctrines and new ideas. I will examine whether that policy is and should be the basis for a new set of legal regulations on drone warfare.

Shahzad Akbar: The United States government has been conducting drone strikes within the sovereign territory of Pakistan since 2004, in breach of a plethora of international and domestic laws. According to independent sources, these drone strikes have caused a large number of civilian casualties including those of women and children. I will discuss the impact of drone warfare on civilians in Pakistan and outline the various strategies adopted by the victims to seek redress.

Australia Aopting USA STEM Plan

Professor Ian Chubb, Australian Chief Scientist, issued a National Science, Technology, National Engineering and Mathematics Strategy Discussion Paper, 21 June 2013. The wording of the paper sounded familiar to me, but I could find no sources cited in the paper. A web search using words from the paper identified the Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education 5-Year Strategic Plan, from the US National Science and Technology Council, May 2013. Adopting existing plan from the USA is a valid strategy for Australia, but if that is the intention, it would be best this was made clear.

I suggest that the priority should be placed on how to implement such strategies. In 1998 I was part of an Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering exercise to prepare a strategy for the development of research in information technology (IT) in Australia over 10-15 years. That strategy lead, in part, to an investment of around $1B in NICTA. But preparing the strategy was the easy bit. ;-)

What Should We Do About China?

Greetings from the Australian National University in Canberra, where Admiral Dennis C. Blair (USN Retired) is speaking on "What should we do about China?".  Admiral Blair started by saying he would later speak about the "young man"  Edward Snowden (who allegedly leaked intelligence from the NSA). However, he then returned to the advertised topic, saying that "China is so large and diverse you can find evidence to support any assertion about it". The task, he suggested, was to find what was most significant. He characterized China's leadership as driven by domestic issues and what is in China's interest, not some rigid ideology. However issues such as the sovereignty of Taiwan remain. Admiral Blair asserted that countries in the region need to be thing about what to do about the Taiwan issue.

Admiral Blair said that China's ambitions would expand as its economic and military power increases. He asserted that China's ballistic missiles were intended to intimidate nations which might wish to intervene over Taiwan. He further said that China's aircraft carriers were more for show than military use. This seemed to me to be a bit glib. China's first aircraft carrier (Shi Lang), is clearly a learning exercise. With its spacecraft, China has shown it can adapt and improve on existing technology obtained from other countries. China now has a operational spacecraft, the Shenzhou, while the USA has none.

Admiral Blair was the co-chair of the Commission on the theft of American intellectual property, which reported in May 2013 for the National Bureau of Asian Research.

At question  time one of the audience took the Admiral Blair to task about the USA's condescending attitude to China. He conceded in reply that there tended to be a "dialogue of the deaf" with both countries tending to state positions, rather than having a genuine dialogue.

In answer to another question Admiral Blair suggested that international treaties to limit weapons in space and cyber-warfare were possible. I suspect that the prospects for cyber-warfare controls are limited.

In the last few months ANU has hosted a series of talks by Australian and US strategic experts about regional issues including the South China Sea. It would be interesting to hear the views of their Chinese counterparts and others in Asia.

ps: The ANU Strategic & Defence Studies Centre has a Centre of Gravity Series of papers.

Alliances under austerity: what does America want?

Greetings from University House at the Australian National University in Canberra, where Dr Bates Gill, CEO of the US Studies Centre is speaking on "Alliances under austerity – what does America want?". Dr Gill said it was a delight to spend time learning more about the Australian end of the relationship with the USA. He has spent three decades writing on strategic issues in the Asian region, with numerous books.

The public perception is that US defense spending is declining, whereas that of China, India and other Asian countries is increasing. Dr Gill pointed out that defense spending has been declining in western countries over the last few years, But over ten years, defense spending is still high by historical standards. Australia and Korea have increased spending, whereas there has been a decline in Europe.

Dr Gill  pointed out there was a more diffuse threat environment. He suggested that the USA wanted more flexibility and independence from its allies. He suggested that this predates the global financial crisis. He suggested the framework for security should be broadened to include cultural engagement(seems a good idea to me as the USA on its own has not been good at winning hearts and minds).

In my view what seemed to be missing from Dr Gill's  analysis was they type of soft diplomacy used by China, with a combination of very targeted aid and economic investment. On a visit to Samoa, I noticed that the US Peace Corps office was being guarded by local staff wearing Chinese People's Liberation Army caps.

While on a visit to Sri Lanka recently, I was surprised to find the hotel full of US military officers there for a Multinational Communication Interoperability Programme workshop. Down the coast, China funded the Port of Hambantot which has strategic implications.

Dr Gill suggested more prepositioning of US equipment in the Asian region would be needed. This is a somewhat controversial issue in Australia, with a recent article in  Online Opinion magazine asking "Is Central Australia the geostrategic centrepiece in the USA's new look east policy?".

Dr Gill suggested  the USA wanted to engage China in ways which both assure and deter. He said this would be "tricky".


I suggest that Australia needs to be clear on what it wants from the relationship and what it needs to contribute and the limits of USA's capabilities. As an example, it appears that Australia is planning to build 12 long range, very large, conventional submarines, for the Collins Class Submarine Replacement Project. Essentially Australia will attempt to build conventional submarines using technology from the USA's nuclear boats. There are both strategic and practical difficulties with this approach.

If larger replacements for the Collins Class Submarines can be built, they will be integrated into the US submarine strategic forces. This may involve Australia in wars far from its shores, preempting Australian political decisions. This could result in Australia being the target of retaliation using strategic weapons, as a way for the USA's opponents to send it a message.

The USA has no recent experience of building conventional submarines and Australia has a poor record of building such submarines. It is almost certain that the project will result in the underwater equivalent of the failed US Zumwalt Class Destroyer project. Australia will spend  billions of dollars and after more than a decade have, at best, one operational submarine. An alternative strategy would have European built submarines of a proven design, which will protect Australia, rather than project power.


One issue Dr Gilldid not address is cyber-warfare. China is reported to be heavily investing in this area, partly because it is cost effective. So perhaps the USA and Australia should be investing more in this area. Australia regularly hosts military exercises, where Australian, US and other forces practice. Some of these are "staff" exercises, run in an office with no real weapons, others have ships, aircraft, vehicles and tens of thousands of personnel. Alongside this can be cyber-war games. At present this is seen in Australia and the USA as a secretive practice for a very small number of personnel. I suggest a change of view is needed, to where it is seen as a mainstream activity, which many personnel will be involved in, alongside civilian security agencies, police, industry and academia. It needs to be realized that the most potent cyber-weapons are civilian systems, not military ones (just as civilian aircraft and ships are taken up for military use during mobilization).

In this lecture, Dr Bates Gill, CEO of the US Studies Centre brings his considerable expertise of American policymaking to bear to examine how the effects of the global financial crisis and American budget crunch are changing the United States’ alliance relationships. As part of the US ‘pivot’ to Asia, Washington will have new expectations, requests and demands of its key allies, including Australia. How will financial decisions affect US strategy? Will this mean Australia has to share a higher security burden or could it lead to an increased voice and influence for Australia in shaping the US approach to the Asia-Pacific.

Dr Bates Gill commenced as CEO of the US Studies Centre in October 2012 after a five year appointment as the Director of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. He previously led major research programmes at public policy think tanks in Washington, DC (Brookings Institution and Center for Strategic and International Studies) and in Monterey, California (Monterey Institute of International Studies). He has also served as a consultant to US companies, foundations, and government agencies, especially with regard to their policies in Asia. He received his PhD in foreign affairs from the University of Virginia, and, in addition to his experience in the USA, has lived and worked for lengthy periods in France, Switzerland, Sweden, and China.

US, Australian UK Naval Interoperability for the Next War

Greetings from the Australian National University in Canberra, where Steven Paget is speaking on "The Special Relationship at Sea: Naval Gunfire Support Interoperability during the Korean, Vietnam and Iraq Wars". He mentioned problems with access to the US Secure Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet) during the second Iraq war. The problem was that the network was not compartmentalized, limiting the access which non-nationals could have. This was corrected by creating a separate network, but the UK and USA tended to miss out on some information sent over SIPRNet. It occurred to me that not only to the nations navies require compatibility with each other, but with other forces of their own and each other countries. Not all ships in warfare are operated by the navy. There are ships operated by coastguards, the army, reserves, the army and civilian contractors. In previous times these ships were not considered combatants and were assumed to be kept safely in the rear. But just as a front line is less clear in modern land warfare it will be less clear in future naval warfare. Also navies will need to cooperate with forces they do not entirely trust. In the case of Australia,  the RAAF are purchasing US aircraft with minimal customization, providing good interoperability. However, the RAN is purchasing Spanish ships with a mix of European and US weapons systems, which will make interoperability more complex. Also the two new RAN two Canberra Class Landing Helicopter Dock ships (LHDs) will create complex issues. These ships are purpose designed for amphibious assault in the littoral zone, transporting, supporting the Australian Army and acting as the flag ships for support vessels. 

One of hallmarks of modern naval operations – from the 1991 Gulf War to ongoing anti-piracy operations in the Gulf of Aden – is the formation of multi-national task forces to pursue common interests. In particular, the navies of Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom have a long history of operating together which continues to this day. This trend is set to continue given the reduction in fleet sizes worldwide, which may see allied nations seeking to build complimentary force elements that can produce combined capabilities.

In this public lecture, Steven Paget will explore the cooperation between the Royal Australian Navy, the United States Navy and the Royal Navy in the provision of naval gunfire support to operations ashore in the conflicts in Korea, Vietnam and Iraq. These historical case studies will open a window on the broader issue of interoperability between the three navies and assess the effectiveness of their efforts to work together, and what lessons can be learned for future operations.

Steven Paget is a graduate of St Andrews University and a doctoral student in the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at ANU. In 2012 he was awarded the Royal United Services Institute of Australia’s Leo Mahony Scholarship to support the research on which this lecture is based.

Lessons for Public Education from a US For-profit University

"The Idea of the Digital University: Ancient Traditions, Disruptive Technologies and the Battle for the Soul of Higher Education" by Frank Bryce McCluskey and Melanie Lynn Winter (2012) is a book which is thought provoking, but does not quite live up to the subtitle's promise of "Ancient Traditions, Disruptive Technologies and the Battle for the Soul of Higher Education".

The authors describe the traditional university, with the professor as a sole practitioner, with no formal training in education, teaching in an isolated classroom of students, year in year out. They discuss the push for on-line education and performance indicators threating this professor. The author's solution appears to be some sort of hybrid system, where the professor accepts a form of team teaching with their colleagues and some  monitoring by professional administrators, but with the academics retaining control of the curriculum.

While the authors start with the idea of a university in ancient Greece, the Library of Alexandra and medieval universities of Europe, the quickly jump to higher education in the USA. The point that the US university is strongly influenced by the German model of 200 years ago is well made. But much has happened with universities in Europe and elsewhere outside of the USA in the last 200 years, which the authors do not address.

The book is from a very narrow perspective: academics involved in a US for-profit US university, suggesting how the US university system can be improved . This book is really about what the "American Public University System" (which is a for-profit company, not a public system), can teach the US state based non-profit universities. The book has some points which may be of global interest, but with insufficient detail.

The description of the European universities of pure centers of learning uninterested in profit seems to not accord with reality. Institutions such as Cambridge University have been making money from their intellectual output and inventions for hundreds of years. Also tutoring was a private for-profit business at Oxbridge for hundreds of years.

The authors also seem to have skipped over significant non-US distance education institutions, such as the UK Open University, which has adapted its techniques from paper and post, through TV to the Internet.

The issue of inclusiveness is an important one covered by the authors. They point out that the metrics on student completion used to measure the effectiveness of universities assume students enroll, study and complete at one institution. Universities which cater for students who would not previously been able to attend university, such as military personnel who are moved so often they can't maintain a program at one physical campus, either rate badly on the conventional measures or are excluded from them.

While an interesting read, there are some problems with the structure of The Idea of the Digital University". The very short chapters are written in a style which reminds me of "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" (which is also about the nature of education in the USA). The numerous summaries are repetitive (I am sure I read some sentence at least three times). There also appear to be some problems with the Index, referring to incorrect page numbers.

Australian and US Naval Gunfire Off Korea

Steven Paget, will speak on "The Special Relationship at Sea: Naval Gunfire Support Interoperability during the Korean, Vietnam and Iraq Wars", at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University in Canberra, 6pm 17 April 2013:

One of hallmarks of modern naval operations – from the 1991 Gulf War to ongoing anti-piracy operations in the Gulf of Aden – is the formation of multi-national task forces to pursue common interests. In particular, the navies of Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom have a long history of operating together which continues to this day. This trend is set to continue given the reduction in fleet sizes worldwide, which may see allied nations seeking to build complimentary force elements that can produce combined capabilities.

In this public lecture, Steven Paget will explore the cooperation between the Royal Australian Navy, the United States Navy and the Royal Navy in the provision of naval gunfire support to operations ashore in the conflicts in Korea, Vietnam and Iraq. These historical case studies will open a window on the broader issue of interoperability between the three navies and assess the effectiveness of their efforts to work together, and what lessons can be learned for future operations.

Steven Paget is a graduate of St Andrews University and a doctoral student in the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at ANU. In 2012 he was awarded the Royal United Services Institute of Australia’s Leo Mahony Scholarship to support the research on which this lecture is based.

Summary of US e-Learning Trends

The report "Changing Course: Ten Years of Tracking Online Education in the United States" by I. Elaine Allen and Jeff Seaman (Babson Survey Research Group) was released in January 2013. An Infographic of Changing Course: Ten Years of Tracking Online Education in the United States is now available. It is an excellent summary of the full report.

In brief, US senior academics see MOOCs as a useful way to attract students and give them a taste of e-learning, but problematic as part of a formal program. Online learning is seen as strategic and more than half of senior academics see it as equal or superior to classroom teaching, but perceive a lack of acceptance by teaching staff as a barrier to adoption.

One reason for lack of enthusiasm by teaching staff was the staff time taken up by online teaching, with staff almost evenly divided as to if it takes more or less time than classroom teaching.  In my view this reflects the inadequate training and materials some staff receive for online courses. I will be discussing some of these issues in "MOOCs with Books" in Colombo at the end of April and at other locations in Australia, and the region.

Student Loans

As someone from outside the USA I find the discussion of the “gainful employment” regulations made by the U.S. Department of Education a little hard to understand. As I understand it, the US government provides low interest student loans to students to study, much like Australia and other countries. These loan schemes are frequently controversial, with issues of if students take on more than they will be able to repay.

In "Now What?" (Inside Higher ED, March 21, 2013), Paul Fain writes that U.S. Department of Education “gainful employment” regulations,have been struck down by a court. The regulations were to measure performance of vocational programs in education institutions. One measure was the percentage of graduates repaying their loans. This seems a curious measure to use and one a court might well strike out, as the educational institution would have little say on if its graduates pay their loans or not. It would be reasonable to see if the courses provided a qualification in a job category in demand, what the rate of employment of graduates was and how much their salary went up. However, such measures are used in Australia only to provide potential students with information when choosing courses, it is left to the students to decide what courses to take.

As an example, here are the statistics for Computer Science graduates from the Australian National University (where I teach),  as reported by the Australian Government's "My University" website:

Overall satisfaction rate (opens in a new window)	79.2%
Good Teaching Scale (opens in a new window)	45.8%
Generic Skills Scale (opens in a new window)	85.4%

Graduate Outcomes (Average of 2009 to 2011)

Graduate Outcomes (Average of 2009 to 2011)	Value
Graduates in full time employment (opens in a new window)	77.9%
Graduates in full time study (opens in a new window)	9.6%
Median graduate salary (opens in a new window)	$54,000

The ANU rates well, except on the "Good Teaching Scale (45.8%). Staff have been encouraged to get trained in the latest education techniques and make full use of technology, to improve teaching and I have found this works Even before finishing the ANU's certificate in Higher Education, my student satisfaction scores increased, after applying what I learned on the program. I discuss some of what can be done, in "MOOCs with Books".