Fireside Chat, Chief of Army Symposium

SUBJECTS: Army transformation and adaptation; ADF integration; Corporal Brendan Hannam

CHIEF OF ARMY, LIEUTENANT GENERAL SUSAN COYLE: Wonderful to have you both here. This is your 20 minutes of grilling from the Chief of Army. Having you both on stage at an Army event like this just reinforces what I know… you already all knew, that Army is your favourite service. 

RICHARD MARLES, ACTING PRIME MINISTER: It’s yours?

CHIEF OF THE AUSTRALIAN DEFENCE FORCE, ADMIRAL MARK HAMMOND: It’s one of my favourites.

MARLES: So, I was asking a number of Army folk in anticipation that we might have a comment of that kind. Do you know what the answer is?

ADMIRAL HAMMOND: I’m sure there’s a million really good answers to that question.

MARLES: Armies win wars that’s what I was told.

LIEUTENANT GENERAL COYLE: I love that. True. So our symposium is about being hardwired for adaptation, so I’d to explore a few threads of that with you, if you would allow me to. We’ll start off with what success in 2030 is going to look like. When I look ahead at 2030, I see an Army that is well advanced in its transformation for adaptation. We see the National Defence Strategy or the next versions of it as our North Star as we adapt and work towards that. I think we’re making great progress on that, and I think we’re doing great. But if we do look ahead to 20-30, what does a successful Australian Army look like to you? And what do you need from the Army between now and then to assure that we get to where you expect us.

MARLES: Well, I think and let me wind back a little bit. The Defence Strategic Review, I think gave us as a country and as a Defence Force, a strategic clarity that we’ve really not had, I think, since the Dib Review in the 19-87 Defence White Paper, as it provided for those times. And not surprisingly, if you are refocusing one’s strategic clarity after that period of time, there’s a lot going to be changed, and there was. Really, what came out of the Defence Strategic Review was an idea that we needed a defence force that could project. And I think, actually – amongst the three services, all of them were touched by the idea of what that might mean for them. But, I do feel Army more than the other two has really had to deal with the burden of change, and let me just say on record I’m very grateful for the efforts that were undertaken by your predecessor Lieutenant General Stuart, and by everyone in Army. It was a lot of change. It is about having an army which is more amphibious, which can get out there. We’re in Perth right now. We will be seeing the building of the Landing Craft Heavy and Medium at Henderson Defence Precinct. I think I’m right in saying that medium will be in the hands of Army by ’28, Heavy is in the hands of Army by ’30. So, it’s kind of in the context of your question. These are transformational pieces of kit, which are going to be not just about having them, but actually learning to work with them and building doctrine around what they then mean in terms of the Army that we have. So I think it is fulfilling the promise of the DSR would be, the short answer to your question about what we want to see in 2030 in respect of Army, noting the particular burden that it asks of Army. But, I think on top of that, what we’ve then seen with the war in Ukraine, the war in the Middle East, is just what feels to me, maybe other generations might say this as well, but what feels to me now like an unbelievably rapid introduction of new technology, drones being the most obvious. You see that in terms of the most recent National Defence Strategy, autonomous systems and drones represented the big change relative to NDS 24. Now that does have implications for all three services, and it actually has very big implications for Navy. But, it definitely does for Army. And so, learning how to operate with those capabilities, and it goes to your first point, Susan, being an adaptable Army which can kind of engage in the process of change as a continuous process which is a big ask. But I think that’s where we need to be as well by the time we get to 2030. So, change is hard. By definition you’re not doing things as you always were. By definition you’re out of your comfort zone. On the other hands it is really exciting. People in this generation in the Army are kind of rewriting what the Army is about and what it can do. I’m very grateful for the way in which that challenge has been embraced.

LIEUTENANT GENERAL COYLE: CDF, before you give us your answer, I just have to add a little bit to my question for you. By the decade, I will be the second largest Chief of Navy in the Southern Hemisphere, so I am calling myself the First Sea Landlord. Over to you.

ADMIRAL HAMMOND: Thank you, Susan. That is one of the reason you are one of my favourite generals in the Australian Defence Force. It’s important to take your job seriously, but never to take yourself too seriously. So, look, what does success in 2030 look like? For starters our strategy of deterrence and denial has succeeded, and that we are still a loving, prosperous nation enjoying all the bounties of security and prosperity. From an Army adaptation perspective just to back in the Acting Prime Minister’s comment about the impact of change that the DSR has led to for Army. For me, it’s an Army that recognises the fight that it’s in, not the one that it might have prepared itself to be in, and is able to adapt at the speed of relevance, recognising that winning comes from a combination of well-being and willpower. And if you have the economic well-being and the physical and mental well-being necessary to continue the fight or to deter the fight, and you have the individual and team willpower to not lose, or to put it in your vernacular – be ready to fight tonight, tomorrow and together, particularly with our allies and partners, then we will have set the foundation for success. I think it’s important that we do not spend too much time contemplating what that fight might look like, with who, against who, for how long, in what context, but to invest in the things we do know, that we can control, which is the delivery of capability through the Integrated Investment Program, but more importantly, the animation of that capability through the courage, the intellect, the determination, and the teamwork of our people.

LIEUTENANT GENERAL COYLE: That’s great thank you. We’re going to move onto the topic of adaptation. So one of the clearest lessons we see in contemporary warfare is that military advantage increasingly belong to the organisation that can adapt the fastest and to deliver that asymmetric advantage. For me though, adaptation begins with people. It requires leaders who encourage initiative. It requires organisations that reward innovation. Acting Prime Minister, we have 57 junior leaders here in the room at the moment who have been a part of what we’re doing this week. Which is why we are about being mission-ready and people-focused. In your interest and your perspectives, what does adaptation mean to each of you? What do you believe most enables or constrains our ability to get after it? And for our ability to adapt at the pace required by the current strategic environment? 

MARLES: So can I ask you, in the context of a command structure, how do you encourage and reward initiative and innovation?

LIEUTENANT GENERAL COYLE: We have very proudly, had bottom-up innovation for decades. We have run expos at unit, brigade and divisional level we give funding and the like, and we have an Army battle lab, we have a remote autonomous wing, we have an experimentation unit in Adelaide. We’re doing it everywhere, and we’re getting even tighter in how we cohere that to make sure we get after it more quickly.

MARLES: That’s a good answer. I think the challenge of being constantly evolving and bringing new technology to the battlefield as quickly as possible is profound. Mark, you talked about the pace of relevance, which is the right phrase to capture what we’re doing here. People in Ukraine talk about this, and people observing Ukraine talk about this. But, in the context of one conflict, one war, I don’t think we have seen such a dramatic shifting in what it actually looks like. You can look at wars past, and there is of course an evolution in technology through the Second World War or the US Civil War. But, what is going on in Ukraine today relative to what was going on in Ukraine back in 2022 it’s just a completely different thing. So, that pace of relevance and getting technologies into operation while at the same time kind of having a command structure in place where people do what they’re told, that needs to be how things operate. But, there also needs to also be instilled in people at every level a kind of curiosity and a questioning which invites finding new answers, and embracing innovation. You can think there’s a version of that across the Integrated investment Program itself, we need to be investing in exquisite technology which takes a decade to build. You cannot give up on that. At the same time, if the whole IIP is dedicated to those programs, and there’s no ability to kind of invest in new technology. Well, by the time you get to 10 years hence, you’re out of date. So, I think it is a balance of those things which is the real challenge. Somehow in the midst of it, and it’s kind of why I asked you the question, I think getting the culture right which allows innovation and curiosity and change in the context of what needs to be a command driven organisation is the biggest challenge here.

ADMIRAL HAMMOND: Can I just, on that note, make it very clear to everyone in this room and those watching online if they are, you have a license to innovate. We need to drive that down to the deck plates of both navies and across the integrated force. You have a license to innovate. Your leaders in the field need to embrace, encourage and nurture that, because the best ideas come from the most challenging operating environments, and you are all on the front line in the most challenging operating environments. Secondly, I would offer that to a great extent, adaptation and integration need to go hand in hand. I think there are elements of the integrative force that are already hardwired for adaptation we just don’t know it yet. I did not realise that I was being groomed throughout my career as a submariner to be hardwired for adaptation. Every time you slow down when you’re doing a high-speed transi, you go from not knowing much about the surrounding environment. So you’re gradually gaining sonar contact. You get up to periscope depth, you build a picture using ESM and visual contacts, and it’s a completely different environment to the one you left. So you’re in a constant adaptation cycle every time you come to periscope depth. I did not realise I was being hardwired in that respect. But, no two days on a battlefield are the same, so our environment demands that we be hardwired for adaptation. The other element I think is adoption. We’ve got to be open to new ideas, we’ve got to create that innovative life cycle within the workforce, and we’ve got to create on-ramps for the greatest ideas to come forward at the speed of relevance. So, adaptation to your environment and the ability to adopt new technologies, new ways of business at the speed of relevance I think are two sides of the same coin.

LIEUTENANT GENERAL COYLE: The next question is in relation to integration. We talk about the National Defence Strategy, its given us something enormously helpful and valuable which is that focus. What does integration mean to each of you in the context of the five war fighting domains? If I asked around the room here, we get different answers to this. But, it is such a valuable and pivotal moment for us to get this right.

MARLES: Do you mean in the terms of jointness of the various services?

LIEUTENANT GENERAL COYLE: Yes.

MARLES: What it means to me, as I have come to Defence, and I’ve not lived in the world of Defence as long as most people in this room. But, I’ve been in it now for more than a decade, and it feels to me that over that period of time, jointness, fighting as one, is this sort of light on the hill that people are trying to pursue. It rolls off the tongue pretty easily, but once you get into it you realise that it is actually quite hard, and every defence force around the world is seeking to achieve that goal. I think the observation I would make is that goal is much harder the bigger the defence force you’ve got. I suspect jointness for the United States Armed Forces is a much harder task than it is for a defence force of our size. That said, they’ve got a whole lot of advantages associated with their size. It seems that one of the advantages that we have of being the defence force of the size we are, is that real jointness and integration is an achievable goal, and we must get there. To be what we need to be in terms of producing the effect that we want which is about deterring adversaries that would seek to coerce us, which I genuinely believe we have the agency to do as a nation. Jointness is at the heart of it. We need a single defence force, and I don’t say that with any lightness to what it is to try and achieve that. But, we are doing a lot of things that are amazing, jointness is an achievable goal for us. And the final point I would then make, and it goes to culture a bit as a well. We rightly instil a culture of trust amongst our various entities within the Australian Defence Force. That does build a sense of collectiveness. Selflessness, looking after those around you, the person next to you other than yourself. Being a part of something bigger than yourself. The idea of tribe. So, I think it is actually a really important cultural attribute, and it’s difficult to bond with the idea of tribe being the idea of the entirety of the ADF. Tribe seems to be something more personal and close, so we shouldn’t let go of that. But, as people rise through the ranks, we really need to be adopting an idea that the colour of your uniform starts to change a bit and you are part of a joint force. A point at which we’re no longer a part of Army or Navy, we are of the Australian Defence Force. And, I think, again, over the 10 years that I’ve been involved that doesn’t necessarily come so easily, and that’s something we really need to instill if we want to genuinely achieve that one fighting force. But, when you see jointness in action it is so powerful and it is something we can do in a way that a lot of other country of our capabilities can’t.

ADMIRAL HAMMOND: I won’t start where you left off Acting Prime Minister. I think this December when the current class, the third years at the Australian Defence Force Academy stand on the parade ground, they will look at the senior leadership team. And for the first time in the history of that institution, every three-star and four-star on parade that day will be graduates of the Australian Defence Force Academy. That’s the team that has grown up, has integrated, joint, since we were teenagers and we’ve crossed paths, many, many times. And it’s a team that’s also operated alongside allies and partners in an integrated, multinational context at various stages of our careers. So I think we’re on the cusp of change, and that’s not to delegitimise other avenues of officer entry, but I think that is a powerful moment. I think integration begins with a mindset, every member of the Australian Defence Force is ultimately an Australian son, daughter, brother, sister, mother, father, aunt or uncle and that’s our common DNA. We have committed ourselves to a shared purpose, which is to being prepared to if necessary fight tonight, tomorrow and together and to do the nation’s most dangerous work, under the most challenging circumstances, wherever and whenever directed by government. That is a pretty powerful statement, and I think when we connect ourselves to that vision, regardless of the colour of the uniform, regardless of the core or element of the ADF we serve in, that’s the pathway to true integration.

LIEUTENANT GENERAL COYLE: Unfortunately, we’re out of time. I had a whole heap of questions, but I’ll save them for the next Chief of Army Symposium. Thank you both for your time this morning, it is really important, and I think it’s an amazing opportunity here at CAS to hear both of your words and for you to give generously of your time. We are being hardwired for adaptation. I assure you, the Australian Army is absolutely fully integrated CDF you wanted to say a couple of closing remarks.

ADMIRAL HAMMOND: Thank you, Susan. Firstly, congratulations on the opening of your Chief of Army Symposium and best wishes for the remainder of the program. I’d just like to add my voice and express my condolences to the family of Corporal Brendan Hannam, and his friends. His colleagues in the 5^th/7^th. It’s a tough day for any serviceman or woman when we lose a colleague, especially under such horrible, unexpected, and tragic circumstances. I’d also like to thank you all for your service, and for those who support the Australian Defence Force, the servicemen and women. We are choosing, as a volunteer force to serve our nation during one of the most challenging and consequential periods in our nation’s history. It is an absolute credit to every single one of you and please know that the men and women of the Australian Defence Force, regardless of their service, our APS colleagues, and industry partners which enable our service all stand shoulder to shoulder with the Australian Army during this important time. And I wish you the greatest of success, for the remainder of the program.

MARLES: I might just add a few words to those of Mark, and very much endorse what Mark has just said. Monday was a terrible tragedy, and obviously our thoughts are very much with the family of Corporal Brendan Hannam, as they are with those currently recovering at Royal Darwin Hospital and Robertson Barracks. We prepare, we build, we train our defence forces to have capability and strength and skill in order to avoid conflict. What that’s about is providing deterrence, it’s there to help maintain the peace. It is work which is dangerous and which carries risk, and what occurred on Monday night is a reminder of that. Sadly, we have had a number of those reminders in the last few years, and I in the midst of all that will now happen in terms of understanding what’s occurred here and learning everything that we must learn from this particular incident. I come away with just a sense that those who wear the uniform do this job for the rest of us. And for that, we are enormously grateful. We owe all of you, and we really owe Corporal Hannam, an enourmous debt of gratitude.

LIEUTENANT GENERAL COYLE: Ladies and gentleman please join me in thanking the Acting Prime Minister and Chief of Defence.