The bargain offered by the Unicorn in Alice in Wonderland is, ‘If you believe in me, I’ll believe in you’, which pretty much sums up the sales pitch from both sides of politics when it comes to the defence and security of our nation. It’s been like that for years. That was shattered when we learned Indonesia and Russia have all this time been Best Friends Forever. So friendly in fact, there is a rumour Russia might be permitted to land its long-range TU-95 bombers on the Indonesian Island of Biak, so long as they are on ‘peaceful missions’. Perhaps a natural progression from their collaboration with Russia’s Roscosmos State Space Corporation to build a spaceport, also on Biak. The one thing about good rumours is they always have an ounce of truth. Strategically what’s important is that, once again, we are reminded of two truths. First, the future of Australia will be decided in our own region. And second, what really matters now is power.

Come to think of it, believing in each other has also been the Unicorn trick played on us by China. And our political establishment, universities, and many of our corporates oh so desperately want to believe in this bargain, no matter the cost to the security of our nation.  If only we believe in China hard enough, they’ll keep buying our wine and lobsters and run our ports. Then China conducted a sail-by-shooting exercise off the coast of Sydney somewhere in the Tasman Sea, and, as if that wasn’t enough, circumnavigated our continent and sent a spy ship. The cognitive dissonance was written all over the Prime Minister’s face.

Importantly, let’s resist going down the mainstream rabbit hole over whether Russia directly made the request to Indonesia. That’s not the point. The point is we are in a cold war where Beijing and Moscow are aligned and coordinating. And no matter how hard those leading the current narrative might try, we cannot go back to yesterday, ‘We were different people then.’ What few people will admit, is that we are in the most serious confrontation in a generation, even bigger than the global war on terror (GWOT). The jihadists didn’t have nukes, aircraft carriers and satellites, nor own or supply chains. Many are still coming to grips with this reality. And instead of doing a deal and backing the United States in its efforts to lead an economic fight against big power threats to our way of life, they’d rather leave it until we have a shooting war on our hands.

Perhaps it’s been hard for some to believe we are in a war because of how war is traditionally framed. While for the last 20 years as we were focused on the GWOT, simultaneously, China has been subjecting us to a protracted non-military contest of Ermattungsstrategie, or ‘exhaustion’. This contrasts with a shooting war aiming for Niederwerfungsstrategie, or ‘annihilation’, or the knock-out blow. While shooting wars can seek to exhaust the enemy, our Western population and politicians get bored of this kind of war. Just look at what happened in Afghanistan. We lack patience, even against dudes in sandals. The thing about exhaustion through non-military means is not only have we been slow to notice, but it also involves multiple avenues of achieving the political ends of war. The whole charade has taken place before our eyes without a shot fired. One of the reasons is we’ve been internally distracted designing dependence.

As a result, one of the worst aspects is our debt-addicted, hyper-regulated, welfare state just cannot keep up. As the Red Queen warned Alice, ‘Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place.’ When we have our politicians seeking to make government the provider meeting almost every human need, we will run out of the imagination and productivity to compete. Sadly, we are not alone. Many of our most important strategic partners, like the United Kingdom, are drifting towards becoming authoritarian-Islamist communes with industrial-scale migration of fighting-aged, single males. If it continues this trajectory, in a couple of generations the UK may no longer be a reliable partner.

Back to Australia. The weird thing is, it’s as if both sides of politics are slightly annoyed with the whole thing like, you know the strategic defence and security of our nation. Instead, they simply appear to be wishing all this geo-politics would just go away so they can get back to building our welfare system. That’s why the message from the new Trump administration is if Australia, as with many other nations, is going to continue relying on the US for its security, then from now on we are going to have to pay for it. Instead, right now, northern parts of Australia should be glistening with medium and long-range missile systems and an array of other lethal defence options. Not in five years, or ten or twenty. But now. To be fair, the Australian government is set to obtain Precision Strike Missiles (PrSM) that can hit targets at 500kms and can be fired from HIMARS launchers. At least Dutton and the Liberals have increased the defence budget to Trump’s requested 3 per cent of GDP, albeit in the future, sometime. Which is an improvement. While the Labor government just ignored the memo from our most important great power partner.

The father of geo-politics, British geographer and academic, Sir Halford Mackinder, determined that democracies refuse to think strategically until they are forced to do so. Halford’s second lesson is that political elites ignore the persistent influence of power dynamics, territorial interests and strategic rivalries that shape international relations.  Again, big power matters.

The other surprising aspect to all this is how surprised our politicians were, caught in a finger-pointing whirlpool, and demanding to see special briefings.

Which is strange because Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto has been open about his intentions to build closer ties with powers Australia would perceive as a strategic threat. These plans are not in the deepest vault of Lubyanka. Russia (and not Australia) is already Indonesia’s weapons supplier of choice.

The other crazy realisation yet to truly dawn on our elites is that the moment Australia supplied money and materiel to Ukraine was the moment we entered the proxy war against Russia. Of course, the irony is that it’s not OK for Russia to lose its cool after forty years of Nato creeping towards its borders but it is OK for us to panic when Russia builds its military presence in our sphere of influence. You know some people in some parts of the world actually mean it when you cross their red line.

If all this sounds a little unsettling, perhaps its because for so long we haven’t really had a clear strategic objective about the defence and security of Australia, so any road will do.