- Joined
- Aug 28, 2011
- Messages
- 3,990
- Points
- 63
https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.asp?country_id=australia
OVERVIEW: Australia
For 2019 Australia is ranked 19 (of 137) out of the countries currently considered for the annual GFP review. It holds a PwrIndx rating of 0.3277 (0.0000 being perfect).
Each nation detailed on GlobalFirepower.com is assessed on individual and collective values. These values are processed through an in-house formula to generate the PwrIndx (PowerIndex) score which is used to establish the finalized GFP rankings for the current year. Keep in mind that some values are estimated when official numbers are not readily available. Otherwise official / semi-official values are used when possible. All content is ©2006-2019 www.GlobalFirepower.com. Reproduction of this content is prohibited.
MANPOWER: Values related to a nation's complete population and as it relates to theoretical available fighting strength. Wars, particularly those with high attrition, traditionally favor higher manpower.
TOTAL POPULATION: 23,470,145
AVAILABLE MANPOWER: 10,808,002
FIT-FOR-SERVICE: 8,888,501
REACHING MILITARY AGE ANNUALLY: 282,654
TOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL: 79,700 (est.)
ACTIVE PERSONNEL: 60,000
RESERVE PERSONNEL: 19,700
AIRPOWER: Total Aircraft Strength value includes both fixed- and rotary-wing systems from all branches of service (UAVs are not included in this total). Attack values cover both multirole and purpose-built light-attack types. Transports value includes only fixed-wing aircraft (as of 2019). EXTERNAL LINK: Aircraft throughout the military history of Australia
TOTAL AIRCRAFT STRENGTH: 467 (ranked 28 of 137)
FIGHTERS: 78 (ranked 27 of 137)
ATTACK: 78 (ranked 33 of 137)
TRANSPORTS: 39 (ranked 23 of 137)
TRAINERS: 162 (ranked 18 of 137)
TOTAL HELICOPTER STRENGTH: 157 (ranked 29 of 137)
ATTACK HELICOPTERS: 22 (ranked 23 of 137)
LAND STRENGTH: Combat Tank value includes Main Battle Tanks (MBTs), light tanks, and tank destroyers (no distinction is made between tracked and wheeled types). Armored Fighting Vehicles (AFV) value includes APCs, IFVs, MRAPs, and Armored Cars. Rocket Projectors only include self-propelled forms. EXTERNAL LINK: Armor and Artillery throughout the military history of Australia
COMBAT TANKS: 66 (ranked 86 of 137)
ARMORED FIGHTING VEHICLES: 3,050 (ranked 22 of 137)
SELF-PROPELLED ARTILLERY: 0 (ranked 137 of 137)
TOWED ARTILLERY: 54 (ranked 85 of 137)
ROCKET PROJECTORS: 0 (ranked 137 of 137)
NAVAL STRENGTH: Aircraft Carrier value includes traditional carriers as well as Helicopter Carriers. Submarine value includes diesel-electric and nuclear-powered types, no distinction being made between conventional- and nuclear-attack forms. Total Naval Assets (*) value includes all possible / available vessels including auxiliaries, which are not showcased individually below. EXTERNAL LINK: Warships and Submarines throughout the military history of Australia
TOTAL NAVAL ASSETS: 47*
AIRCRAFT CARRIERS: 2
FRIGATES: 10
DESTROYERS: 2
CORVETTES: 0
SUBMARINES: 6
PATROL VESSELS: 13
MINE WARFARE: 6
NATURAL RESOURCES (PETROLEUM): Petroleum remains the lifeblood of war. As such it is weighed into the GFP ranking through the figures below. Values are shown as BBL/DY (Barrels Per Day).
OIL PRODUCTION: 263,000 bbl/dy
OIL CONSUMPTION: 1,085,000 bbl/dy
PROVEN RESERVES: 1,821,000,000 bbl
LOGISTICS: For the GFP ranking, Logistics values include personnel, industry, and services related to war production.
LABOR FORCE: 12,910,000
MERCHANT MARINE STRENGTH: 549
MAJOR PORTS, HUBS & TERMINALS: 23
ROADWAY COVERAGE: 818,356 km
RAILWAY COVERAGE: 38,445 km
SERVICABLE AIRPORTS: 480
FINANCE: The GFP ranking takes into account a nation's financial health on the world stage. All values presented in USD ($).
DEFENSE BUDGET: $26,300,000,000
EXTERNAL DEBT: $1,714,000,000,000
RESERVES OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE & GOLD: $66,580,000,000
PURCHASING POWER PARITY: $1,278,000,000,000
GEOGRAPHY: Geography values factor into both offensive and defensive wars.
SQUARE LAND AREA: 7,741,220 km
COASTLINE: 25,760 km
SHARED BORDERS: 0 km
WATERWAYS: 2,000 km
https://mil.news.sina.com.cn/china/2019-07-03/doc-ihytcitk9320293.shtml
澳专家：澳大利亚需要拥有核武器 以对抗中国
2019年07月03日 08:51 环球时报
4,839
原标题：澳专家居然建议拥核对抗中国？澳国防部迅速否决
[环球时报记者 白云怡]“澳大利亚也许需要考虑拥有核武器，以对抗中国的主导地位”，澳大利亚新闻网站ABC 2日援引该国著名国防问题专家休·怀特的话警告称，作为澳大利亚应对中国崛起战略的一部分，该国可能不得不考虑这一“难题”。不过，他的观点被澳大利亚官方迅速否决，澳国防部长称，澳大利亚将信守《核不扩散条约》的承诺。
据ABC报道，澳大利亚前国防官员和情报分析师休·怀特称，中国作为地区主导力量不可避免地崛起意味着澳大利亚必须紧急反思自己的军事立场。“我认为澳大利亚面对的战略形势正在发生真正的、根本性的转变”，他认为，“自欧洲人定居这块大陆以来，我们第一次不再能假定我们还会有一个强大的朋友作为亚洲的主导和最强大的军事力量。”
另据《悉尼先驱晨报》报道，怀特对该报记者称，澳大利亚在过去40年中没有考虑核武器是有道理的，因为该国对美国的“核保护伞”很有信心。“但美国之所以能提供保护伞，是因为它在亚洲的主要大国地位得到了巩固。但如果（未来保持）这一地位的可能性变低，那我们面临的情况将大不相同……我们必须问问自己，我们能抵御像中国那样的大国么？”
在新书《如何保卫澳大利亚》中，怀特提出，澳大利亚现有的不拥核政策在未来可能难以持续。但他也承认，核武器对澳大利亚来说仍然是一个“不太可能的提议”，并认为只有在极端情况下这一选项才会被认真考虑。澳智库洛伊国际政策研究所专家罗杰文称，澳发展核武对区域的影响很大，印度尼西亚可能跟进。
此外，怀特认为，随着中国的持续崛起，澳大利亚的总体国防支出占国内生产总值的比例将从2%提升到3.5%。“这意味着我们需要考虑每年300亿美元的额外支出”，他称，“但在我们对美国支持不再那么有信心的背景下，我们还能期待什么呢？”
不过，怀特有关澳大利亚拥核的建议已被澳联邦政府迅速否决。ABC 2日援引该国国防部长雷诺兹发表的声明称，作为一个无核国家，澳大利亚信守其不获取或发展核武器的《核不扩散条约》的承诺。
点击进入专题：
每日军情TOP5
澳专家：澳大利亚需要拥有核武器 以对抗中国
2019年07月03日 08:51 环球时报
4,839
原标题：澳专家居然建议拥核对抗中国？澳国防部迅速否决
[环球时报记者 白云怡]“澳大利亚也许需要考虑拥有核武器，以对抗中国的主导地位”，澳大利亚新闻网站ABC 2日援引该国著名国防问题专家休·怀特的话警告称，作为澳大利亚应对中国崛起战略的一部分，该国可能不得不考虑这一“难题”。不过，他的观点被澳大利亚官方迅速否决，澳国防部长称，澳大利亚将信守《核不扩散条约》的承诺。
据ABC报道，澳大利亚前国防官员和情报分析师休·怀特称，中国作为地区主导力量不可避免地崛起意味着澳大利亚必须紧急反思自己的军事立场。“我认为澳大利亚面对的战略形势正在发生真正的、根本性的转变”，他认为，“自欧洲人定居这块大陆以来，我们第一次不再能假定我们还会有一个强大的朋友作为亚洲的主导和最强大的军事力量。”
另据《悉尼先驱晨报》报道，怀特对该报记者称，澳大利亚在过去40年中没有考虑核武器是有道理的，因为该国对美国的“核保护伞”很有信心。“但美国之所以能提供保护伞，是因为它在亚洲的主要大国地位得到了巩固。但如果（未来保持）这一地位的可能性变低，那我们面临的情况将大不相同……我们必须问问自己，我们能抵御像中国那样的大国么？”
在新书《如何保卫澳大利亚》中，怀特提出，澳大利亚现有的不拥核政策在未来可能难以持续。但他也承认，核武器对澳大利亚来说仍然是一个“不太可能的提议”，并认为只有在极端情况下这一选项才会被认真考虑。澳智库洛伊国际政策研究所专家罗杰文称，澳发展核武对区域的影响很大，印度尼西亚可能跟进。
此外，怀特认为，随着中国的持续崛起，澳大利亚的总体国防支出占国内生产总值的比例将从2%提升到3.5%。“这意味着我们需要考虑每年300亿美元的额外支出”，他称，“但在我们对美国支持不再那么有信心的背景下，我们还能期待什么呢？”
不过，怀特有关澳大利亚拥核的建议已被澳联邦政府迅速否决。ABC 2日援引该国国防部长雷诺兹发表的声明称，作为一个无核国家，澳大利亚信守其不获取或发展核武器的《核不扩散条约》的承诺。
点击进入专题：
每日军情TOP5
Australian expert: Australia needs to have nuclear weapons to fight against China
July 03, 2019 08:51 Global Times
4,839
Original title: Australian experts actually proposed to hold nuclear against China? Australian Department of Defense quickly vetoed
[Global Times reporter Bai Yunyi] "Australia may need to consider possessing nuclear weapons to counter China's dominant position," Australian News website ABC quoted the country's famous defense expert Hugh White as saying that Australia's response to China's rise strategy is In part, the country may have to consider this "difficulties." However, his views were quickly vetoed by the Australian authorities, and the Australian Defense Minister stated that Australia would abide by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
According to ABC, former Australian defense official and intelligence analyst Hugh White said that China’s inevitable rise as a regional leader means that Australia must urgently reflect on its military stance. “I think the strategic situation facing Australia is undergoing a real and fundamental transformation,” he said. “Since Europeans have settled on this continent, we can no longer assume that we will have a strong friend for the first time. Asia’s dominant and most powerful military force."
According to the Sydney Morning Herald, White told reporters that Australia has not considered nuclear weapons in the past 40 years, because the country has confidence in the US nuclear umbrella. “But the United States is able to provide an umbrella because its status as a major power in Asia has been consolidated. But if the possibility of this status is lowered, we will face very different situations...we must Ask yourself, can we resist a big country like China?"
In the new book How to Defend Australia, White argues that Australia's existing non-nuclear policy may be difficult to sustain in the future. But he also acknowledged that nuclear weapons are still an "impossible proposal" for Australia and believe that this option will only be seriously considered in extreme cases. Luo Jiewen, an expert at the Australian Institute of International Policy, said that the development of nuclear weapons in Australia has a great impact on the region, and Indonesia may follow suit.
In addition, White believes that with China's continued rise, Australia's overall defense spending as a percentage of GDP will increase from 2% to 3.5%. “That means we need to consider the extra spending of $30 billion a year,” he said. “But in the context of our lack of confidence in US support, what else can we expect?”
However, White’s proposal for Australia’s nuclear support has been quickly rejected by the Australian federal government. On the 2nd, ABC quoted a statement issued by the country's Defense Minister Reynolds as a non-nuclear country that Australia abides by its commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Click to enter the topic:
Daily military TOP5
OVERVIEW: Australia
For 2019 Australia is ranked 19 (of 137) out of the countries currently considered for the annual GFP review. It holds a PwrIndx rating of 0.3277 (0.0000 being perfect).
Each nation detailed on GlobalFirepower.com is assessed on individual and collective values. These values are processed through an in-house formula to generate the PwrIndx (PowerIndex) score which is used to establish the finalized GFP rankings for the current year. Keep in mind that some values are estimated when official numbers are not readily available. Otherwise official / semi-official values are used when possible. All content is ©2006-2019 www.GlobalFirepower.com. Reproduction of this content is prohibited.
MANPOWER: Values related to a nation's complete population and as it relates to theoretical available fighting strength. Wars, particularly those with high attrition, traditionally favor higher manpower.
TOTAL POPULATION: 23,470,145
AVAILABLE MANPOWER: 10,808,002
FIT-FOR-SERVICE: 8,888,501
REACHING MILITARY AGE ANNUALLY: 282,654
TOTAL MILITARY PERSONNEL: 79,700 (est.)
ACTIVE PERSONNEL: 60,000
RESERVE PERSONNEL: 19,700
AIRPOWER: Total Aircraft Strength value includes both fixed- and rotary-wing systems from all branches of service (UAVs are not included in this total). Attack values cover both multirole and purpose-built light-attack types. Transports value includes only fixed-wing aircraft (as of 2019). EXTERNAL LINK: Aircraft throughout the military history of Australia
TOTAL AIRCRAFT STRENGTH: 467 (ranked 28 of 137)
FIGHTERS: 78 (ranked 27 of 137)
ATTACK: 78 (ranked 33 of 137)
TRANSPORTS: 39 (ranked 23 of 137)
TRAINERS: 162 (ranked 18 of 137)
TOTAL HELICOPTER STRENGTH: 157 (ranked 29 of 137)
ATTACK HELICOPTERS: 22 (ranked 23 of 137)
LAND STRENGTH: Combat Tank value includes Main Battle Tanks (MBTs), light tanks, and tank destroyers (no distinction is made between tracked and wheeled types). Armored Fighting Vehicles (AFV) value includes APCs, IFVs, MRAPs, and Armored Cars. Rocket Projectors only include self-propelled forms. EXTERNAL LINK: Armor and Artillery throughout the military history of Australia
COMBAT TANKS: 66 (ranked 86 of 137)
ARMORED FIGHTING VEHICLES: 3,050 (ranked 22 of 137)
SELF-PROPELLED ARTILLERY: 0 (ranked 137 of 137)
TOWED ARTILLERY: 54 (ranked 85 of 137)
ROCKET PROJECTORS: 0 (ranked 137 of 137)
NAVAL STRENGTH: Aircraft Carrier value includes traditional carriers as well as Helicopter Carriers. Submarine value includes diesel-electric and nuclear-powered types, no distinction being made between conventional- and nuclear-attack forms. Total Naval Assets (*) value includes all possible / available vessels including auxiliaries, which are not showcased individually below. EXTERNAL LINK: Warships and Submarines throughout the military history of Australia
TOTAL NAVAL ASSETS: 47*
AIRCRAFT CARRIERS: 2
FRIGATES: 10
DESTROYERS: 2
CORVETTES: 0
SUBMARINES: 6
PATROL VESSELS: 13
MINE WARFARE: 6
NATURAL RESOURCES (PETROLEUM): Petroleum remains the lifeblood of war. As such it is weighed into the GFP ranking through the figures below. Values are shown as BBL/DY (Barrels Per Day).
OIL PRODUCTION: 263,000 bbl/dy
OIL CONSUMPTION: 1,085,000 bbl/dy
PROVEN RESERVES: 1,821,000,000 bbl
LOGISTICS: For the GFP ranking, Logistics values include personnel, industry, and services related to war production.
LABOR FORCE: 12,910,000
MERCHANT MARINE STRENGTH: 549
MAJOR PORTS, HUBS & TERMINALS: 23
ROADWAY COVERAGE: 818,356 km
RAILWAY COVERAGE: 38,445 km
SERVICABLE AIRPORTS: 480
FINANCE: The GFP ranking takes into account a nation's financial health on the world stage. All values presented in USD ($).
DEFENSE BUDGET: $26,300,000,000
EXTERNAL DEBT: $1,714,000,000,000
RESERVES OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE & GOLD: $66,580,000,000
PURCHASING POWER PARITY: $1,278,000,000,000
GEOGRAPHY: Geography values factor into both offensive and defensive wars.
SQUARE LAND AREA: 7,741,220 km
COASTLINE: 25,760 km
SHARED BORDERS: 0 km
WATERWAYS: 2,000 km
https://mil.news.sina.com.cn/china/2019-07-03/doc-ihytcitk9320293.shtml
澳专家：澳大利亚需要拥有核武器 以对抗中国
2019年07月03日 08:51 环球时报
4,839
原标题：澳专家居然建议拥核对抗中国？澳国防部迅速否决
[环球时报记者 白云怡]“澳大利亚也许需要考虑拥有核武器，以对抗中国的主导地位”，澳大利亚新闻网站ABC 2日援引该国著名国防问题专家休·怀特的话警告称，作为澳大利亚应对中国崛起战略的一部分，该国可能不得不考虑这一“难题”。不过，他的观点被澳大利亚官方迅速否决，澳国防部长称，澳大利亚将信守《核不扩散条约》的承诺。
据ABC报道，澳大利亚前国防官员和情报分析师休·怀特称，中国作为地区主导力量不可避免地崛起意味着澳大利亚必须紧急反思自己的军事立场。“我认为澳大利亚面对的战略形势正在发生真正的、根本性的转变”，他认为，“自欧洲人定居这块大陆以来，我们第一次不再能假定我们还会有一个强大的朋友作为亚洲的主导和最强大的军事力量。”
另据《悉尼先驱晨报》报道，怀特对该报记者称，澳大利亚在过去40年中没有考虑核武器是有道理的，因为该国对美国的“核保护伞”很有信心。“但美国之所以能提供保护伞，是因为它在亚洲的主要大国地位得到了巩固。但如果（未来保持）这一地位的可能性变低，那我们面临的情况将大不相同……我们必须问问自己，我们能抵御像中国那样的大国么？”
在新书《如何保卫澳大利亚》中，怀特提出，澳大利亚现有的不拥核政策在未来可能难以持续。但他也承认，核武器对澳大利亚来说仍然是一个“不太可能的提议”，并认为只有在极端情况下这一选项才会被认真考虑。澳智库洛伊国际政策研究所专家罗杰文称，澳发展核武对区域的影响很大，印度尼西亚可能跟进。
此外，怀特认为，随着中国的持续崛起，澳大利亚的总体国防支出占国内生产总值的比例将从2%提升到3.5%。“这意味着我们需要考虑每年300亿美元的额外支出”，他称，“但在我们对美国支持不再那么有信心的背景下，我们还能期待什么呢？”
不过，怀特有关澳大利亚拥核的建议已被澳联邦政府迅速否决。ABC 2日援引该国国防部长雷诺兹发表的声明称，作为一个无核国家，澳大利亚信守其不获取或发展核武器的《核不扩散条约》的承诺。
点击进入专题：
每日军情TOP5
澳专家：澳大利亚需要拥有核武器 以对抗中国
2019年07月03日 08:51 环球时报
4,839
原标题：澳专家居然建议拥核对抗中国？澳国防部迅速否决
[环球时报记者 白云怡]“澳大利亚也许需要考虑拥有核武器，以对抗中国的主导地位”，澳大利亚新闻网站ABC 2日援引该国著名国防问题专家休·怀特的话警告称，作为澳大利亚应对中国崛起战略的一部分，该国可能不得不考虑这一“难题”。不过，他的观点被澳大利亚官方迅速否决，澳国防部长称，澳大利亚将信守《核不扩散条约》的承诺。
据ABC报道，澳大利亚前国防官员和情报分析师休·怀特称，中国作为地区主导力量不可避免地崛起意味着澳大利亚必须紧急反思自己的军事立场。“我认为澳大利亚面对的战略形势正在发生真正的、根本性的转变”，他认为，“自欧洲人定居这块大陆以来，我们第一次不再能假定我们还会有一个强大的朋友作为亚洲的主导和最强大的军事力量。”
另据《悉尼先驱晨报》报道，怀特对该报记者称，澳大利亚在过去40年中没有考虑核武器是有道理的，因为该国对美国的“核保护伞”很有信心。“但美国之所以能提供保护伞，是因为它在亚洲的主要大国地位得到了巩固。但如果（未来保持）这一地位的可能性变低，那我们面临的情况将大不相同……我们必须问问自己，我们能抵御像中国那样的大国么？”
在新书《如何保卫澳大利亚》中，怀特提出，澳大利亚现有的不拥核政策在未来可能难以持续。但他也承认，核武器对澳大利亚来说仍然是一个“不太可能的提议”，并认为只有在极端情况下这一选项才会被认真考虑。澳智库洛伊国际政策研究所专家罗杰文称，澳发展核武对区域的影响很大，印度尼西亚可能跟进。
此外，怀特认为，随着中国的持续崛起，澳大利亚的总体国防支出占国内生产总值的比例将从2%提升到3.5%。“这意味着我们需要考虑每年300亿美元的额外支出”，他称，“但在我们对美国支持不再那么有信心的背景下，我们还能期待什么呢？”
不过，怀特有关澳大利亚拥核的建议已被澳联邦政府迅速否决。ABC 2日援引该国国防部长雷诺兹发表的声明称，作为一个无核国家，澳大利亚信守其不获取或发展核武器的《核不扩散条约》的承诺。
点击进入专题：
每日军情TOP5
Australian expert: Australia needs to have nuclear weapons to fight against China
July 03, 2019 08:51 Global Times
4,839
Original title: Australian experts actually proposed to hold nuclear against China? Australian Department of Defense quickly vetoed
[Global Times reporter Bai Yunyi] "Australia may need to consider possessing nuclear weapons to counter China's dominant position," Australian News website ABC quoted the country's famous defense expert Hugh White as saying that Australia's response to China's rise strategy is In part, the country may have to consider this "difficulties." However, his views were quickly vetoed by the Australian authorities, and the Australian Defense Minister stated that Australia would abide by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
According to ABC, former Australian defense official and intelligence analyst Hugh White said that China’s inevitable rise as a regional leader means that Australia must urgently reflect on its military stance. “I think the strategic situation facing Australia is undergoing a real and fundamental transformation,” he said. “Since Europeans have settled on this continent, we can no longer assume that we will have a strong friend for the first time. Asia’s dominant and most powerful military force."
According to the Sydney Morning Herald, White told reporters that Australia has not considered nuclear weapons in the past 40 years, because the country has confidence in the US nuclear umbrella. “But the United States is able to provide an umbrella because its status as a major power in Asia has been consolidated. But if the possibility of this status is lowered, we will face very different situations...we must Ask yourself, can we resist a big country like China?"
In the new book How to Defend Australia, White argues that Australia's existing non-nuclear policy may be difficult to sustain in the future. But he also acknowledged that nuclear weapons are still an "impossible proposal" for Australia and believe that this option will only be seriously considered in extreme cases. Luo Jiewen, an expert at the Australian Institute of International Policy, said that the development of nuclear weapons in Australia has a great impact on the region, and Indonesia may follow suit.
In addition, White believes that with China's continued rise, Australia's overall defense spending as a percentage of GDP will increase from 2% to 3.5%. “That means we need to consider the extra spending of $30 billion a year,” he said. “But in the context of our lack of confidence in US support, what else can we expect?”
However, White’s proposal for Australia’s nuclear support has been quickly rejected by the Australian federal government. On the 2nd, ABC quoted a statement issued by the country's Defense Minister Reynolds as a non-nuclear country that Australia abides by its commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Click to enter the topic:
Daily military TOP5
