The contrast could not be more sharp. Our government produces endless talk and signs paper security treaties with Pacific micro states incapable of policing their fishery zones.
By contrast Beijing is blasting nuclear capable missiles with ranges in excess of 11,000km to the farthest reaches of the Pacific.
China’s latest intercontinental ballistic missile test will have been months in the planning and totally coincidental to Anthony Albanese’s South Pacific visit.
Beijing’s message to the US on Monday is that they have achieved nuclear weapons parity and can hit any American city with missiles and warheads more modern and capable than those of their US counterparts.
The Pacific Island states and Australia can complain about a nuclear-weapons intrusion into our backyard, but Beijing has zero strategic interest in our opinions.
The South Pacific, in Chinese thinking, is a weapons testing ground and potentially a zone of conflict. Think of Japan’s military strategy in World War II. The Imperial Japanese Army and Navy aimed to occupy central Pacific Islands as far south as the Solomon Islands to deny this territory to the US. Japan wanted to keep the American military as far away as possible from their home islands. China’s strategy in 2026 is much the same: keep US forces at a substantial distance from the mainland.
This explains China’s continued objective to establish defence relations with micro states such as the Cook Islands and French Polynesia in the central Pacific – likely to be some of the closest countries to the missile’s splashdown area.
China last fired an ICBM into the South Pacific in September 2024. This was a missile known as the DF-31AG – an ICBM carried by a road-mobile launch vehicle.
The missile was launched from Hainan island. It flew entirely over water, east of the Philippines and south of Guam, to land south of the Hawaiian islands, near French Polynesia. Beijing was testing the reliability of its missile deterrent. From a road mobile launch to a targeted splashdown, the 2024 test was a success.
What is significant about Monday’s launch was that it was from a missile-carrying submarine in the South China Sea towards the South Pacific. China is testing another leg of its nuclear triad – the third element being air launched weapons. This is a significant development – Chinese submarine operations, combining great distance from the mainland and a physical weapons launch.
These tests are a clear signal to the US that China has reached a new level of maturity with a nuclear arsenal able to target the American mainland, along with US and allied military facilities anywhere in the Asia-Pacific.
China’s nuclear plans underpin President Xi Jinping’s ambitions to make his country the dominant military power in Asia. Nuclear weapons parity with the US gives China a stronger negotiating position over Taiwan – think of Vladimir Putin’s regular nuclear sabre-rattling designed to keep NATO distanced from Ukraine.
The next land launched ICBM test may be of China’s newest missile, the DF-41, which is said to have a 15,000km range. That weapon could hit Washington DC.
The DF-41 combines long range, road mobility, multiple warheads, and survivability into a single system. It’s quite a weapon and China will want to test it multiple times to ensure its reliability.
That means we should expect more Chinese ICBM launches into that long maritime corridor from Hainan island, east and south into the far South Pacific and more Chinese missile carrying and Hunter-killer submariner operations in the Pacific.
It also explains why a decade ago China annexed the South China Sea. Hainan island has an important submarine base and is increasingly a testing ground for missile technology. China wants no one getting near that island.
Anthony Albanese should use his Pacific trip to try to galvanise island state leaders to condemn the submarine launch. Here is an opportunity for some adroit, swift-footed Australian policy to try to build a regional political consensus against Chinese missile testing. No Pacific Island leader not already in the pay of the Chinese intelligence services will be happy about the launch.
So the Prime Minister should try to build on that shared view and get island leaders to agree not to engage with any Chinese military activity in the region. China would put a high priority in being able to establish a maritime basing presence in the South Pacific to assist in supporting submarine and surface fleet operations.
The ICBM test also creates an opportunity for Albanese to invest some effort explaining to Australians how our alliance with the US is becoming even more vital. The US is the one country with the capacity to push back against China’s military dominance.
Australia and Japan remain America’s key regional allies. Acting in concert we can deter China from reckless military adventurism against Taiwan, or in the East and South China seas.
The AUKUS submarine program worries Beijing, which is why they relentlessly speak out against it. The challenge for the AUKUS partners and Japan is to deepen and further accelerate defence co-operation to deter war in the second half of this decade.
Albanese’s failure to invest in building a viable relationship with Donald Trump remains a serious impediment to boosting defence co-operation. But if Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney can establish an effective partnership with the US President, then Albanese should do the same.
A key starting point is for Albanese to quash growing anti-AUKUS sentiment in his party. Signing security treaties with Fiji and other Pacific Island states are helpful, but frankly will do little or nothing to slow China’s military ambitions. The only thing that will give Xi pause is American military power, linked to the closest alliance relationships with Japan and Australia.
This is a tough message for Albanese to sell to an Australian public that seems only to want cotton candy from Canberra. We may not be looking for war, but with Xi at the helm in Beijing, it is most assuredly looking for us.
