Sukarno stays in power - what would Asutralia do?

[Dilandu]

So let's assume that Indonesian socialist leader Sukarno was more competent in terms of economic (or at least listened to better advisor) and managed to avoid the economy crisis that led to his downfall in OTL 1966. He remained relatively popular and in power; Indonesia remained socialistic and pro-Soviet. And Indonesian military continued to get new and better weapons from USSR; subsonic Tu-16KS bombers were replaced with supersonic Tu-22K. Mig-19 fighters gave way to Mig-23 and Mig-25 interceptors. Old gun-armed Project 30-bis destroyers were replaced with export-build Project 61 anti-submarine ships, equipped with state-of-art surface-to-air and anti-ship missiles.

For the Australia, dangerous times started. It have a constant source of threat now - and not somewhere far away, but just a few hundred kilometers to the north. Indonesian warships roamed Timor sea, locking their fire control radars on Australian shipping. Long-range jet bombers and patrol planes were reaching as far as Perth. High-altitude Mig-25R recon planes buzzed over Darwin, blatantly disregarding Australian air space.

What would Australia do in such situation? Of course, it need a better military than in OTL - the opponent it faced is close enough to be a direct threat to Australian mainland. What exactly Australia should seek to procure then?

P.S. To simplify the situation, let's assume that Indonesia have access to roughly the same level of Soviet-build hardware as Iraq. With a larger emphasis of navy, of course. I.e.:

* Mig-21, Mig-23MS as main fighters (about 200 units), Mig-25PD as interceptors (about 50 units), Mig-25R as high-altitude fast recon planes (about 25 units)
* Tu-16K and Tu-22K as long-range bombers with KSR-2 and KSR-11 missiles (about 25 + 25 units)
* Su-17 and Mig-27 fighter-bombers as short-range attack planes (about 200 units)
* Modified Project 61M (Kashin-class) destroyers with P-15M anti-ship missiles and Volna-M SAM (about 6 units)
* Project 1135 (Krivak-class) anti-submarine frigates with "Metel" anti-submarine missiles (about 10 units)
* Project 1234 (Nanuchka-class) missile corvettes with P-15M missiles (about 10 units)
* Osa-class missile boats with P-15M missiles (about 20 units)
* Project 633 diesel-electric submarines (about 10 units)
* Polish-build medium amphibious landing ship in sufficient numbers for two mechanised regiments total capacity
* S-75, S-125 land-based SAM's, a limited number of S-200 long-range SAM's (export versions)
* Coastal missile batteries with P-15M missiles
* Army units mainly equipped with legacy Soviet era weapons, like T-34 and T-54 tanks, M-30 howitzers, BTR-50 APC's. Several elite reigments are equipped with newer weaponry, such as T-62 tanks, PT-76 light tanks, D-30 howitzers and mobile SAM systems.

 

[Rule of cool]

Firstly, nothing much would change until 1966, after all decisions such as to buy the F111 assuming a 1969 in service date, not to buy the 4th DDG and go to Vietnam were made during Suharto's tenure and during the Konfrontasi period. Further even 1966 would only be a bit of a warning, the real shock would be in 1969 with the British withdrawing from the region by 1971 and the US introducing Nixons Guam doctrine.

Secondly, Vietnam would still be a bruising experience that would basically remove Conscription as a political option. This would mean reintroducing the 1951-59 conscription scheme of broad-based service in the Reserves would be off the table, despite its ability to address many of Australia's manpower problems in this scenario.

Thirdly, Australia is not set up for self-sufficient home defence and would have to undertake pretty major development projects. For example, despite Fleet Base West being planned from 1969 the first unit wasn't based there until 1984, this would have to be drastically accelerated. Similarly there were a number of airbases built or upgraded from the 60s until the 90s, this too would have to be drastically accelerated. I'd also think we'd get the Jervis Bay nuclear power reactor actually built, the Adelaide to Darwin railway competed decades earlier and other major development projects as well.

As for kit, a few early examples would be the DDL and LST MkII being built, not cutting the 2nd batch of subs from 4 to 2 to get the 2nd batch of A4s, keeping the F4s when the F111s were delivered and likely getting the full helicopter buy in 1972 including the AH1s.

 

[Dilandu]

Firstly, nothing much would change until 1966, after all decisions such as to buy the F111 assuming a 1969 in service date, not to buy the 4th DDG and go to Vietnam were made during Suharto's tenure and during the Konfrontasi period. Further even 1966 would only be a bit of a warning, the real shock would be in 969 with the British withdrawing from the region by 1971 and the US introducing Nixons Guam doctrine.

A good and logical analysis!

 

[GK Dundas]

While Nixon probably viewed the Indonesian problem with a certain distance. I suspect that the British might not.
Do you honestly think Suharto wouldn't take advantage of the situation if the British withdrew?

 

[Rule of cool]

@Dilandu a query for this scenario. Sukarno started lose authority through 1966, he was put under house arrest in March 1967 and died from liver failure in June 1970 due to inadequate medical care age 69. Given he's not going to live forever how long do you think he'd remain in power?

 

[Dilandu]

query for this scenario. Sukarno started lose authority through 1966, he was put under house arrest in March 1967 and died from liver failure in June 1970 due to inadequate medical care age 69. Given he's not going to live forever how long do you think he'd remain in power?

Likely up to his death in about mid-1970s, then it would be a matter of " who would be his successor"

 

[MrTopaz]

Somewhat related, but since “Indonesia as a more prominent geopolitical player” is enough of a niche what if scenario I thought it might be fruitful to drop a link to @SSgtC fantastic-but-lamentably-aborted alt history thread that covers some of Australia’s strategies and acquisitions, at least up until about 1960, if memory serves.