During my visit to Australia in May-June 2025, I have focused significantly on the coming of autonomous systems and how to incorporate them effectively into the Australian Defence Force and for security operations. I have published a new book which looks specifically at the paradigm shift in maritime operations and how maritime autonomous systems are key drivers in that shift.
The point is that such systems are not simply uncrewed variants of crewed systems: rather they follow a very different logic and purpose. They operate to perform tasks which would otherwise not be done, or they do a mission driven task differently from a crewed system.
I had a chance to talk with my friend and colleague Keirin Joyce during my visit. Joyce is really a true knowledge source on such systems given his experience in the Australian Army and the Air Force with such systems and his recent work and writing in the maritime domain. He currently is the Sir Richard Williams Scholar at the Air and Space Power Center and I am a senior research fellow at the foundation, so a perfect opportunity to collaborate and to think through ways to consider these systems for use within a broader Australian strategy.
And to be clear, we are talking as much about security operations as we are about defense operations. Many of the pressing threats facing our nations are in the security domain, and without credible security of our territories, defense capabilities will matter much less. Certainly, the recent Ukrainian attack WITHIN Russia using various packages of forward deployed drones makes that point rather obvious.
Current Australian maritime autonomous systems operate at what Joyce referred to as “level 2 autonomy” — essentially sophisticated remote-controlled vehicles with humans firmly in the decision-making loop. While impressive technological achievements, they fall short of the transformative capability that true autonomy could provide.
Joyce underscored: “Right now, Tesla’s autopilot is operating at about level four autonomy. “Our maritime systems need to take that next evolutionary step to be equipped with the sensing and computation power to reach similar levels of independence.”
This autonomy gap represents more than just a technological challenge — it’s a strategic limitation that prevents Australia from achieving the “mass dividend” that autonomous systems promise. Without one-to-many or many-to-many control capabilities, the ADF cannot deploy these systems at the scale necessary for effective deterrence across the Pacific’s enormous distances.
Aerial autonomous systems have made significant progress in solving the twin challenges of sensing and security. Collaborative combat aircraft are already incorporating infrared search and track systems and detect-and-avoid capabilities that operate continuously without human intervention.
The MQ-9B drone or SkyGuardian, for instance, features certifiable detect-and-avoid radar providing 120-degree coverage at all times. These aircraft represent an evolution toward systems that can sense their environment and adapt their behavior accordingly, rather than simply following pre-programmed instructions.
Enhanced autonomy requires upgraded security frameworks, moving these platforms from their current “official and protected” classification levels to secret and top-secret operations. This transition demands onboard encryption, zeroization equipment, and robust cybersecurity measures — capabilities that current maritime autonomous systems largely lack.
Rather than viewing security requirements as obstacles, Australia could leverage its maritime autonomous systems to strengthen regional partnerships while building operational experience. Lower-classification missions like fisheries patrol, border surveillance, and maritime domain awareness offer ideal testing grounds for these emerging technologies.
Traditional Australian naval engagement in the Pacific involves periodic patrol boat visits and occasional maritime aircraft surveillance — valuable but inherently limited by the intermittent nature of crewed operations. Autonomous maritime systems could provide persistent presence, offering partner nations continuous surveillance capabilities rather than fleeting support.
This approach offers multiple strategic benefits. Partner nations gain enhanced maritime security capabilities, Australia builds deeper defense relationships across the Pacific, and the ADF accumulates crucial operational experience with autonomous systems in challenging maritime environments. Most importantly, this persistent presence contributes to “deterrence by detection” — the principle that visible surveillance capabilities can deter malicious actors in gray-zone conflicts.
I have argued in my new book that maritime autonomous future operates very differently from capital ships. Capital ships operate in task forces which are increasingly learning to operate in terms of distributed operational approaches.
Maritime autonomous systems, dependent on how they are configured in terms of C2 and ISR payloads, can operate as “mesh fleets.” They are carriers for the payloads onboard and have significant capability to perform several maritime tasks currently.
But they need to be deployed, not treated as science experiments for the distant future. There is a need and opportunity in deploying platforms primarily to gain operational experience while gradually upgrading their capabilities through advanced payloads and sensors. Unlike traditional naval platforms that deploy with their full capability suite from day one, autonomous systems can evolve their mission sets over time.
This evolutionary approach offers significant advantages. Adversaries cannot easily assess the true capabilities of a mesh fleet, as individual platforms may carry different sensor and payload configurations. The fleet can adapt to changing mission requirements by swapping payloads rather than building entirely new platforms. Most importantly, operational experience gained through lower-stakes missions provides the foundation for more advanced capabilities when tensions escalate.
The strategic value of maritime autonomous systems extends beyond their immediate tactical capabilities. In an era where gray-zone conflicts challenge traditional deterrence models, the ability to persistently monitor and document activities across vast ocean areas becomes a powerful tool for maintaining rules-based order.
China’s approach to the South China Sea demonstrates how incremental actions below the threshold of armed conflict can gradually shift strategic balances. Effective deterrence in this environment requires consistent observation and documentation of rule-breaking behavior. Autonomous maritime systems, operating at scale across the Pacific, could provide this persistent surveillance capability.
The psychological impact of known surveillance should not be underestimated. When potential adversaries understand that their actions are being continuously monitored and recorded, they face difficult choices about escalation. This “deterrence by detection” becomes particularly powerful when combined with transparent sharing of surveillance data with partner nations and international bodies.
The transition to truly autonomous maritime systems faces several technical hurdles that must be addressed systematically. Link 16 data link systems, essential for secure communications, currently cost $100,000-200,000 per unit — prohibitively expensive for attritable autonomous platforms. Future communication systems must provide equivalent security and interoperability at dramatically reduced costs.
Sensor integration represents another critical challenge. Maritime autonomous systems need the same environmental awareness capabilities being developed for aerial platforms: radar systems for threat detection, infrared sensors for target identification, and collision avoidance systems for safe navigation. These sensors must operate reliably in harsh maritime environments for extended periods without human intervention.
Security frameworks must evolve to protect increasingly sophisticated autonomous systems without compromising their operational effectiveness. This includes not just cybersecurity measures, but also physical security features that prevent technology compromise if platforms are captured or recovered by adversaries.
Australia’s geographic position and strategic commitments across the Pacific make autonomous maritime systems not just advantageous but essential for future defense planning. The distances involved in Pacific operations, combined with the need for persistent presence rather than intermittent patrols, align perfectly with the capabilities that autonomous systems can provide.
Success requires more than technological development — it demands new operational concepts, revised training programs, enhanced partner nation cooperation, and evolved command and control structures.
The technology exists to make this vision reality. What remains is the strategic commitment to deploy these systems, gain operational experience, and build the partnerships that will define Pacific security for decades to come. In an era where presence enables influence and power, autonomous maritime systems offer Australia the opportunity to maintain persistent influence across distances that would otherwise prove prohibitive.
Featured image: The AI-generated image depicts a map of Australia, showcasing its geographic position and strategic commitments across the Pacific Ocean. It highlights the use of autonomous maritime systems, illustrating the vast distances involved in Pacific operations and the significance of persistent presence for defense planning.