In three separate essays, the report analyses Australian declaratory policy, the force structure that emerges from the paper, and defence finances.
The first essay, by Rod Lyon, argues that Australia's latest Defence White Paper is at least as much a political document as a strategic one, intent on rebuilding defence bipartisanship after an era of controversy in strategic policy.
The document paints a picture of the strategic environment pointing to major uncertainties in coming decades and, consequently, to a need for Australia to enhance its own strategic weight.
At the core of the assessment lies an especially worrying uncertainty - about the US' role in the region.
In the next essay, Andrew Davies sees the military strategy articulated in the White Paper as coming down on the side of an Australian Defence Force constructed for the defence of Australia and operations in the ‘immediate neighbourhood' - Timor, PNG, Pacific Islands and New Zealand.
But in analysing the associated equipment acquisition and force structure decisions, he finds that the extra naval weight injected into the White Paper's ‘Force 2030' will also strengthen the ability of future governments to contribute to operations with the US in the wider Asia-Pacific arena.
In the final essay, Mark Thomson looks at defence funding over the lifetime of the White Paper and the outlook for Defence's $20 billion Strategic Reform Program.
The conclusions are sobering - current plans for a significant ramp-up of defence spending between 2012 and 2017 will present the department with an enormous challenge, and the long-term funding on Force 2030 is likely to prove inadequate for the expansion that is envisaged.