The chilling warning every Australian should read as China builds military capable of striking our cities – and they won’t even need bombs to bring us down
China's rapidly expanding military could soon be capable of striking Australia directly, according to a new Lowy Institute report that warns Canberra faces a "real and growing" threat as Beijing's arsenal reshapes the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific. Experts say the danger extends beyond conventional weapons, with concerns that China could paralyse Australian cities and infrastructure through cyberattacks rather than relying solely on missiles or bombs, making the threat harder to detect and defend against.
The report cites China's expanding fleet of warships, submarines, heavy bombers and nuclear weapons as evidence of its growing military reach, with the shift in regional power balance expected by 2035. It outlines a range of possible scenarios, from symbolic strikes intended to intimidate Australia to more serious attacks, with the specific form any action might take dependent on Beijing's strategic objectives at the time.
- Lowy Institute warns China could strike Australia militarily by 2035
- Report cites growing Chinese warship, submarine and nuclear capabilities
- Experts also flag cyberattacks as a major, less visible threat
New here? Start with this
Australia's national security debate has been reignited by a report from the Lowy Institute, a Sydney-based foreign policy think tank, which examines how China's fast-growing military could affect the region over the next decade. The report looks beyond traditional weapons like ships and missiles to consider newer threats, including cyberattacks that could disrupt essential services such as power, water or communications.
China has been steadily building up its armed forces for years, adding submarines, warships, aircraft and nuclear weapons, which has shifted the balance of military power across the Indo-Pacific, the region stretching from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific that includes Australia, China, and South-East Asia. Analysts use reports like this one to assess how such changes might affect Australia's security planning and defence spending in the years ahead.
This matters because Australia has no land border with China, so any future risk would most likely come through long-range military capability or through less visible means such as cyber interference, rather than a conventional invasion. The report does not claim an attack is imminent or planned, but sets out possible scenarios that policymakers and defence planners may need to consider as the regional balance continues to shift.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Those who take the Lowy Institute's warning seriously argue that Australia has a responsibility to clear-eyed threat assessment rather than wishful thinking, pointing to China's genuinely rapid expansion of warships, submarines, bombers and nuclear warheads as objective, verifiable facts rather than speculation. They contend that acknowledging the risk of coercion, whether through cyberattacks on infrastructure or more overt military pressure, is the necessary first step towards building deterrence and resilience, much as insurance against a fire does not mean one expects the house to burn down. On this view, public debate informed by expert analysis strengthens democratic decision-making about defence spending and alliance commitments, and silence or complacency would leave Australia dangerously unprepared should the regional balance shift as projected by 2035.
The case against
Sceptics of this framing worry that headlines invoking Chinese strikes on Australian cities amount to threat inflation that exaggerates a distant, contingent possibility into an imminent danger, and that such language can become a self-fulfilling prophecy by hardening mistrust and justifying costly militarisation. They point out that capability is not the same as intent, and that China's strategic priorities are overwhelmingly regional, focused on Taiwan and its immediate periphery, rather than any plausible interest in attacking a country with which it has deep trading ties. From this perspective, sensationalist coverage serves the interests of defence contractors and hawkish policymakers, crowds out diplomatic engagement, and risks entrenching a costly arms race that makes the region less safe rather than more secure.