The pivot to guided weapons and long-range strike abilities to deter enemies further from Australia's shores have formed the centrepiece of a major defence review.
But the opposition is hammering the government for reprioritising defence dollars and cutting land projects instead of boosting overall spending.
This includes the slashing of 450 planned infantry fighting vehicles to 129 after the independent review into the defence force warning it's not fit for purpose in the "missile age".
"The simple truth is that our troops will have less protection in close combat infantry are most effective when fighting with armoured support," opposition defence spokesperson and former soldier Andrew Hastie said.
"This indicates a fundamental lack of seriousness about the strategic challenges facing this nation with the degradation of land power."
Security expert John Blaxland said Australia needed to increase its long-range capabilities to project its power further from its shores.
"Stretching the range of the defence force out from 150km or so to potentially 1000km is a game changer in terms of the deterrent effect we can expect," he told AAP.
Professor Blaxland said the government would need to acquire thousands of long-range missiles to stop the navy's fleet of destroyers from being overwhelmed in a conflict.
"Our current fleet of warfare destroyers have the capability of firing off a few dozen missiles and then have to go back to port to resupply," he said.
"If they face an in extremis challenge, and there is a genuine conflict, it will involve more than 48 launches."
Prof Blaxland said the United States needed to work quickly to cut red tape around its arms regulations imposed by Congress so Australia could acquire and domestically build guided missiles and develop hypersonics.
He said the acceleration of local manufacturing would not only shore up Australia's capabilities but protect against a future isolationist government in Washington.
"They will still get the benefit of the license fee, and they will also get the benefit of an ally that's muscular," he said.
The Australian Strategic Policy Institute's Bec Shrimpton said hypersonic missiles and counter-hypersonic technology would be critical in the future.
Ms Shrimpton said adversaries were developing missiles that could stretch further into Australia's area of operations, adding that the 40km range of the defence force's missiles doesn't go far enough.
"When we're talking about trying to contest any challenges, confront risk further afield, that kind of range doesn't get you very far," she said.
"You need them to be precise and you need them to go as far as you possibly can."
The defence strategic review outlined the importance of being able to deter potential enemies at a much larger distance given that an attack on Australia doesn't have to come in the form of an invasion.
"This review and the government's response does provide for a reshaping of the Australian army but in a way which gives it a much greater and a much longer range strike capability," Defence Minister Richard Marles said while unveiling the review on Monday.
