budanski
08-05-2003, 11:28 AM
US May Want to Set Up Military Bases in Australia, Prime Minister Says
By Patrick Goodenough
CNSNews.com (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=%5CForeignBureaus%5Carchive%5C200308%5CFOR20030805c.html)Pacific Rim Bureau Chief
August 05, 2003
Pacific Rim Bureau (CNSNews.com) - The Australian government would consider allowing the U.S. to establish American military bases on its soil, if approached by Washington, Prime Minister John Howard said Tuesday.
Speaking in the country's far north -- thought to be the likeliest location for any future U.S. military base -- Howard said no request had yet been made, but he noted that the Americans were currently reviewing the deployment of their forces around the world in the aftermath of the Iraq war.
He told a radio station in the Northern Territory capital, Darwin, "they may possibly approach Australia, they may not."
"There shouldn't be any assumptions made that we would automatically agree or disagree," he said, but added: "We will have a look at it -- it is possible."
Howard is a close ally of President Bush and supported the U.S.-led mission to oust former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. Australian forces have fought alongside Americans in the Pacific, Korea, Vietnam and the Gulf.
The federal opposition Labor Party - which opposed the Iraq war - said Tuesday it saw no need to base U.S. troops on Australian soil.
Labor defense spokesman Chris Evans said any U.S. request to that effect would have to be justified.
"Until there's a proper explanation as to why that would be necessary Labor doesn't believe it's necessary."
Reports have surfaced at regular intervals in recent months suggesting that entire military bases, or contingents of U.S. troops, could be relocated to Australia from elsewhere in Asia.
Following a rise in anti-American sentiment in South Korea late last year, talks are underway to re-arrange the deployment of the 37,000 U.S. troops there, moving them away from the demilitarized zone dividing the peninsula.
During a regional visit last June, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said the U.S. felt it was important to update its force posture in the region "so that we can counter a North Korean attack more quickly, more effectively."
He said the troop posture in Japan, where 47,000 personnel are based, was also being reviewed, but denied reports that the U.S. was considering a wholesale move of Asian-based forces to Australia.
The following month, Canberra played down rumors that U.S. F-16 fighter planes could be based in the Northern Territory for extended periods - reports that prompted some local politicians to say such a development would be welcomed for security and economic reasons.
"The Northern Territory has always been on the frontline of defense and I believe many Territorians would view any increased U.S. presence in Australia's north positively," said one of them, Howard ally Denis Burke.
He noted that U.S. warships have long been welcome visitors to Darwin.
Leftist criticism
The two countries already have a joint intelligence base in the Australian outback called Pine Gap, a longstanding target of left-wing campaign groups like the Australian Anti-Bases Campaign Coalition.
Coalition representative Dr. Hannah Middleton said by phone Tuesday that it was not good enough for Howard to remain non-committal about the possibility more U.S. bases could be set up in Australia.
"For the government to say that we haven't yet been asked, therefore we don't have a position, is in fact disingenuous," she said by phone.
Howard should make his position on this matter clear, now, "so there can be an informed debate in society, instead of the incremental statements we're getting at the moment."
The coalition, whose affiliates include peace organizations, trade unions and political groups, opposes U.S. bases in Australia because it rejects U.S. policies.
"Australia is already unquestioningly tied into U.S. foreign and military policy," Middleton said. "If that was a policy that genuinely looked after the interests of the Australian people, then our concerns would largely, but not entirely, disappear.
"The trouble is, Australia is backing a government that has stated that it will take pre-emptive strikes ... against countries which in effect displease it."
This was putting Australia at risk, Middleton said, by making it "a target."
'Alliance makes Australia safer'
The "target" argument has been raised regularly by opponents of the government's decision to support U.S. policies in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere.
Terrorist leaders, including Osama bin Laden, have named Australia among their enemies in recent years.
A terrorist plot foiled in Singapore early last year involved plans to attack the Australian mission there, as well as those of the U.S., Britain and Israel.
Eight-eight Australians were killed in last October's terrorist bombing on the Indonesian resort island of Bali, blamed on the regional al-Qaeda proxy, Jemaah Islamiah (JI).
The government has confirmed that JI cells have been uncovered in Australia.
Howard Tuesday challenged the notion that Canberra's alliance with the U.S. was jeopardizing its security.
"It's obviously in Australia's security interest to have a close defense alliance with the United States," he told journalists in Darwin.
"That defense alliance makes Australia safer; it doesn't make Australia more vulnerable."
Political analyst Des Moore, a councilor at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, also differs with the target theory.
"We're already under threat anyway," he said from Melbourne Tuesday, adding that it was clearly to Australia's benefit to pursue its present course.
"The terrorist threat has quite radically changed the world outlook, and we do need to get closer to the United States and, for that matter, Britain," including possibility accepting U.S. bases in Australia, he said.
Moore disagreed with another argument raised by critics of Howard, who say that Canberra's close alignment with Washington is threatening Australia's ties with its Asian neighbors to the north.
In the event of U.S. troops being moved from South Korea or Japan to Australia, he said, Asian critics may in fact be pleased that there are fewer U.S. forces "in their area."
Knock Knock. Can Mortimer come out and play? ;)
By Patrick Goodenough
CNSNews.com (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=%5CForeignBureaus%5Carchive%5C200308%5CFOR20030805c.html)Pacific Rim Bureau Chief
August 05, 2003
Pacific Rim Bureau (CNSNews.com) - The Australian government would consider allowing the U.S. to establish American military bases on its soil, if approached by Washington, Prime Minister John Howard said Tuesday.
Speaking in the country's far north -- thought to be the likeliest location for any future U.S. military base -- Howard said no request had yet been made, but he noted that the Americans were currently reviewing the deployment of their forces around the world in the aftermath of the Iraq war.
He told a radio station in the Northern Territory capital, Darwin, "they may possibly approach Australia, they may not."
"There shouldn't be any assumptions made that we would automatically agree or disagree," he said, but added: "We will have a look at it -- it is possible."
Howard is a close ally of President Bush and supported the U.S.-led mission to oust former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. Australian forces have fought alongside Americans in the Pacific, Korea, Vietnam and the Gulf.
The federal opposition Labor Party - which opposed the Iraq war - said Tuesday it saw no need to base U.S. troops on Australian soil.
Labor defense spokesman Chris Evans said any U.S. request to that effect would have to be justified.
"Until there's a proper explanation as to why that would be necessary Labor doesn't believe it's necessary."
Reports have surfaced at regular intervals in recent months suggesting that entire military bases, or contingents of U.S. troops, could be relocated to Australia from elsewhere in Asia.
Following a rise in anti-American sentiment in South Korea late last year, talks are underway to re-arrange the deployment of the 37,000 U.S. troops there, moving them away from the demilitarized zone dividing the peninsula.
During a regional visit last June, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said the U.S. felt it was important to update its force posture in the region "so that we can counter a North Korean attack more quickly, more effectively."
He said the troop posture in Japan, where 47,000 personnel are based, was also being reviewed, but denied reports that the U.S. was considering a wholesale move of Asian-based forces to Australia.
The following month, Canberra played down rumors that U.S. F-16 fighter planes could be based in the Northern Territory for extended periods - reports that prompted some local politicians to say such a development would be welcomed for security and economic reasons.
"The Northern Territory has always been on the frontline of defense and I believe many Territorians would view any increased U.S. presence in Australia's north positively," said one of them, Howard ally Denis Burke.
He noted that U.S. warships have long been welcome visitors to Darwin.
Leftist criticism
The two countries already have a joint intelligence base in the Australian outback called Pine Gap, a longstanding target of left-wing campaign groups like the Australian Anti-Bases Campaign Coalition.
Coalition representative Dr. Hannah Middleton said by phone Tuesday that it was not good enough for Howard to remain non-committal about the possibility more U.S. bases could be set up in Australia.
"For the government to say that we haven't yet been asked, therefore we don't have a position, is in fact disingenuous," she said by phone.
Howard should make his position on this matter clear, now, "so there can be an informed debate in society, instead of the incremental statements we're getting at the moment."
The coalition, whose affiliates include peace organizations, trade unions and political groups, opposes U.S. bases in Australia because it rejects U.S. policies.
"Australia is already unquestioningly tied into U.S. foreign and military policy," Middleton said. "If that was a policy that genuinely looked after the interests of the Australian people, then our concerns would largely, but not entirely, disappear.
"The trouble is, Australia is backing a government that has stated that it will take pre-emptive strikes ... against countries which in effect displease it."
This was putting Australia at risk, Middleton said, by making it "a target."
'Alliance makes Australia safer'
The "target" argument has been raised regularly by opponents of the government's decision to support U.S. policies in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere.
Terrorist leaders, including Osama bin Laden, have named Australia among their enemies in recent years.
A terrorist plot foiled in Singapore early last year involved plans to attack the Australian mission there, as well as those of the U.S., Britain and Israel.
Eight-eight Australians were killed in last October's terrorist bombing on the Indonesian resort island of Bali, blamed on the regional al-Qaeda proxy, Jemaah Islamiah (JI).
The government has confirmed that JI cells have been uncovered in Australia.
Howard Tuesday challenged the notion that Canberra's alliance with the U.S. was jeopardizing its security.
"It's obviously in Australia's security interest to have a close defense alliance with the United States," he told journalists in Darwin.
"That defense alliance makes Australia safer; it doesn't make Australia more vulnerable."
Political analyst Des Moore, a councilor at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, also differs with the target theory.
"We're already under threat anyway," he said from Melbourne Tuesday, adding that it was clearly to Australia's benefit to pursue its present course.
"The terrorist threat has quite radically changed the world outlook, and we do need to get closer to the United States and, for that matter, Britain," including possibility accepting U.S. bases in Australia, he said.
Moore disagreed with another argument raised by critics of Howard, who say that Canberra's close alignment with Washington is threatening Australia's ties with its Asian neighbors to the north.
In the event of U.S. troops being moved from South Korea or Japan to Australia, he said, Asian critics may in fact be pleased that there are fewer U.S. forces "in their area."
Knock Knock. Can Mortimer come out and play? ;)