AUKUS: Australia decides to die for USA's war with China
Author`s name Lyuba Lulko
The Asia-Pacific region is about to fall for an arms race in connection with Australia's decision to acquire nuclear submarines under a new pact with the United States and Great Britain, which local environmentalists call 'floating Chernobyls'.
Unprecedented deal
On September 16, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison unveiled an agreement on the transition to nuclear-powered submarines with the help of the United States and Great Britain. However, Australia decided to refuse from its earlier agreements with France.
The deal to acquire nuclear submarines, concluded under the new AUKUS pact, used to be considered unthinkable from both political and practical points of view. Canberra did not even expect either the United States or the UK to share their nuclear technology, and feared public outcry against the presence of nuclear facilities in a nuclear-free country.
Australia will now become the only country in the world that does not possess nuclear weapons, but has nuclear submarines.
Morrison said that they would be designed over the next 18 months and built in Adelaide. Officials said that the new submarines would be quieter and more powerful than Australia's existing submarine fleet and that they would deter China's ambitions in the Far East.
'Floating Chernobyls' will put Australia on the line of fire
Adam Bandt, the leader of the Australian Greens, said that the decision to procure nuclear submarines from the US and the UK was "one of the worst security decisions in decades."
"It's a dangerous decision that will make Australia less safe by putting floating Chernobyls in the heart of our major cities," he told the ABC on Thursday.
The prime minister, he added, will need to explain what may happen in the event of an accident at a nuclear reactor in the center of an Australian city.
In his opinion, escalating tensions between China and Australia will increase the risk of a nuclear war, which will put Australia on the line of fire.
As a regional power, Australia should stick to an independent course to de-escalate the conflict in the region, the politician also noted.
He hopes to veto the deal in the parliament with the help of the Labor Party.
Australia counts on US victory in war with China
Hugh White, a Professor of Strategic Studies at the Australian National University, said that one should expect China's response to the deal. Such a major deal, he said, will change Australia's approach to the region. The trilateral pact would serve US interests by giving the key ally more powerful submarines in the Pacific. In the escalating rivalry between America and China, Australia supports the United States and hopes that the Americans will win, Professor White believes. At the same time, he added, if one looks 10 or 20 years ahead, USA's dominance over China does not seem to be possible.
The expert explained that the trilateral nature of the deal is based on the fact that the UK needed permission from the US to deliver top-secret nuclear technology. This showed how seriously America is determined to flex its muscles in the Asia-Pacific region.
China warns Australia
Australia's relations with China have become increasingly strained after Canberra demanded an investigation into the causes of the COVID pandemic, which originated in the Chinese city of Wuhan in late 2019. China responded by banning exports of coal, copper and sugar from Australia.
A senior Chinese diplomat, deputy ambassador of China to Canberra, Wang Xining, warned Australia in April by saying that a superpower is "not a cow that can be at first milked and then slaughtered."
"China is not a cow. I don't think anybody should fancy the idea to milk China when she's in her prime and plot to slaughter it in the end. So we are open for collaboration and cooperation, but we'll be very strong in defending our national interest,” Wang Xining said. "Australia connived with the United States in a very unethical, illegal, immoral suppression of Chinese companies,” he said.
US builds Asian version of NATO
Andrey Koshkin, an expert at the Association of Military Political Scientists, told Pravda. Ru, that the Americans did not like it when suddenly Australia "began to be courted by the French."
According to the expert, the United States wants to make Australia to be on duty to guard Antarctica and oppose China.
"The world is changing so dynamically, so Australia may eventually agree to run errands for the USA," Andrey Koshkin told Pravda. Ru.
A quadripartite agreement between Japan, the United States, India and Australia is to be signed on September 24. When signing the agreement, the countries will pledge to join their forces against China and partly Russia as well.
"The United States of America is drawing Australia into the process of creating the Asian version of NATO. The ultimate goal of this project is to contain China and, to a certain extent, Russia in the Far East," the expert noted.
China will stand up against Asian NATO bloc
China is already outraged about the prospects for military-political alliances to appear in the Indo-Pacific region.
"China will defend itself. Indonesia is already outraged. New Zealand says that it will not let those submarines pass, and there will be other reactions coming from Asia soon, because the focus of attention of the United States of America is shifting from the European continent to the Asian one," Andrey Koshkin said in an interview with Pravda.Ru.
Prime Minister of New Zealand Jacinda Ardern said Thursday, September 16, that the country would not lift the ban on nuclear vessels entering its waters after Australia decided to build a fleet of nuclear submarines in partnership with the United States and Britain.
"Certainly they couldn't come into our internal waters. No vessels that are partially or fully powered by nuclear energy is able to enter our internal borders," she said. "This is not a treaty level arrangement. It does not change our existing relationship including Five Eyes or our close partnership with Australia on defence matters," she added.
China's reaction to AUKUS
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian called US actions "highly irresponsible." According to him, Canberra is "solely responsibility for the current difficult situation."
The deal seriously undermines regional peace and stability, intensifies the arms race and undermines the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, the Chinese official said. The international community, including neighboring countries, has good reasons to doubt Australia's sincerity, he noted.
An editorial published in China's Global Times, described the pact as "another hostile signal" to China.
It is worthy of note that China has six nuclear-powered submarines art the moment, but this number will be increased to 16 by 2040.
Читайте больше на https://english.pravda.ru/world/149212-australia/
The former prime minister questioned whether the deal would force Britain into conflict if Beijing tries to invade Taiwan
Mrs May was responding to a Commons statement on the deal from Boris JohnsonBy Arj Singh
Deputy Political Editor
September 16, 2021 5:57 pm(Updated 9:07 pm)
Theresa May has questioned whether the UK could be dragged into war with China if it invades Taiwan following the signing of a new defence pact with the US and Australia.
The former prime minister asked Boris Johnson what the “implications” of the deal’s commitment to preserving security and stability in the Indo-Pacific were in the event of an incursion by Beijing into Taiwan.
The ground-breaking deal will see the three allies co-operate on the development of a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines for the Australian navy.
It is being seen as an attempt to check China’s growing military assertiveness in the region, including towards Taiwan.
In the Commons, Mrs May asked the Prime Minister: “What are the implications of this pact for the stance that would be taken by the United Kingdom in its response should China attempt to invade Taiwan?”
Mr Johnson replied: “The United Kingdom remains determined to defend international law and that is the strong advice we would give to our friends across the world, and the strong advice that we would give to the government in Beijing.”
In a separate exchange, the PM also insisted Aukus is “not intended to be adversarial toward any other power”.
But writing for i, another former Tory leader, Iain Duncan Smith, said: “Prior to Aukus, China had taunted Taiwan that, ‘when the war comes’ Taiwan could not count on US support. This was reinforced by near daily incursions of Taiwanese airspace by Chinese military aircraft.
“The Aukus pact is a good response to this taunt and shows that the UK and US – and I hope other free countries that will follow – will not allow China’s aggressive behaviour to go unchecked.”
Ex-Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn was less enthusiastic about the deal, tweeting: “Starting a new cold war will not bring peace, justice and human rights to the world.”
The Guardian view on the Aukus defence pact: taking on China
The agreement between the US, UK and Australia strengthens old ties as a new era unfolds in the Indo-Pacific region
Thu 16 Sep 2021
No one – least of all Beijing – believes the denials. The new defence pact between the US, UK and Australia is unmistakably aimed at containing China. The question is how substantive it will prove to be. The initial project – Canberra’s acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines, with Washington and London’s help – is prompted in part by growing Australian frustration over its troubled contract for French-made vessels. But it opens the way for greater military cooperation and is to be underpinned by wide-ranging collaboration on areas such as cyber-security, artificial intelligence and quantum computing, which China is pursuing intensively.
Joe Biden appears to be realising Barack Obama’s pledge of a pivot to Asia, with US capacity freed by withdrawal from Afghanistan, and China’s behaviour ringing alarm bells internationally. The Aukus pact binds the UK and Australia more closely to the US position, and should augment US military power in the region (though France, Europe’s most significant Indo-Pacific player, is openly furious). Though Boris Johnson has highlighted the promise of UK jobs, a White House official described the deal as a “downpayment on global Britain”.
Three years ago, Australia’s prime minister, Scott Morrison, insisted Canberra need not choose between Beijing and Washington. Now he seems to have judged that China has made the choice for him, given the punishing trade war, the treatment of Australian citizens, mammoth hikes in military spending (albeit from a lower base than the US) and its broader behaviour. Donald Trump’s presidency gave China an opportunity to strengthen relationships with US allies; the pandemic gave it an opportunity to rebalance towards cooperation. Instead, it accelerated course with Wolf Warrior diplomacy, trade pressure, clashes with India and more frequent incursions into Taiwan’s air defence identification zone, and upped the ante in the South China Sea.
The result is growing coordination among anxious nations. The anglophone “Five Eyes” intelligence-sharing nations have increased cooperation; Australia and the US have worked more closely with India and Japan in the “Quad”; the UK invited India, South Korea and Australia (as well as South Africa) to the G7. At US prompting, Nato has taken a stronger line on China.
A firm and unified response to China’s actions by democratic nations is both sensible and desirable. Whether the new pact will restrain it – or prompt it to boost its military even further, pursue closer relations with Russia, and intensify other forms of pressure – remains to be seen. Beijing’s attacks on “cold war mentality” are about perception, not just rhetoric. This week we learned that the top US military officer reportedly called his Chinese counterpart fearing that Beijing believed the Trump administration was preparing to attack. Mr Biden may believe he can pursue “extreme competition”, confronting Beijing in some areas and engaging it in others, but China clearly disagrees. It sent a junior official to meet John Kerry for climate change talks. Reportedly, Xi Jinping did not respond to the president’s proposal of a face-to-face summit.
While many herald Aukus as a momentous step, this is not a treaty but a statement of intent, with even the details of the submarine agreement 18 months away. Setting aside that project (and the real concerns it might open the door to proliferation), we cannot yet tell how significant the pact will be. Faith in US commitments is shakier in the wake of Mr Trump. What is certain is that this further sharpens the divide between China and the west.
No comments:
Post a Comment