| Submit your comments on this article |
| Down Under |
| U.S. said to eye troop deployment |
| 2003-05-26 |
| The United States is considering positioning combat troops and aircraft in Australia as part of an effort to intensify the war on terrorism in Southeast Asia, Australian defense officials were quoted by local press reports as saying. The reasons, they said, are political instability in Indonesia, to Australia's immediate north, and the rise of Islamic fundamentalist groups there, including Jemaah Islamiyah. Defense sources told the newspaper Australian last week that Washington had approached Canberra with plans that included the deployment of F-16 fighters and positioning up to 5,000 Marines at an Australian army base. If the plans were implemented, it would be the first time since World War II that U.S. troops in large numbers were deployed in Australia. The Australian reported further that Deputy Defense Secretary Shane Carmody had told a parliamentary hearing on maritime strategy in Canberra that the provision of facilities for U.S. troops in Australia had been suggested. But an aide to Defense Minister Robert Hill told The Washington Times that "nobody at the U.S. political level has said they would like any access to Australian bases they don't already have." The aide could not confirm whether discussions about such a possibility were taking place at the departmental level. At present, U.S. military presence in the country is most prominent at the joint-intelligence facility at Pine Gap, the largest and most important U.S. satellite ground station outside the United States. It was used during both Persian Gulf wars to help direct U.S. missiles to their targets but does not include any American combat troops. "It will be a very brave government that decides to host large numbers of U.S. combat troops in this country," said John Walker, a lecturer in politics at the University of New South Wales. He said many Australians have begun seeing Prime Minister John Howard as a puppet of the Bush administration after he supplied troops during the war with Iraq without the explicit backing of the United Nations. Many Aussies also see John Howard as a brave man of his word. In the pubs of Sydney, Mr. Howard has gone down a few notches from being "honest Johnny Howard" to being referred to as "Little Johnny Howard." Traders here are also worried when they see business opportunities in postwar Iraq being grabbed by the Americans, says Mr. Walker. "People here are alert to the broader relationship, especially trade. We were one of the main exporters of wheat to Iraq, but now the U.S. is in control of that. It's these sort of things that can sour the mood," he said. Some diplomats and analysts believe that while a U.S. presence in the region would be a stabilizing factor and a deterrent against the hegemony of China, a broadening of the presence would cause suspicion. "If the plan becomes policy, then of course we will take it up with the Australian government and the Americans, and ask for clarification on what exactly is being planned," said a spokesman for the Indonesian Embassy in Canberra. Making the Indonesians nervous would be sufficient reason to do this. Feeling surrounded yet, boys? Ask the mullets in Iran about that. Analysts said it has always been Australia's wish to have the United States more interested in the country's north. "We would look to the U.S. if we went into any big confrontation in the region," said Wayne Reynolds, associate professor at the University of Newcastle. But he said U.S. troops on the ground should be a last resort. "The U.S. should provide logistical support, technological support, but military muscle should be provided by Australia itself," he said. Sure hope the Aussies know that we'd be there for them. |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #3 In the pubs of Sydney, Mr. Howard has gone down a few notches from being "honest Johnny Howard" to being referred to as "Little Johnny Howard." Yeah, but that's been going on for at least four years. The newspapers (i.e. the Sydney Morning Herald) have been calling him that since before I went to Australia. Asking an Australian academic for his opinion on world affairs will always net you a result like the one shown. The rot is pervasive. It would be very foolish to put any number of American troops in Australia. Right now, people making their way illegally to Australia are detained in camps in the desert until it can be determined that their status as asylum-seekers is legitimate. Advocates for the "hopeless" and "desperate" gather around them, trying to tear down the fences so the occupants can be free to flee into the wilderness and die. There's a single atomic reactor in Australia, in Sydney. A while back Greenpeace invaded the place, hanging a big banner and generally making a nuisance of themselves. In neither case is the government (in my opinion) terribly serious about defending the facilities. That's the sort of thing any American troops would have to contend with in Australia. |
| Posted by: Angie Schultz 2003-05-26 08:48:20 |
| #2 You know it ticks me off to no end? IT is when I read an Aussie official/prof state that "if the fight was a big one...of course we would expect the US to help" come on...we are trying to prevent a "big fight" by taking out the cowardly terrorists in southeast Asia...then the popular masses calling Howard a puppet? Go have another beer mate...you don't that you don't know! What fools! Yeah, we want to take over Australia, what a joke...any way I do think of the Aussies as friends of the US...Russell that fear you have of another Carter or Clinton coming into power is shared by me...on many levels...God bless! Brien |
| Posted by: Brien 2003-05-26 08:19:45 |
| #1 Steve, While most Aussies (and hopefully many Americans) would expect the US to be there in a crisis when we might need them - experience in East Timor didn't run that way. It was a different US Administration that looked at the Indonesians committing slaughter in Australia's nearest neighbour and announced that they felt like "we are being asked to tidy up my teenage daughter's bedroom". The US declined to provide material assistance. We are realistic enough to realize that, while it helps to have good friends, when it comes down to it you may not be able to count on anybody. The current administration is unlikely to let us down, but you are bound to have another Carter or Clinton eventually. |
| Posted by: Russell 2003-05-26 03:13:13 |