A precedent on our expected diplomatic behaviour had been well established by the previous Howard government.

So anxious was Howard to be seen as a sycophantic supporter of Bush, who turned out to be the most incompetent and deceitful President in the history of the USA, heading a long list of previous Presidential infamy from Chile to Vietnam to Laos / Cambodia and on..
The cunning operators in Washington would have quickly picked Gillard as an "all the way with Barak Obama" type and used her fawning attitude to their advantage as they did with Howard in the negotiations on the US Free Trade Agreement, of great benefit to the US and a great disadvantage to Australia.

However, the worst aspect of this latest visit is the fact that although not trumpeted in public, Gillard would have offered Australia as a site for a US base of some kind, a further compromise of our independence and ability to make our own foreign policy decisions.
How can any country be totally in tune with the actions of another. As well, how would this be seen by China, our largest trading partner as they emerge as the #1 superpower following the US, now morally and financially bankrupt sliding further down the hill towards right wing policies and Zionist parasitic infiltration.

The danger is that Australia at 24 million people has neither the funds nor the capability to be a major power in the world and our future is best guaranteed by being a friend to all countries rather than be aligned to the terrorist nature of the US whose march for military hegemony and the pursuit of oil is never ending.

Being a friend means being aware of how we are viewed by others.

Right now, thanks to the orchestrated Gillard/Obama theatre last month, we are viewed as a sycophantic nation anxious to do the bidding of the US, because "the US can do anything". Thanks to Gillard ‘s theatrical performance, we have reduced yet again the opinions by others of our worth as an independent nation.

That was the real downside.

rexw,

you state "As well, how would this be seen by China, our largest trading partner as they emerge as the #1 superpower following the US, now morally and financially bankrupt sliding further down the hill towards right wing policies and Zionist parasitic infiltration".

You must be joking, right. For all of the US's faults, I see nothing to suggest that China will, ever be a worthy superpower that surpasses the efforts of the US.

As were the British until WWII, the imperialist nature of empire builders cannot be maintained. In the case of the US, the world has tired of military dalliances in Afghanistan and spreading to Pakistan with covert activity daily and with the prompting of the Zionists in Israel, with their eyes on Iran. Now there's a lot of oil there.
Let us not even mention the bin Laden sideshow, a Disney production. All that was missing was Donald Duck.

The world is also tired of the lies, misrepresentations and deceit in the daily dealings by the US with other countries as per Wikileaks, showing them for what they are, devious and totally dishonest. Nothing new here, the mastermind being the cunning Clinton, a truly Machiavellian figure.

Into this environment struts our current Prime Minister, in costumes various, fulfilling a carefully arranged sideshow scheduled by the Melbourne chapter of Israel Incorporated who, through their partners at AIPAC , manage the daily activities of Obama and his cabal in Washington. From here on it was all bad theatre raising so little interest by the people as to hardly rate a mention. They have seen it all before. Another sham.

So what was the outcome of having a naive and egotistical Prime Minister let loose on the world stage in yet another orchestrated performance in Washington? More of the same submissive behaviour that the US has learnt to use to their advantage, and how!

Reports from China are even more alarming. It was a Chinese ‘go-through-the-motions’ stuff this time, China knowing clearly that in Australia they have a compliant and weak partner in a country that allows them to buy shares, companies, land, factories, none of which can be done by Australians in China. Similar to Japan who learned years ago that they should own their pine chip mills, cut down all the Australian trees and not have to touch a single tree in their country. Clever.
It’s all part of selling off Australia. Makes the figures look good for a ‘government’ gasping for breath, daily.

Just more grist for the Gillard spinning mill.

Chris,

Respectfully, I suggest that there are better qualified people around that could clearly enunciate the conditions that determine a superpower. Rather than detract from the intelligent writings of Bruce Haigh and go too far off topic, I would prefer someone like Bruce to answer your comment.

From my viewpoint, I would suggest that until the UK borrowed from the US to maintain a WWII war capability, needed so badly with their limited resources, over a 7 year period, they were still the largest empire, ever. Debt changed all that.

Who owes the greatest amount of money in 2011? The US.
Please do not see the 'strength' of the US Federal Reserve as an American asset. It is foreign owned. Printing money as with the Global Financial Crisis doesn't help one bit either.

Locally in the US find a retailer who is not selling at least 65% of his goods made in China. They must be paid for. Find a building in New York not owned by the oil producers in the Middle East, or a shipping line or major infrastructure project that hasn't attracted Chinese or oil producers as investor. Multiply such numbers by the length of time that the US has been borrowing heavily, an on-going activity. In comparison to such amounts we are a little savings account in Australia.

You have 80% of the Congress and 70% of the Senate who are subservient to Israel. They don't care about the US and drag the US into battles like Iraq, now Afghanistan, trying hard in Pakistan through covert activity and promoting heavily the idea that Iran needs to be controlled if only for the oil reserves. These military actions cost dearly, Chris, the real figures never being disclosed. An ongoing cost, every year and there are 740 US military establishments around the world

Empires come and Empires go and it is generally money that brings on the changes. Not in my lifetime, I would think, but on the way nonetheless.

rexw,

I don't dispute that the US (and West) is in trouble. Debt levels and a lack of real urgency to deal with reality speak for itself.

However, I wonder what superpower appeal China has given its approach to a variety of issues alien to Western traditions. A true superpower must have ideological and cultural appeal, and I doubt that china (with its mercantalist mentality and other problems) will ever offer such appeal, at least based on recent trends.

Culture, an important factor no doubt and a weak link in China's ability to be a superpower..

There are so many factors not the least of which is disparity between rich and poor. In the US, the wealth was with corporations whereas in China, the wealth is with government structures and the power to overcome that and become a land of independent entrepreneurs has not been vested in the people....yet.... and in fact, may never be so.

That will be the determinant...Chinese government long term policy.

The Chinese should continue doing what they are doing now; expanding their exports by 10-15% per year with a gradual improvement in the quality of life for the workers which, starting from a such low point has some way to go to equal the West if they actually want to

One can see that the influence the US exerts over the rest of the world may have been built on respect for their achievements /capabilities as well as military power. The respect is eroding very quickly and military power ceases to be a factor when you can't pay your troops.

Most people see the US in 2011 as something of a self-centred terrorist as it is fully engaged in the pursuit of oil, and cultivating governments as in a 'partnership'. Like the Shah in Iran, a friend one day but disposable tomorrow. Saddam Hussein the same. Their ability to select partnerships was based on the sale of military hardware to autocratic leaders like Mubarak who are slowing being replaced. South America is littered with the bones of US supported dictators and the complete continent hates them, justifiably based on their record.

Now that’s erosion. Same with Asia.

Culture may be a stumbling block in the end for China but military might can win most arguments when all a soldier needs are his orders for the day and a bowl of rice, selected as he is from a population of 1.34 billion and the US is only 0.3 billion. It’s all in the maths

The options are endless.