plantagenet,
I don't think China's Govt is all that interested in Australia, I think they got their eyes on PNG.
No shortage of water there for starters & plenty of natural resources.
On the other hand, if they did look seriously at Australia they'd first get the Bradfield scheme under way. And, probably build a bridge across Torres Strait.

Hi indy

Like all great powers China has a worldwide econo-political strategy - especially in its own Asia-Pacific region.

So, yes, Cambodia, PNG, Vanuatu, Fiji other, Pacific and Indian Ocean islands, are all part of China's debt trap (they owe China money) dynamic. As they can't afford to pay China back China often takes/develops key parts of their territory, typically ports, instead.

China's increasing hold over PNG and other Pacific and Indian Ocean islands gives China a potential isolation/blockade of AUSTRALIA option in the medium-distant future. You will recall that Japan had just such a Pac Island/PNG strategy in WWII.

And yes China has sufficient econo-political control, via Chinese companies, to exert influence over AUSTRALIA by:

- buying up key Australian facilities (eg. Port Darwin), and

- being Australia's No.1 import/export partner.

Cheers

Pete

As they can't afford to pay China back China often takes/develops key parts
plantagenet,
They hit the Jackpot with Darwin harbour by the looks of it. I'd like to know what Australia owed China for to get that deal ?

Hi again Indy

It may cost "only" about $100 Billion for Australia to buy Port of Darwin back from China, I think :)

Regards

Once again the USA has suffered the tragic social and personal impact of mass shootings witnessed in El Paso and Dayton. There has followed political and media driven attempts to label the cause as “White supremacist” and “racism” generally as the factors behind these despicable acts. The Left has been quick to associate remarks by Donald Trump as the instigating factor. Certainly his inflammatory tweets or his political opponents/media interpretation of them do little to improve the political atmosphere that builds the social tension that contributes to the mindset of those inclined to violence.

However the political “Left” themselves may have contributed even more significantly to the social malaise that, in my view, underlies so many of the social problems of modern Western societies through their 'social engineering' of the basic social institution, viz 'the family'. In the USA no where is the community impact of this 'social engineering' more apparent than the horror of gun violence especially in the all too frequent mass shootings.

Certainly the “Conservatives” have also contributed to the 'social engineering' more often by default in failing to adequately defend 'family values' that both sides of politics basically once supported. In respect of the gun violence the “conservatives” have been too lax or too deferential to the National Rifle Association, to even limit access to automatic weapons which have greatly magnified the extent of the mass killings. At least in Australia the conservative Howard Government brought in and enforced strict gun laws following the Port Arthur massacre.

Part 2. But back to my contention that the 'social engineering' of the 'family' underpins so many of today's social problems, and in respect to this article the disastrous and destructive growth in mass shootings in the USA.

In this regard, a US study of mass shootings carried out by Jillian Peterson and James Densley, Aug. 4, 2019 (1) from 1966 to today discloses that in the case of nearly all individuals involved 'childhood trauma' was part of the backdrop

For two years, they studied the life histories of mass shooters in the United States for a project funded by the National Institute of Justice, the research arm of the U.S. Department of Justice. They built a database dating back to 1966 of every mass shooter who shot and killed four or more people in a public place, and every shooting incident at schools, workplaces, and places of worship since 1999. They interviewed incarcerated perpetrators and their families, shooting survivors and first responders. They examined media and social media, manifestos, suicide notes, trial transcripts and medical records.
They observed that the vast majority of mass shooters experienced early childhood trauma and exposure to violence at a young age. The nature of their exposure included parental suicide, physical or sexual abuse, neglect, domestic violence, and/or severe bullying. The trauma was often a precursor to mental health concerns, including depression, anxiety, thought disorders or suicidality.
All pointing to family breakdown and as the statistics show alarming rates in the increase of fatherless families since the 1960s.