Of course Australia has a dependent relationship with the US, any other type of association is beyond the wit and wisdom of our political elites or the imagination of most of the voters. Australia seems, forever,to be destined to be a client state of some great power. The only nation that, demonstrably, has a "special relationship" with the US is Israel, there is no other plausible explanation for American indulgence. Small, loyal, allies of great nations sometimes have tragic histories, remember the fate of the Plataeans.

Brendon

Not a bad article but Australia's freedom of action is physically constrained by our overly weak and incomplete defence force.

I don't think there is much scope for truly independent Australian foreign policy while Australia's military structure is geared toward alliance and dependence on the US military.

Right now (as in 1915 vis a vis Britain) Australia is a very junior partner who must participate in the senior partner's interests and wars.

Australia’s main interest is backing up the US because the US protects us with:

- its aircraft, warships and subs in the Indian and Pacific Oceans

- bases at Pearl Harbour, Guam, Okinawa, Diego Garcia and little discussed Persian Gulf bases

- the US led UKUSA intelligence network including sigint and satellite imagery (Defence intelligence as you say).

We are isolated and cannot provide the essential defence resources that the US provides now. To provide our own effective resources would mean a huge unpopular increase in defence spending along the lines of France and Israel - probably including Australia possessing nuclear weapons like those two countries.

But back to dependence. Protection comes at a monetary cost (money to buy US weapons, ie premium on ANZUS) and a dependent policy/thinking cost.

If we had such independent defences we could then the have independent foreign policies that you and I wish for. But no serious Australian politician would waste $35 Billion in defence spending each year to achieve independent defences.

For example in Afghanistan Australia has no option of withdrawing, or whether to act as a tiny ineffectual voice in negotiations. Our choice is to minimise Australian casualties while we are there. This is unfortunately until the US says we can go.

It sounds passive but until Australia can provide for its own independent defences our geographical isolation means that we are not in a position to have Independent policies.

Afghanistan is an indicator of Australia continuing long term dependence on the US. Exhaustion of the US public with Afghanistan, as with their exhaustion over Iraq and earlier exhaustion over Vietnam, is Australia's main hope to withdraw.

Pete
http://gentleseas.blogspot.com/

I'm not much of a Rudd fan, except in the "thank god he's not Howard" sense, but I am impressed with his diplomacy.

His relationship with Obama is as it should be: polite and frank, unlike the neo-con frat brother relationship of the previous leaders.

And a bit of fawning to the Chinese is fine. We can't always rely on America, and In the event of a truly world-scale catasrophe, we'll be at China's mercy. It pays to keep them happy.

oh dear here we go again
of courtse we have strong links to usa[after all we are of the same root[are ruled by the same elete london based law society]

used the same colonising teqniques to eradicate the native inhabitants[the same colonising teqnique perfected in canada, south africa , indonesia and israel,

its the same neo con boys club running things, using the same old racist teqniques[killing off the naytives and re-educating their kids under the rules of war [under war powers and the rules of contract law[civil law]

we all have founding documents based on the magna carta etc[but they arnt allowed to be quoted in our courts[because what they do is unconstitutional[the same elites took over the babnking systems, under much the same timming and civil enactments,under the law of the seas and the laws of buisness[the invasion colonisation buisness stealing others lands and resources

even the media is owned by the same cartel[as is the fed reserve sysatem,and the status of remaining a british colony under the maritime powers of hrh[despite loudly proclaiming legal self country status, by deceptive acts, but under laws under a gov general]

the ties that bind are via the laws that blind

[were the truth of their govt crimes ever revealed the people claiming the 'status' of civilian[ima-grant/serf]they would gasp in horror of what deceptions and colusions that were done in their name,let alone created their person[persona legal personum],but let the serfs believe they are cityzenry..lol

you gave up freeman rights long ago,look up the term some time[know statue law is due only on your person[criminal law needs a victim]no victim no crime[unless you claim to be a citizen[person]then its under civil contract law

[but its all gobbly gook to ya right [lol]

Who can forget the pathetic little boy scout salute given by Kevin Rudd to George Bush when they first met? Unfortunately, as he had pleaded with the voting public only months before that we were becoming America's lapdog, his behaviour seemed somewhat disingenuous. This event was quite significant as it made clear how the Labor Party, on the one hand was prepared to appeal to the rebellious adolescent mentality of some voters urging a "stand on our own two feet" and shun the Father America and Mother England approach, while they were quite prepared to grovel to them (and now China)in the background. The realities of the relationship were apparent - we need their support badly.

Meanwhile in the US, Obama's perspective on the wider world is puzzling and concerning. While he is immensely popular his administration's inability to comprehend the perspective of other countries may be reflected in his giving world leaders iPods and Box sets of Hollywood movies as gifts on the one hand while asking the International community to forgive American arrogance on the other. I'm not so sure Australia will be as 'understood' as it was under Bush.

Despite Rudd's attempts to capture the reflection of Obama's popularity, his strong association with China and his previous anti-american stance has clearly distanced the US from Australia.

This is extremely dangerous for Australia a country very vulnerable to military attack and dependent on our Western for all means of support and assistance.

Can you send more troops to Afghanistan Kevin? Of course I can, Mr Obama. Now go tell them Fitzgibbon!.

Atman

I agree with you.

I expect that after Fitzgibbon's lameduck visit to the US he won't make it as Defence Minister to ANZAC Day - because the diggers deserve better.

While officials in Beijing may hope their boy can continue to be useful I suspect that even Rudd will feel that things are getting a bit strained.

If you have to choose between reliance on the US or with a country that still has a poster of Mao above Tiananmen Square I know where the allegiance (and eventual votes) of most Australians lie.

And Fitzgibbon's campaign money? Thankyou Beijing run Bank of China.

China needs to prove that it has a better future for Australia than Maoist manipulation.

Pete