Photo: Xinhua
Submitted by Dr. Binoy Kampmark
The blinkered security establishment is standard fare in politics. From Washington to Manila, we hear of terrors and concerns which tend to more spectral than not. Legitimate concerns such as catastrophic environmental failure, or a nuclear accident, are treated with a sigh, its warners doomsday advocates rather than reasoned citizens. It is the unseen demon that preoccupies.
One such blinkered devotee is Andrew Hastie, an Australian member of parliament who prides himself as something of a security sage. (Suffice to say that experience serving as a member of the Special Air Services Regiment does not necessarily qualify you as an expert in world politics.) He chairs the Parliamentary Joint Committee for Intelligence and Security, a grouping of parliamentarians that has done more harm to Australian civil liberties than most institutions. Lacking an inner cabinet role, he has the freedom to mouth some of his richer views, possibly with promptings from the Prime Minister, Scott Morrison. Best get the lowly man to do the damage if you want a view known widely.
Being no Sinophile, Hastie has deemed the People’s Republic of China the great Satan of international politics, something that will earn him a fan base in certain circles in the Washington cocktail set. In doing so, he reiterates fears of Yellow-Red horde coursing its way through Asia to the idyllic, peaceful antipodes. He scolds Australians for not appreciating the “ideology” of the Chinese Communist Party. This is the new domino effect, and like that haphazard assessment formulated during the Eisenhower years, it is equally unconvincing.
In The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald on Thursday, Hastie expressed an opinion dressed up in the language of urgency, an attempt to awaken a certain consciousness. In that sense, he is an options shop, hand-me-down George Kennan, who penned his famous Long Telegram as US chargé d’affaires in Moscow warning of the Soviet mindset. “At bottom of Kremlin’s neurotic view of world affairs is traditional and instinctive Russian sense of insecurity,” he noted.
Hastie makes no mention of Kennan, preferring, instead, the convenient findings of Stephen Kotkin of Princeton to disabuse those silly sods who thought that “Stalin’s decisions were the rational actions of a realist great power.” In Kotkin’s views, it turned out that the embroidering of Marxist terms through meetings, discussions and policies in the Kremlin were really due to one tendency: “the Communists were Communists!”
For Hastie, the planes finding their incendiary conclusion in the World Trade Centre in New York and the Pentagon did not supply the defining “geopolitical moment” of the 21st century. That dubious honour went to the colliding encounter between a J-8 fighter jet of the People’s Liberation Army Navy and a US Navy EP-3 signals intelligence aircraft off Hainan Island that same year. The PLAN pilot perished; the 24 crew of the EP-3 were subsequently held by the PRC for 11 days. The aircraft was duly stripped and examined, and returned in parts. “The Hainan Island incident laid down the contours for the present challenge facing Australia. It portended the agonising security and economic balancing act we must now perform.”
Hastie is less anthropological, and more reactionary than Kennan. “Right now,” writes Hastie, “our greatest vulnerability lies not in our infrastructure, but our thinking.” This is nothing less than an “intellectual failure” rendering Australia and other states “institutionally weak. If we don’t understand the challenge ahead for our civil society, in our parliaments, in our universities, in our private enterprises, in our charities – our little platoons – then choices will be made for us. Our sovereignty, our freedoms, will be diminished.” Strong language from a politician in the service of a country whose sovereignty has always been susceptible to modification, being an annex of Washington’s imperium.
What was needed, in the view of a worried Hastie, was for Australians to accept and duly respond “to the reality of the geopolitical struggle before us – its origins, its ideas and its implications for the Indo-Pacific region”. Australia found itself facing “every strategic and economic question […] refracted through the geopolitical competition of the US and the PRC.” The solution? Continue to trade with the PRC for reasons of prosperity, yet maintain a firm security posture against it.
Shaky historical comparisons make their way into the piece. Australia, he insisted, found itself in the same position as those French strategists worried about the rise of Nazi Germany. The “Maginot Line” built to protect France against Germany prior to the Second World War finds a modern equivalent in the theory that “economic liberalisation would naturally lead to democratisation in China.” The French failed against the German panzers; Australia has, in turn, “failed to see how mobile our authoritarian neighbour has become.”
The extrapolations are inevitable: the Munich analogy that corrupted so much thinking in US foreign policy, leading to defeat in Vietnam; the need to take steps to avert disaster and avoid appeasing authoritarianism. Many an idiotic policy has arisen from shonky historical analogies.
The Chinese response was curt, coming in a statement from the embassy. “We strongly deplore the Australian federal MP Andrew Hastie’s rhetoric on ‘China threat’ which lays bare his Cold War mentality and ideological bias.” Its assessment was conventional: there was a “world trend of peace, co-operation and development” that was undermined by such remarks.
Hastie has his glum faced backers unnerved by the “might is right” view of the world order, be it US President Donald Trump’s penchant for tearing up treaties, Russian disruptions, strong man popularity or disunity in Europe. Anne-Marie Brady, based at the University of Canterbury, defers to the MP’s wisdom, making the common mistake about a joint parliamentary committee that often sees haunting forms rather than substantive matters. That committee, after all, “helped pass the new counter-foreign interference legislation which will help address the Chinese Communist Party’s aggressive united front work activities in Australia”.
We have seen this in history: the hysterical prophet who insists on self-fulfilling prophecies. If you proclaim the end of the world is nigh, you might just get what you wish for. Terrifying your opponents, unsettling them into something rash, is the stuff historical blunders are made from. The march of history is not that of an orderly, planned sequence, but a messy stumble occasioned by blundering leaders. With individuals like Hastie, a reasoned balance will not be struck. Those in Washington will remain confident that they have Australia on their side in any future skirmish.
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com
Australia is a little barking poodle of the Americunts and is biting the Chinese hand that feeds it. China can destroy the bankrupt Aussie deadbeat economy in a day if it stops buying the polluting coal and iron from the British penal colony.
That’s a good description of my country. The anti Chinese articles are now a weekly occurrence in the MSM. Honestly though as much as I hate imperialist ??, are the Chinese any better? We are in a major predicament, having to obey our trigger happy masters and trying not to antagonise our major trading partner cannot really be achieved. The shit could really hit the fan.
Very sad, I know that the arsehole SloMo had full Trump and CIA support and Bill Shorten lost an unlosable election thanks to usual Murdoch, Jew and CIA meddling and incessant propaganda. But giving the Americunt warmongering arseholes naval and military bases in NT and Queensland is sheer suicidal lunacy.
Yeah, a complete violation of our sovereignty, well our so called sovereignty, lol. There was absolutely no debate in the media about it. The only thing Australians protest about now is LBGTDWSIZKOL rights. Snowflakes.
Clima Green Gays are marching from victory to victory all over the world and will take over world governance.
I don’t know what country you live in, but if you are from the other side of the world, I’m impressed by your knowledge of the then opposition leader Bill Shorten. I wasn’t surprised he lost, there was really nothing about him that was inspiring. Just the same old run of the mill spineless puppet.
I doubt Hastie is smart enough to pen any article! Surely ghostwritten by his CIA handlers.
all of them are brainwashed convict Anglo trash racists who are having a hard time with global power shifts and irreversible rise of China and Asia. The Aussie convicts have world class inferiority complex and just want to lick US masters dumbarse.
Not all of them. ?
Let’s hope not, but the Jew arsehole Murdoch has brainwashed most of the racist trash. You could be the only exception. Good on ya mate!
Alot of Australians have been conditioned not to talk about politics, and when it comes to international politics they are generally completely ignorant, thanks to Murdoch..
The end of the world is not nigh. But a balanced assessment of active and relatively unchanging policies and associated actions (and with consideration of the direction of unfolding events) should clarify logical outcomes.
For example, the successive and globally expanding wars of aggression of the U.S.-NATO-Israel-allied bloc (of which Australia is a willful participant) and concurrent forms of warfare (such as proxy warfare, economic warfare/sanctions, destabilization operations, partition operations, cyber warfare, regime change operations, etc.) are likely to continue expanding (as is occurring). The most recent targets include the DPRK, Iran, Venezuela, the PRC, the Russian Federation, etc. Proxy warfare and partition operations against Syria (involving U.S. efforts to secure the major oil producing regions through its proxies) in combination with U.S. recognition of the (illegal) Israeli occupation of Syrian territory (also involving planned joint resource extraction projects) will be eventually challenged by Syria (diplomacy being its preferred method but the likely failure of such mechanisms to logically lead to a military solution).
Israel is obsessive in its desire to dismantle/degrade the retaliatory capabilities of its regional adversaries (having played a key role in engineering war against Iraq and proxy warfare operations against Syria, with current efforts to engineer an allied war against Iran and with recognition of its preparations for war against Hezbollah and Palestinian resistance organizations having regional implications).
Greece (in collaboration with Israel, Cyprus and the U.S.) and Turkey are gradually moving towards a kinetic stage of conflict particularly over resources in the Cyprus region [1]. India (also involving Israeli guidance and provision of military technology) and Pakistan are already involved in a low intensity conflict that clearly has the potential to escalate significantly. The U.S. position regarding the DPRK is also incompatible with a lasting diplomatic resolution (in many ways replicating the approach applied against Iraq). U.S. and Chinese analysts have documented assessments that a kinetic stage of conflict is likely a matter of time (escalation being the logical progression of conflict relating to the pursuit of primacy) [2-3]. Actions against the Russian Federation indicate what is occurring is more than a Cold War but not yet a direct Hot War [4-6].
The globally expanding militarism of the U.S.-NATO-Israel-allied bloc is unlikely to cease. The eventual outcome should therefore be obvious (despite efforts to prevent this as limits of restraint will in time likely be exceeded).
– “The unleashed power of the atom has changed everything save our modes of thinking and we thus drift toward unparalleled catastrophe” [A. Einstein].
Note: A worst case scenario, if it occurs, does not translate to human extinction but it would eclipse previous wars (many nations would largely be destroyed). Subsequent deaths would result from radiation poisoning, mob violence, famine, disease, etc. but stability would in time return (although the political map of the world would be altered). An era would end but logically another would follow. I hope that I am wrong in my assessment of what is more broadly unfolding (with recognition obscured by the staged application of successive and globally expanding wars of aggression) but I am comfortable and confident I am not.
References: 1. Turkey Prepared To Reinvade Cyprus If Needed – Erdogan Says Following EU Sanctions, Southfront/ZeroHedge, 21/07/2019
2. “The US military-intelligence complex is engaged in systematic preparations for World War III. As far as the Pentagon is concerned, a military conflict with China and/or Russia is inevitable, and this prospect has become the driving force of its tactical and strategic planning…. Each of the hearings presumed a major US conflict with another great power (sometimes unnamed, sometimes explicitly designated as China or Russia) within a relatively short time frame, years rather than decades.” (Washington prepares for World War III, WSWS, 5 November 2015)
3. “According to a report in China Military Online, escalations between the two superpowers will lead to the inevitable. “The problem is not whether the war will break out, but when,” the report said. “Our task is to develop the ‘trump card’ weapon for China before the war.” (New Arms Race: China, US Prepare for Missile Warfare, Sputnik, 24/08/2016)
4. “I think everybody understands that an undeclared war against us is underway…..” [Russian State Duma’s Budget and Tax Committee Andrey Makarov] said. (“Undeclared war” forces Russia to boost defense spending — minister, Tass, October 27, 2018)
5. “there can be no Cold War II because the Cold War as we knew it never ended. NATO’s eastward creep, Georgia in 2008, Ukraine now, the merciless, reckless sanctions—all that has changed since 1991 are tactics, not strategy…. Russians far afield from the Kremlin share the thought that they are in a war with Americans. The bitter truth, available to us as of these past weeks, is that they are right.” (Noam Chomsky and what the media’s not telling you about the new Cold War, Salon, 30/01/2015)
6. “We know what will happen year after year, and they know that we know… Russia will no longer play games with the USA and get involved in deals in the dark. Russia is ready for serious negotiations, only if they contribute to collective security. All aspects of global security now lie in ruins. There are no more international guarantees for security and the country responsible for the destruction of the global security is the USA. Russia does not intend to reform the world according to its own views, and will not allow itself to be reformed according to foreign views. Russia will not close itself for the world, but anyone who tries to close it to the world will harvest storms. Russia will not act as the savior of the world either, as in the past. Russia does not want war and does not intend to start a war. But today, Russia can see that the explosion of a global war is almost unavoidable and is prepared and will continue preparing. Russia does not want a war but is not afraid of a war. Those who get Russia involved in this process will learn the real meaning of pain”. [Vladimir Putin] (At the Threshold of a Third World War, Southfront, 12/09/2016)
What type of human kind will be if they will release against each other the most deadly biological-genetic weapons?