#aukus | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

mapsontheweb · 1 year

Photo

AUKUS - trilateral security pact between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States

#maps #aukus #military alliances #us #uk #australia

87 notes · View notes

dreaminginthedeepsouth · 3 months

Text

Mike Luckovich ::

* * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

February 10, 2024

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

FEB 11, 2024

A key story that got missed yesterday was that the Senate voted 64–19 to allow a bill that includes $95.34 billion in aid for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan to advance a step forward. In terms of domestic politics, this appears to be an attempt by those who controlled the Republican Party before Trump to push back against Trump and the MAGA Republicans.

MAGA lawmakers had demanded border security measures be added to a national security supplemental bill that provided this international aid, as well as humanitarian aid to Gaza, but to their apparent surprise, a bipartisan group of lawmakers actually hammered out that border piece. Trump immediately demanded an end to the bill and MAGA obliged on Wednesday, forcing the rest of the party to join them in killing the national security supplemental bill. House Republicans then promptly tried to pass a measure that provided funding for Israel alone.

At stake behind this fight is not only control of the Republican Party, but also the role of the U.S. in the world—and, for that matter, its standing. And much of that fight comes down to Ukraine’s attempt to resist Russia’s invasions of 2014 and 2022.

Russian president Vladimir Putin is intent on dismantling the rules-based international order of norms and values developed after World War II. Under this system, international organizations such as the United Nations provide places to resolve international disputes, prevent territorial wars, and end no-holds-barred slaughter through a series of agreements, including the United Nations Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the U.N. Genocide Convention, and the Geneva Conventions on the laws of war.

Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, deliberate targeting of civilian populations, and war crimes are his way of thumbing his nose at the established order and demanding a different one, in which men like him dominate the globe.

Trump’s ties to Russia are deep and well documented, including by the Senate Intelligence Committee, which was dominated by Republicans when it concluded that Trump’s 2016 campaign team had worked with Russian operatives. In November 2022, in the New York Times Magazine, Jim Rutenberg pulled together testimony given both to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation and the Senate Intelligence Committee, transcripts from the impeachment hearings, and recent memoirs.

Rutenberg showed that in 2016, Russian operatives had presented to Trump advisor and later campaign manager Paul Manafort a plan “for the creation of an autonomous republic in Ukraine’s east, giving Putin effective control of the country’s industrial heartland, where Kremlin-armed, -funded, and -directed ‘separatists’ were waging a two-year-old shadow war that had left nearly 10,000 dead.”

But they were concerned that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) might stand in their way. Formed in 1947 to stand against Soviet expansion and now standing against Russian aggression, NATO is a collective security alliance of 31 states that have agreed to consider an attack on any member to be an attack on all.

In exchange for weakening NATO, undermining the U.S. stance in favor of Ukraine in its attempt to throw off the Russians who had invaded in 2014, and removing U.S. sanctions from Russian entities, Russian operatives were willing to put their finger on the scales to help Trump win the White House.

When he was in office, Trump did, in fact, try to weaken NATO—as well as other international organizations like the World Health Organization—and promised he would pull the U.S. out of NATO in a second term, effectively killing it. Rutenberg noted that Russia’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine looks a lot like an attempt to achieve the plan it suggested in 2016. But because there was a different president in the U.S., that invasion did not yield the results Putin expected.

President Joe Biden stepped into office more knowledgeable on foreign affairs than any president since Dwight Eisenhower, who took office in 1953. Biden recognized that democracy was on the ropes around the globe as authoritarian leaders set out to dismantle the rules-based international order. He also knew that the greatest strength of the U.S. is its alliances. In the months after he took office, Biden focused on shoring up NATO, with the result that when Russia invaded Ukraine again in February 2022, a NATO coalition held together to support Ukraine.

By 2024, far from falling apart, NATO was stronger than ever with the addition of Finland. Sweden, too, is expected to join shortly.

But far more than simply shore up the old system, the Biden administration has built on the stability of the rules-based order to make it more democratic, encouraging more peoples, nations, and groups to participate more fully in it. In September 2023, Secretary of State Antony Blinken explained to an audience at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies that the end of the Cold War made people think that the world would inevitably become more peaceful and stable as countries cooperated and emphasized democracy and human rights.

But now, Blinken said, that era is over. After decades of relative stability, authoritarian powers have risen to challenge the rules-based international order, throwing away the ideas of national sovereignty and human rights. As wealth becomes more and more concentrated, people are losing faith in that international order as well as in democracy itself. In a world increasingly under pressure from authoritarians who are trying to enrich themselves and stay in power, he said, the administration is trying to defend fair competition, international law, and human rights.

Historically, though, the U.S. drive to spread democracy has often failed to rise above the old system of colonialism, with the U.S. and other western countries dictating to less prosperous countries. The administration has tried to avoid this trap by advancing a new form of international cooperation that creates partnerships and alignments of interested countries to solve discrete issues. These interest-based alignments, which administration officials refer to as “diplomatic variable geometry,” promise to preserve U.S. global influence and perhaps an international rules-based order but will also mean alliances with nations whose own interests align with those of the U.S. only on certain issues.

In the past three years, the U.S. has created a new security partnership with Australia and the United Kingdom, known as AUKUS, and held a historic, first-ever trilateral leaders’ summit at Camp David with Japan and the Republic of Korea. It has built new partnerships with nations in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as with Latin American and Caribbean countries, to address issues of immigration; two days ago the Trilateral Fentanyl Committee met for the fourth time in Mexico. This new system includes a wider range of voices at the table—backing the membership of the African Union in the Group of 20 (G20) economic forum, for example—advancing a form of cooperation in which every international problem is addressed by a group of partner nations that have a stake in the outcome.

At the same time, the U.S. recognizes that wealthier countries need to step up to help poorer countries develop their own economies rather than mine them for resources. Together with G7 partners, the U.S. has committed to deliver $600 billion in new investments to develop infrastructure across the globe—for example, creating a band of development across Africa.

Biden’s is a bold new approach to global affairs, based on national rights to self-determination and working finally to bring an end to colonialism.

The fight over U.S. aid to Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, and the other countries with which we have made partnerships is not about saving money—most of the funds for Ukraine are actually spent in the U.S.—or about protecting the U.S. border, as MAGA Republicans demonstrated when they killed the border security bill. It is about whether the globe will move into the 21st century, with all its threats of climate change, disease, and migration, with ways for nations to cooperate, or whether we will be at the mercy of global authoritarians.

Trump’s 2024 campaign website calls for “fundamentally reevaluating NATO’s purpose and NATO’s mission,” and in a campaign speech in South Carolina today, he made it clear what that means. Trump has long misrepresented the financial obligations of NATO countries, and today he suggested that the U.S. would not protect other NATO countries that were “delinquent” if they were attacked by Russia. “In fact,” he said, “I would encourage [Russia] to do whatever the hell they want.”

—

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

#political cartoons #Mike Luckovich #Letters From an American #Heather Cox Richardson #history #NATO #alliances #foreign policy #AUKUS #security partnership #democracy #21st century #diplomatic variable geometry

11 notes · View notes

nando161mando · 1 month

Text

Israel has become emboldened by the West’s complicity in the genocide.

8 notes · View notes

fuckyeahmarxismleninism · 8 months

Text

By Brian Berletic

A series of announcements by the U.S. reflects its large and still growing military presence across Asia-Pacific, particularly in East and Southeast Asia. Together, they reflect a continued and increasingly desperate desire by Washington to encircle and contain China.

#China #imperialism #Asia Pacific #Pentagon #Joe Biden #Taiwan #Aukus #antiwar #Struggle La Lucha

13 notes · View notes

matrim-cauthons-hat · 3 months

Text

ok, i got a idea. a brilliant one! you, see Aukus submarine deal costs $368 billion. waste of money i say. these submarines things are a fad, like zeppelin bomber. what we should spend that money on instead is a comprehensive high speed rail. like the shinkansen but a bit sturdier. AND THEN! we comission a fleet of armoured trains. waaaaaaaayyyyyy better at defending our territory than a measely fleet of submarines. and much cooler too

#auspol #my stuff #aukus

4 notes · View notes

claraameliapond · 1 year

Text

youtube

This!!!! EXACTLY this

Everything

This was/ is exactly my reaction, OH I'M SO GLAD KEATING SAID SOMETHING

And France is offering us a new deal

Jesus just take it it's perfect

Ahhh

THANK GOODNESS KEATING SPOKE ON THIS

He's completely right

Ah and gosh so intelligent

I do truly support Labor, I always will

They are so much better for all Australian people , our earth, everything.

But I never agreed with this idiocy AUKUS

He's right - those in the Labor party- and those in support of it - the vast majority of us will not support this deal .

Labor ARE the better party and therefore our best and only good choice, but this decision is the wrong one. The logic and cost alone is absurdity.

But pandering to the US ego is something that has become a habit of everyone in the whole world and IT HAS TO STOP

Highly recommend that you watch the whole thing , it's so compelling and even if you're not Australian it's a chance to see the master at work.

He said "acid drop" !!!! That's my favourite one!!!

23 notes · View notes

xtruss · 9 months

Text

Washington, Not Beijing, is a Master at Manipulating the 'Trojan Horse 🐎'

— Liu Zhiqin | August 01, 2023

Illustration: Chen Xia/Global Times

The Global Times on Sunday published an opinion piece that argues describing China's cooperation with Italy under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) as a Trojan horse for "China's entry into the West" pushes the West off the course of globalization. Currently, the paranoia of the US and the West about the BRI is indeed very absurd. Their fear of this initiative has reached a level of dementia and logical confusion that is truly astonishing. This makes us wonder: Why do they think we need to resort to such shoddy methods as placing a "Trojan horse" in our cooperation with Europe or other countries?

The US has been using the "China threat" theory to scare its European allies in order to keep Europe firmly tied to its chariot. Unfortunately, on a continent as vast as Europe, it is difficult to find a single entity that can stand tall instead of being a "puppet" under the protection of the US. Europe constantly calls for "strategic autonomy," but why does it lack any strategic confidence?

The US and the West accusing the BRI of being a "Trojan horse" is not just an "imaginative" idea, but a true confession of their real strategy. If you want to know what the US and the West have done in the past, just look at how they are now accusing China. If you want to know what the US and the West want to do in the future, just look at how they are smearing China's development blueprint.

When the US and the West accuse China of "conducting cyberattacks and surveillance," we know where their expertise lies. When they criticize China for "trampling on human rights," we hear guns on American streets. When they say China doesn't follow the "rules," we find that the US and the West are the ones acting arrogantly according to their own set of rules in the world. Currently, the US and the West are implementing the principle of "opposing anything China supports and supporting anything China opposes." This is how the US and the West have turned themselves into such bizarre entities that are neither fish nor fowl.

Rather than the BRI, the US' Marshall Plan provided to Europe after the end of World War II was the true "Trojan horse."

Since the US infiltrated Europe with the Marshall Plan, it provided Europe with a lifeline and an opportunity for post-war reconstruction and revival. The Marshall Plan easily captured the hearts of Europeans and successfully penetrated the political hubs and power centers of Europe. As a result, Europe's "strategic autonomy" has since disappeared; the motto that "Europe is the Europe of Europeans" has become history; "Let Europeans handle European affairs" is now a wonderful wish.

The US used the Marshall Plan to make Europe an economic vassal of the US and "North Atlantic Terrorist Organization (NATO)" to make Europe a military "proxy" for US strategy. Thus, Europe has become the "base" to implement the US global hegemony. With the Marshall Plan (and a batch of other aid programs) and NATO, the US successfully separated the "head" and "body" of Europe: Europe's "body" remains on the continent, while its "head" has already been transplanted to the American continent.

Unfortunately, Europe has not yet come to its senses. The US "Trojan horse" program in Europe is a "US patent" that can't be duplicated.

The US has not stopped the implementation of the "Trojan horse" program around the world, such as the US-Japan-South Korea cooperation, the AUKUS and the "Indo-Pacific Strategy." In particular, the US military assistance for the island of Taiwan is obviously a more arrogant and blatant "Trojan horse" program. In a word, when the US claims that the China-proposed BRI is a "Trojan horse," the US has already deployed its own Trojan horse plans worldwide, and the false accusations against China are just Washington's usual "camouflage."

The US framing of BRI as a "Trojan horse" may offer a new chance for the world to analyze, study, compare and judge: between BRI and those delicately packaged US cooperation initiatives, which one is the real "Trojan horse" and which is the "Noah's Ark" that saves people from danger? The answer is evident.

— The Author is a Senior fellow from the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies at the Renmin University of China (RDCY).

#Washington #Beijing #United States 🇺🇸 The Master of Manipulation #Trojan Horse 🐎#Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)#China 🇨🇳#Italy 🇮🇹#The Global Times #China Threat #Marshall Plan #Europe #North Atlantic Terrorist Organization (NATO)#US 🇺🇸-Japan 🇯🇵 -South Korea 🇰🇷#AUKUS #US’ Marshall Plan #Noah's Ark #Liu Zhiqin #Chongyang Institute For Financial Studies #Renmin University of China (RDCY)

2 notes · View notes

jsato · 1 year

Text

シンガポールからの眺め

執筆：キショール・マブバニ（シンガポール国立大学特別研究員、元国連安保理議長・シンガポール外交官）元記事：https://www.australianforeignaffairs.com/afamonthly/the-view-from-singapore

オーストラリアの指導者たちが、アジアの21世紀におけるオーストラリアの将来について、不安や時にはパラノイアさえ感じるのは無理からぬことである。欧米のパワーが世界、特に東アジアから後退していく中で、オーストラリアとニュージーランドは、アジアにおける孤独な欧米の前哨基地として取り残されることになるからだ。

しかし、地政学的な難題に、感情的に安易な解決策を見出すことは致命的だ。これがAUKUSの根本的な問題点である。AUKUSは、アングロサクソン系の旧友と新たな絆を築くことで、安らぎを与えている。しかし、これでは、オーストラリアの戦略的ジレンマに対処できない。オーストラリアの友人や同盟国は遠く離れているため、（カナダとは異なり）オーストラリアが抑止力のために強力な国内防衛力を整備することは理にかなっている。同様に、オーストラリアが米国との同盟を維持するのも理にかなっている。では、英国はどうだろうか。1950年、英国は世界第3位の経済大国であった。2050年には、トップ10に入るのも難しいだろう。そして、英国は国内のニーズが、遠くの同盟関係よりも重要だと感じると、その同盟関係を取りやめる。オーストラリアとシンガポールが第二次世界大戦で見捨てられたことは周知の事実である。そして、英国は予算が逼迫した1968年にシンガポールの海軍基地を閉鎖している。過去に賭けるのは常に間違いである。未来に賭けた方がいい。今後100年間、オーストラリアにとって最も重要な隣国がインドネシアであることは間違いないだろう。オーストラリアは、インドネシア（および他のASEAN諸国）と緊密な関係を築かなければならないだろう。オーストラリアは、隣国とより緊密に連携して自国の安全保障を強化することに取り組むつもりはない、というシグナルを送ってしまったのだ。インドネシアは明らかに、オーストラリアに小突かれたと感じた。AUKUSの合意に対して、「インドネシアは、オーストラリアが核不拡散の義務をすべて果たし続けるという約束の重要性を強調する」、「インドネシアは、オーストラリアが友好協力条約に基づき、地域の平和、安定、安全に向けた約束を維持することを求める」といった外交用語をインドネシアは使った。インドネシア人は懸念を表明する際に常に控えめであり、このような明確な声明は、AUKUSに対するインドネシアの不安の大きさを示している。オーストラリアの労働党指導者の多くは、過去に、オーストラリアがこの地域のイスラエルのように台頭することは賢明でないと理解していた。イスラエルのように台頭すると、オーストラリアは軍事的には強くなるが、政治的には孤立し、長期的には心理的に不安定になるからである。それゆえ、オーストラリアは数十年にわたり、賢くASEANと緊密な関係を築き、同じ方向へ泳ごうとしてきた。私が個人的に経験したのは、1990年代半ば、シンガポール外務省の事務次官を務めていたときのことだ。当時は、ASEAN10カ国とオーストラリア、ニュージーランドを加えた12カ国による共同体構想に取り組んでいた。そうすることで、オーストラリアは東南アジアに近づき、地政学的に穏やかな緩衝材となるはずであった。しかし、それ以来、オーストラリアとASEANは、地政学的な課題への対処において、距離を置くようになってしまった。ASEAN諸国の多くが中国との関係を概ね改善したのに対し、オーストラリアと中国との関係は、最近の改善にもかかわらず、依然として緊張をはらんでいる。

AUKUSは、オーストラリアを現在守れればよいものではない。今世紀半ばのオーストラリアを守れないといけないものだ。2050年の世界はどうなっているだろうか？あるシナリオでは、米国が依然として世界一の大国であり、東アジアで最も強力な軍事力を持っている可能性がある。そうなれば、オーストラリアは十分に保護されることになる。もう一つのシナリオは、中国が世界一の経済大国となり、東アジアで最も強力な軍事力を持つようになり、米国は外国との関わりを減らし、東アジアでの存在感を薄めるというものである。これがAUKUSの根本的な問題点である。オーストラリアは3680億ドルを投資することで、米国が依然としてナンバーワンである世界では、オーストラリアはより安全となる。しかし、中国がナンバーワンに躍り出た世界では、同じ金額を投資することは、オーストラリアはより安全でないと感じることを招く。中国は軍事的に力を誇示する必要はない。政治的、経済的な影響力は絶大である。象徴的な言い方をすれば、オーストラリアはキューバのようになる可能性がある。地域の支配的な大国の意向に従うことを拒否し、政治的に隣国のほとんどから孤立している独立心の強い国である。ASEAN諸国は、米国や中国との良好な関係を維持するために、慎重に努力してきた。しかし、ASEAN諸国のアプローチは、北京に屈服する運命にあることを意味しない。例えば、南シナ海の行動規範の草案では、断固とした姿勢で臨んでいる。その一方で、中国との経済関係を強化し、互恵的な関係を築こうと努力している。オーストラリアが、東アジアのイスラエルやキューバになるといった極端な選択しかできないとは考えにくい。幸いなことに、オーストラリアはこの地域の経済にうまく溶け込んでいる。地域包括的経済連携や環太平洋パートナーシップに関する包括的および進歩的協定など、地域の主要な貿易協定にすべて賢明にも参加している。しかし、オーストラリアがこの地域の他の国とは異なる地政学的な方向へ泳ぎ続ければ、近隣諸国から遠ざかっていると認識され、心理的に孤立することになる。オーストラリアに関して本当にショックなのは、身近な隣国に対する知識と理解が著しく低いことである。ASEANがどれほど強力なパートナーになり得るか、オーストラリアはまったく理解していない。例えば、キャンベラの多くの人々は、オーストラリアが現在、クアッドで日本と親密な関係にあることを称賛している。2000年当時、日本の経済規模はASEANの8倍あった。しかし、現在は1.5倍程度にしかなっていない。2030年には、ASEANの経済規模は日本の経済規模を上回ると言われている。オーストラリアは、イギリスなどのAUKUSのパートナーや日本との協力によって、過去に賭けてしまっている。未来が変わることは間違いない。アメリカの世紀とは似ても似つかないアジアの世紀にどう適応するのか、オーストラリアは冷静かつ合理的な計算をする時期に来ている。AUKUSは、未来ではなく、過去への回帰を意味する。

#diplomacy #asean #australia #aukus #japan #new world order

3 notes · View notes

dialogue-queered · 1 year

Link

Australian Issues Primer

Has Australia abandoned an independent foreign policy by yoking our force structure so closely to the US via exclusive access to US nuclear submarine technologies? A former foreign minister answers: yes.

Extract1: [A] big unanswered – or less than persuasively answered – question is whether, by so comprehensively further yoking ourselves to such extraordinarily sophisticated and sensitive US military technology, Australia has for all practical purposes abandoned our capacity for independent sovereign judgment. Not only as to how we use this new capability, but in how we respond to future US calls for military support.

There were assurances at the time of the first Aukus announcement by the US secretaries of state and defense that “there will be no follow on reciprocal requirements of any kind” and “no quid pro quo”. But in my own experience that is not quite the way the world – and American pressure – works.

When I hear the refrain that an Australian flag means just that, and that we will retain complete operational independence in the use of these boats, whatever the context, I can’t help but be reminded of then US secretary of state James Baker’s reply to my call to him as foreign minister at the height of the first Gulf war in 1991. When I suggested that, given the sensitivities involved, it would have been helpful for us to have had just a little consultation before some assets of ours were ordered into a particularly vulnerable location, I was left in no doubt, buddy, that it was Washington running this war, not Canberra.

Extract2: The biggest test case we face is if China launches an unprovoked attack on Taiwan, which I think is far less likely in the foreseeable future than the China-scare brigade insist, but not to be completely discounted. Senior US figures, including deputy secretary of state, Richard Armitage, as far back as 1999, have told Australian interlocutors that if the US found itself in conflict with China over Taiwan, it would expect Australia’s support, and would mean the end of the alliance if it didn’t get it.

The notion that we would have no alternative but to go to war in these circumstances has in recent years gained much more traction – on both sides of politics, albeit a little more reluctantly on my own – than it should have. We need to remind ourselves more often that both the UK and Canada sat out the Vietnam war without alliance rupture.

#aukus #australian foreign policy #australian military #australian politics #paul keating #auspol #gareth evans #2023 #the guardian

1 note · View note

forgottenbones · 1 year

Text

youtube

America SCAMS Australia

#friendlyjordies #aukus #''hey do you... do you want a nuclear submarine?''#that's the empire kids!

2 notes · View notes

dcoglobalnews · 2 years

Text

U.S TO CHINA: WE'RE HOSTING WORLD'S LARGEST NAVAL EXERCISE, IN PACIFIC

U.S TO CHINA: WE’RE HOSTING WORLD’S LARGEST NAVAL EXERCISE, IN PACIFIC

The U.S. is hosting the world’s largest naval war games in the Pacific ocean this summer in a loud message to China. All four members of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (also known as “The Quad”) and at least five countries from the South China Sea will be in attendance.In a Tuesday press release, the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) said the 2022 Rim of the Pacific exercise (RIMPAC)…

View On WordPress

5 notes · View notes

lpdhmm · 2 years

Text

#aukus #politique #France #royaume uni #Australie #etats unis #Disons que c'est de bonne guerre - quoique

2 notes · View notes

alwayshistory · 9 days

Text

A war is brewing in the Pacific Will Aukus make the same mistakes as Nato?

BY Thomas Fazi The US may be losing ground to new global powers in many respects, but when it comes to the business of sowing conflict around the world, it remains unrivalled. As it slowly abandons Ukraine to its own fate, after playing a crucial role in triggering the conflict in the first place, and as it contributes to the dangerous escalation in the Middle East, it is also laying the ground…

View On WordPress

#Asia- Pacific #AUKUS #China #NATO #USA

0 notes

sinoeurovoices · 18 days

Text

美日同盟已轉變為真正的全球夥伴關係

美國總統拜登（Joe…

View On WordPress

#AUKUS #拜登岸田文雄 #美日同盟 #美日戰略合作

0 notes

head-post · 21 days

Text

Canada might join AUKUS amid Arctic territorial threats

Several countries around the world, including those without direct access to the Arctic, claim the right to develop this resource-rich region. Experts predict that the Arctic will become not only a territory of political and economic confrontations, but also of armed clashes in the future, according to Navy Recognition.

Five countries have direct access to the Arctic: Russia, Canada, the United States, Norway and Denmark. Russia’s longest border was determined by the respective decrees of the President of Russia dated 2 May 2014 (maritime section) and 27 June 2027 (land territories) based on the resolution of the Presidium of the Central Executive Committee of the USSR dated April 15, 1926.

However, there is no international treaty defining the legal status of the Arctic. The legal status of the Arctic territories is regulated by international law, the national legislation of the Arctic states and bilateral agreements.