According to Agence France-Presse reported on November 22, Australian Defense Ministry Darden signed an agreement with British and American diplomats in Australia on the same day to establish Australia's position in the three defense cooperation, the so-called "AUKUS", and share sensitive technologies related to nuclear submarines. In response to the previous comments of the Chinese Embassy in Australia on issues such as cooperation between the three countries' nuclear submarines, Dutton also openly said that "the remarks of Chinese embassy officials are provocative and stupid and ridiculous." As we all know, Australia's nuclear submarine cooperation with britain and the United States has caused many negative consequences, not only harming international nuclear non-proliferation efforts, but also intensifying the nuclear arms race. However, some Australian politicians are full of Cold War mentality and ideological prejudice, not only blatantly going against the trend of "peaceful development and cooperation in the world today", but also repeatedly playing up the Theory of The China Threat, making groundless accusations and attacks against China, and not hesitating to tie Australia to the "chariot" of confrontation with China. So, why has Australia repeatedly provoked China-related issues? What deep-seated problems have been exposed by its recent actions? Please pay attention to the "National Defense Time and Space" - South Military Forum.
The United States, the United Kingdom and Australia prepare to sign the "Naval Nuclear Propulsion Information Exchange Agreement" at the Parliament Building in Canberra (Global Network)
Zhou Yuting:
As of the first half of this year, China remains Australia's largest trading partner. However, for some time now, Australia, as an ally of the United States, has willingly acted as a pawn of the United States and constantly provoked contradictions with China. Australia has repeatedly pointed fingers at the Hong Kong National Security Law, and they have also grossly interfered in China's internal affairs on issues such as Taiwan to support and cheer up the "Taiwan independence" forces. Australia has flouted international rules and disregarded the opposition of all parties to carry out nuclear submarine cooperation, deliberately exacerbating regional tensions, stimulating an arms race, and threatening regional peace and stability. Not only that, but some Australian politicians have repeatedly made extremely absurd and irresponsible remarks against China out of their own political self-interest. Professor Yinan, what do you think of Australia's frequent provocations on China-related issues?
Jin Yinan:
Now, the United Kingdom, the United States and Australia have officially signed a defense cooperation agreement. The United States and the United Kingdom are both nuclear powers, and Australia is not even a nuclear power, so why do we have to squeeze into the nuclear countries? As we all know, if a non-nuclear State wants to become a nuclear-armed State, the risk is very large. Australia's geographical location, although it is a separate continent, is close to Asia. From this perspective, Australia is basically a country in Asia and the Pacific. In fact, almost all of Australia's economic benefits are derived from Asia, especially in recent years, the sustained growth of the Australian economy is inseparable from China's economic development. It can be said that without the economic take-off of East Asia and the economic take-off of China, Australia would not have been able to develop to this point. It should be said that it has fully enjoyed the dividends of Asian economic development and the dividends of China's economic development, and Australia is the biggest beneficiary of Asian prosperity and China's prosperity.
But what did Australia do in reverse? Together with the United States and Britain, it has set up an "AUKUS," and the United States wants it to serve as a vanguard of anti-China efforts to curb China's development. Not to mention how much of a threat nuclear proliferation will pose to Australia itself in the future, in the case of Australia containing China alone, it is actually being someone else's thug, doing something completely contrary to what it has benefited for many years. In this regard, former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and Keating have repeatedly raised warnings. Of course, these Australian officials who raised different opinions are not pro-China and friendly forces, but they proceed from Australia's own interests and oppose the anti-China policy adopted by the current government. These officials know very well that if Australia becomes an anti-China vanguard, it will clearly be engaged in serious confrontation with Asia, China, its largest trading countries, and its main source of economic growth. Such an unwise choice is actually pushing Australia in a dangerous direction.
Screenshot of a statement posted by Australian Defence Ministry Dalton on social networking sites (Observer Network)
Australia's current behavior is typical of "revenge". Let's look at the Australian Defence Ministry Of Darton, one of the toughest officials in morrison's administration toward China. Just a few days ago, in an interview, he said in vain that "Chinese mainland have no right to take back Taiwan" and that it would be "unthinkable" for Australia, as its ally, not to participate in military operations if the United States promised to send troops to "defend Taiwan." Some netizens commented, "If this is the case, then it is inconceivable that China will not beat you, and Australia will be ready to shed blood and sacrifice for the United States." Indeed, Australia's attempt to make profits through anti-China will be shattered, and it will eventually only lift a stone and drop it on its own feet, becoming the laughing stock of the whole world.
That is true. As Australia's defense minister, Dutton dared to say that "China has no right to take back Taiwan." Why doesn't he talk out of his mind? Even Biden wouldn't say that. The reason why he dared to speak in this way may be that the United States likes him to say so, and has said something that is inconvenient for the United States to say. Therefore, Dutton's speech directly reflects Australia's status in the international community and the status of these people represented by Dutton. He spoke out what the United States had revealed privately, but it was not convenient for the United States to say. So, Dutton is ridiculous, he thinks he plays the role of a hero, but he is actually a clown. I think that if Australia insists on playing such a role, it will end up with a gray head, a blue nose and a swollen face, which is for sure, and its final outcome can only be like this. Therefore, Dutton seems to be as strong as an ox on the surface, but in fact, his words fully highlight Australia's status and role in "AUKUS". It is actually working hard for others, and it is the first wave of thugs who rush up when the United States clashes with others. As for what the thug will end up like, how the black boss negotiates with the other side is another question, it is just a bargaining chip.
Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison (Reuters)
After the deterioration of Sino-Australian relations, Australia's economic development has been seriously affected, which has also exacerbated the dissatisfaction of the Australian people with Morrison. Former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd shouted at Morrison in an interview with the media, accusing him of his actions that have torn apart Australia's diplomatic relations with other countries and isolated the whole of Australia. Another former Australian prime minister, Keating, publicly reprimanded Morrison in the media, believing that Morrison's idea of "pro-American enemies" was very wrong, and his policy made Australia's self-depreciation become a "follower" of the United States. Professor Yinan, the Morrison government disregarded domestic public opinion and insisted on taking a series of unilateral measures to lead to the continuous deterioration of China-Australia relations.
Since its establishment in 1901, the Commonwealth of Australia has pursued a policy called "White Australia". The White Australia policy refers to restricting the entry of immigrants of color, mainly to restrict Chinese. Of course, this bill of itss has now been repealed. Because the bill itself is racially discriminatory. But the bill reflects an attitude of some white Australians towards people of color. We can see very clearly from Dutton's words and deeds that he was rude to the Chinese ambassador to Australia and had no courtesy in government-to-government interactions. What does this mean? It is the "white supremacy" trend of thought. Although the "White Australia" policy was abolished in the 1970s, the idea of "White Australia" still has a large market in Australia to this day, and it has always been haunted and affected many people.
In recent years, they feel that their self-esteem has been greatly hurt, because Australia's economy is not developing well, it needs to rely on people of color in the economic field, and the defense of countries of color has developed more powerfully than that of white countries, especially when they see that China has so many new equipment, and the weapons and equipment of the Chinese army, navy and air force are more powerful than Australia. At this time, on the one hand, there is the impetus of the United States to act as a thug and help the United States do things; on the other hand, there is also the initiative of Australia. The main reason why Australia treats China in this way is that they feel that Australians and Americans are white, Anglo-Saxon, everyone speaks English, and they all think that white people should control the world, and white people should not let the yellow people become the leaders of the world economically, politically, and militarily. This is the starting point of the most secret and inconvenient thought problems in their hearts to express to others.
However, we must always believe that white supremacy is a small phenomenon in Western countries, and most white people still want to improve their lives. In Australia in particular, most people still want to engage and do business with China. What are the demands of ordinary people? It is an increase in income, an improvement in the environment, and a happy life. Therefore, morrison and Dutton's policy does not represent the future long-term Australian policy. Over time, as confrontation with China becomes more and more ineffective, as the cost of confrontation becomes more and more expensive, all costs will eventually need to be paid by ordinary people, and eventually the Australian people will make the choice that best suits their interests.
Source: Yangguang Military