If Only We Could Mine And Export 'Having A Go'

PM Kevin Rudd gets a decent, fairly serious profile in the US Time Magazine.

It's often interesting to read how American, UK or European media portray Australia in its feature stories. The perspective, obviously, is greatly different from anyone living here, and what may seem common knowledge to us, or to Australian journalists, often seems fascinating to outsiders. It's also curious to read a feature story in corporate media that makes Australia sound so damned triumphant, so successful, with the potential of being a major player on the world stage through the rest of the 21st century.

This Australia? Here? Really?

If Time Magazine is right, Kevin Rudd cuts a much more impressive figure on the world stage than the local media has led us to believe.

Grabs from the Time Story :

As Rudd reveals his foreign exploits, the crowd shifts; attentions wander. The Aboriginal elder who kicked off the event with a traditional welcome ceremony lets his eyelids droop....Rudd, 51, doesn't fit the typical mold of an Australian man of action....Rudd is the consummate globalized citizen....,"(Rudd will) put in a full day in the Parliament and then, because of the time difference, call world leaders way into the night".... Its geographic remoteness notwithstanding, Australia deserves watching.... (Australia) has a chance to show the rest of the world the importance of maintaining good relations with both the new century's superpowers....If Rudd can navigate warm and friendly relations with both the U.S. and China, he will turn out to be a politician of more than local significance.... "I'm in the business of making a difference"....After more than 17 years of sustained growth, Australia is flirting with recession....Rudd comes across as more buttoned-up than many of his predecessors.... In moments of crisis, his emotions resonate.....the global financial crisis underlines how individual countries, even supremely powerful ones, cannot rely on go-it-alone approaches...."I am acutely conscious of what happens when you simply allow things to drift to unrestrained nationalism".... "friends of all, enemy of none"....as a child avoiding work in the cowshed, he would retire to the farthest reaches of the farm with a book on Asian archaeology.....For the better part of two centuries, Australia's self-perception was that of a chunk of the West that unaccountably found itself floating in the South Pacific....Until the 1970s, an exclusionist White Australia Policy kept out most Asian immigrants. But today, around 8% of Australians are of Asian descent...."At last," says the Prime Minister, "we have some decent food to eat"....Some Asian, Middle Eastern and African Australians complain that they are somehow considered less truly Australian than those who came from, say, Italy, Greece or Croatia....the specter of a communist country of 1.3 billion people can spook even close economic partners.....In Taipei, where Rudd studied Mandarin, his home was the wonderfully named Republic of China Anti-Communist Recover the Mainland International Youth Activity Center...in a speech in Mandarin to students at Peking University last year, he infuriated his Chinese government minders by highlighting human-rights abuses in Tibet....can a nation really welcome being economically yoked to China if it also sees Beijing's ambitions as a threat?.... "America has a great history of reinventing itself".... at the dawn of this new century, as a country and a continent unto itself, Australia has to define its security on its own terms...."You can sit around quietly on the global diplomatic circuit and get nowhere," he says, "or you can ball up a few ideas, some of which have some prospects".... Makes you wonder whether Australia couldn't export that having-a-go spirit along with its iron ore, coal and gas. The world might be better for it.

Read The Time Magazine Profile Of Kevin Rudd Here

Last Australian Combat Troops Arrive Home, Mission Completed

John Howard On The Iraq War : The First Six Months

So the Iraq War is over now for Australian combat troops, officially anyway, with the last troops arriving home to warm welcomes from friends and family over the weekend :

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has today seen the completion of his pledge to bring home all of Australia's combat troops from Iraq, with the final contingent of soldiers flying into Brisbane.

Families and friends waited nervously at Brisbane airport for the first glimpse of loved ones they had not seen for more than six months.

Hugs and tears greeted the 80 members of the Seventh Brigade after their plane touched down...

They are the last soldiers from the Overwatch Battle Group to return home from southern Iraq and their Commander, Brigadier Steven Day, says they accomplished their mission.

"There is a deep sense of pride in what they have done. They have toiled hard for the last six or seven months and southern Iraq is a better place for what they have done," he said.

Well Done and Welcome Home.

The Australian Defence Force strategists who purposely kept Australian combat troops from spending too much time patrolling with under-trained, terrified, and sometimes dangerously incompetent American forces should be thanked. (While stationed in Jordan in the days before the war officially began, Australian troops witnessed young, inexperienced Americans almost blowing a British Chinook helicopter out of the sky. The Americans thought the Chinook was Iraqi. Iraq, of course, has never owned or used Chinook helicopters. The Brits landed their helicopter near the Americans, got out and punched crap out of them.)

Likewise, those ADFers who demanded Australian troops spend as little time as possible in Iraqi provinces fatally contaminated by depleted uranium dust should be thanked.

It will be many years before some of the most important government and ADF documents and reports on the lead-up to the Iraq War, and its opening months, are declassified, and it will only be then that we will learn the full truth of war where it concerned Australian combat troops.

That most Australians know so little of what their troops did and experienced in the Iraq War is a damn shame, and hopefully something that will be rectified in the next few years as more stories of their frontline experiences are made public through books, documentaries and movies.

That most Australians know so little about John Howard's total commitment to the 'War on Terror', including the Iraq War, within days of the September 11, 2001 attacks, is an abheration of our nation's history. That Howard repeatedly lied to all Australians that he had not committed Australian troops to the Iraq War as late as mid-March is, or should be, criminal.

Following is a recap of Howard quotes on the invasion and occupation of Iraq from January to June, 2003. Note the constantly shifting 'reasons for war' and the blindly optimistic belief that there would be no major resistance from Iraqi civilians, which directly contradicted key intelligence briefings Howard received on what would happen once the invasion begun.

As a point of reference, being information Howard was clearly made aware of, the first car bombs aimed at American troops exploded with hours of the start of the war, and the very first American vehicles to enter Baghdad were not met with a shower of chocolates and flowers but machine gun fire from men, women and children shooting from hundreds of open windows and rooftops. The Iraqi resistance began the moment the war did, as Australian generals well knew it would.

John Howard :

"....our goal is to make certain that the weapons that Iraq now has, chemical and biological and a capacity to develop nuclear weapons, are taken from Iraq. I don't believe the world can turn its back on that - January 23, 2003

"..if as a consequence of that military action the current regime disappears, that circumstances in Iraq could well be a lot better, I’m certain they will be a lot better and that in a relatively short period of time the situation could stabilise in the way that it did in Afghanistan." - February 7. 2003

"Iraq must be disarmed. We cannot afford to allow a rogue state like Iraq to retain chemical and biological weapons. Others will do likewise. North Korea will not be disciplined by the world community if Iraq is not disciplined." - March 14, 2003

Howard had been told repeatedly, by March 14, 2003, that Iraq's WMD capabilities were next to useless and/or non-existent.

"I have no doubt at all in my mind, and many would agree with me, that the Iraqi people will suffer less if Saddam Hussein is removed." - March 17, 2003

"I think you’ve also got to remember that the suffering of the Iraqi people will be a lot less once this regime has gone..." - March 19, 2003

"I want the Iraqi regime disarmed, I want Iraq disarmed. The question of what happens to Saddam Hussein to me is incidental. The aim is the disarmament of Iraq."- March 19, 2003

"...we don’t have any quarrel with the ordinary people of Iraq, we don’t want to inflict any avoidable pain injury or death on them. We do have a big quarrel with the regime because it’s the regime that has defied the world in relation to its chemical and biological weapons. We mustn’t lose sight of what this is all about." - March 20, 2003

"....on the scale of suffering I have believed for a long time that the people of Iraq will suffer less if he’s gone than if he’s left there." - March 21, 2003

"...it is a very tyrannical regime and once it’s gone the people of Iraq will I’m sure have a much better life." - April 2, 2003

"...if Iraq had disarmed and fully cooperated, then I don’t think people would have been arguing on its own for regime change." - April 2, 2003

"...getting rid of the regime and thereby ensuring that Iraq does not retain chemical and biological weapons or a capacity to develop them in the future, that is the goal....I would say victory once the regime is gone." - April 6, 2003

"...we won't be making a significant peacekeeping contribution. I would expect that as our military involvement winds down, and I'm not announcing that it's about to wind down, let me emphasise, but at some point obviously it will begin to wind down." - April 10, 2003

The scale of resistance by Iraqi civilians to the invasion and occupation was already clear by April 10, 2003. Howard knew that. By April 10, Howard had already told the Australian military leaders and commanders that he had committed Australian troops to staying in Iraq for the long haul.

"Of course there were (civilian casualties from 'Shock & Awe'). But you have to put that in the balance against the tens upon tens of thousands who have died in different ways as a result of this regime." April 13, 2003

Conservative estimates of Iraqi deaths as a direct result of the invasion and occupation of Iraq reach more than 100,000. More generous estimates put the death toll at close to one million. The majority of deaths in Iraq were, and are still, not officially recorded by the US military, or the US and Iraq governments. The Iraq War resulted in some 4 million Iraqis becoming refugees.

"It was inevitable that when you topple a tyrannical regime and you took the lid off, it was inevitable there was going to be a period of some upheaval..." April 16, 2003

"...it was a remarkable military victory, and a great tribute to the American military leadership." May 2, 2003

"...can I Mr President congratulate you on the leadership that you gave to the world, at times under very great criticism, at times facing very great obstruction...I think what was achieved in Iraq was quite extraordinary from a military point of view. I think the military textbooks will be replete with the experiences of Operation Iraqi Freedom for many years to come..." May 3, 2003

A few more recaps of the Iraq War and Australia's role in it to follow in the next week.

Scrapping Mega-Billions Jet Fighter Purchase May 'Harm Australia-US Relations'

It's nice to know that Australia's much-praised and constantly touted close relationship with the United States is worth more than six or seven billion dollars in questionable war industry purchases from Boeing.

Or is it?

Cancellation of the controversial $6.6 billion contract to buy 24 F/A-18F Super Hornet fighter-bombers could hurt Australia's diplomatic and commercial relationship with the US, a national security think tank has warned.

...Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon yesterday reaffirmed his Government's pre-election pledge to review the purchase announced without warning in March by then defence minister Brendan Nelson.

At the time, Dr Nelson said the deal was made after advice from the Defence Department and RAAF that the US-built Super Hornet offered the best solution to a looming air combat capability gap.

Deliveries of its intended replacement, the state-of-the-art but unproven F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) are not expected until 2013 and, at a starting price of $15.6 billion, the project is running over budget and embroiled in production delays.

Andrew Davies, of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute warns :

...that any decision to axe the Super Hornet contract would carry "precipitous" consequences. It would require "careful management in Washington", he said, and would result in fraught commercial ties with Boeing...

"The very first question you have to answer is: what sort of stoush do you think you are going to be in when you need something like that?" he said.

So is Australia only so highly valued by the US because we spend billions of dollars a year buying 'product' from their war industries, and pouring billions more into American owned war machine corporations based in Australia?

It's not often the public gets such insights into the politics and blackmail of war industry business between the United States and Australia. And as usual, it's ugly and more than a little seedy.

Brendan Nelson is one of the more spectacular war industry whores Australia has produced in decades. Under Nelson, and the Howard government, Australia's 'defence' budget was set to roar beyond $30 billion in 2008 (including the "extra projects" never announced in budgets).

It remains to be seen whether the new Labor defence minister will stick to all the deals and promises Howard and Nelson made to international war industry corporations, mostly American ones.

Outside of the United States, Australia under Howard had one of the largest defence budgets of any country in the world, with Russia and China only spending a few billion more in the past few years than Howard did.

Yo Yanks, We Love Your Movies, But Your Food And Foreign Policy Is Bogus

Although the vast majority of Australians express a profound dislike of American foreign policy, we still thoroughly enjoy its movies and music, and admire its scientific progress. But we're not too keen on American fast food or its attitude to climate change.

Mored details here :

The survey of 1213 Australians revealed our love/hate relationship with US popular culture. "People and popular culture" ranked as both the thing Australians most liked, and most disliked, about the country.

...Undertaken by the University of Sydney's United States Studies Centre, the survey found 77 per cent of respondents were worried about US foreign policy while 71 per cent were concerned by its fast food culture.

Certainly, confidence in the US among Australians has slipped over the past 21 years, perhaps influenced by the Iraq war and the botched rescue and reconstruction effort after Hurricane Katrina.

While 62 per cent had a favourable view of the US system of government in 1986, only 49 per cent felt the same way in 2007.

In 1986, 56 per cent of those surveyed said they were confident the US could deal wisely with its social and economic problems. In 2007, 44 per cent of respondents concurred.

Howard And Downer Were Full Of "Cut And Run" Lies On Iraq

Troop Withdrawals From Iraq Will Have No Negative Impact On Australia-US Alliance

Another bunch of foul lies of John Howard and former foreign minister, Alexander Downer, exposed for the dirty propaganda that they were :

(Former) prime minister John Howard condemned Mr Rudd's proposed timetable for a troop withdrawal as abandoning an ally and providing encouragement for terrorists.

But a senior US State Department official, Nicholas Burns, said the US appreciated what Australia had done in Iraq...

Mr Burns, Under-Secretary for Political Affairs in the US State Department, delivered a strong message of support for the Rudd Government from the Bush Administration.

Yesterday Mr Rudd described the US as "an overwhelming force for good in the world" and Mr Burns said he was impressed with the skill, knowledge and professionalism of the new ministers.

Both Mr Rudd and Mr Smith have been invited to visit Washington as soon as they can.

For more than three years, Howard and Downer railed in Parliament and ranted across the media about how the Labor position of withdrawing combat troops from Iraq would have massively negative impacts on the Australian alliance with the US, and would be "cutting and running" on the US, the Iraq government and the Iraqi people.

All of those claims from Howard and Downer were nothing but worthless rubbish :

Mr Burns has told ABC TV's Lateline he has been very impressed with the new Federal Government.

"Allies should treat each other in a friendly and respectful way, particularly when a new government comes in, so there's a lot of goodwill in Washington towards Prime Minister [Kevin] Rudd and towards his fellow members of the Australian Cabinet."

Mr Burns says the US administration understands the Labor Government's stance on Iraq.

"What all those Australian men and women have done in the Iraq effort, as well as Australia is doing in Afghanistan, we're grateful for it," he said.

"But we understand that Australia has a right to make its own decisions, we respect that."

The desperate deceptions and propaganda of the former Howard government over Rudd's plan to "cut and run" from Iraq and to "abandon its allies" aggravated officials in the US State Department, who always saw the continuing US-Australia alliance, and positive relationship, as vastly more important than whether or not Australia kept 500 combat troops in Iraq when the primary missions Australia was tasked with, such as training the Iraq Army and police, were clearly coming to an end.

Australia Pulls Support For US Military Action On Iran

Downer Signs Up To The Coalition Of The Unwilling

Australian troops and special forces will not join the United States in proposed military action on Iran, according to foreign minister Alexander Downer.

Of course, this is Downer speaking. Australian special forces may already be operating inside Iran, along with US troops, conducting sabotage and espionage operations, and paying off military units not to fight if the US goes to war, as they are widely alleged to have done in the months before the Iraq War officially began in March 2003.

The point is, if Australian troops were already engaged in such operations with the United States inside Iran, Downer's hardly going to admit it. Certainly not in the lead-up to an election.

Still, it's a substantial show of official non-support from Australia for the "all options (including nuclear attack) are still on the table" aggressive creed when it comes to Iran, from President Bush and the NeoCons.

From ABC News :

Foreign Affairs Minister Alexander Downer has ruled out Australian involvement in any United States-led military action in Iran.

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh has been writing about the possibility of a US strike on Iran for the past 18 months.

Mr Hersh says US President George W Bush is now focusing on getting support from allies, including Australia.

Mr Downer says he does not believe America is planning to invade Iran, but if the US did pursue that path, Australia would not follow.

"We're not planning to get involved with any military action against anybody."

story continues after...
---------------------------


Go Here To Read ED DAY - Darryl Mason's Online Novel Of Life In Sydney After An Apocalyptic Bird Flu Pandemic Kills Millions

Go Here For The Latest News From 'Your New Reality'


-----------------------------
story continues...


Downer, like prime minister John Howard, must be feeling extremely nervous about all the talk from American NeoCons and Israeli extremists demanding Iran be bombed, and soon. Australia has more than 800 troops and support staff in the south of Iraq.

Iran would be expected to launch retaliatory strikes against US allies in the event of an attack, which would mean Australian forces, relatively close to the Iranian border, would presumably be targets for Iranian military and terrorist strikes.

UPDATE : 'Australia's Next Prime Minister', Labor leader Kevin Rudd, has announced he wants to haul the Iranian president before the International Criminal Court and have him charged for "inciting genocide" :

In a dramatic lift in diplomatic pressure on a bellicose and defiant Iran, Kevin Rudd has committed a Labor government to take "legal proceedings against President Ahmadinejad on a charge of incitement to genocide".

The Leader of the Opposition said the charge of incitement to genocide "could occur through the International Court of Justice on reference by the UN Security Council" because of Mr Ahmadinejad's public statements.

"They refer to statements about wiping Israel off the map, questioning whether Zionists are human beings and the recent abhorrent conference that he convened on the veracity of the Holocaust," Mr Rudd said.

"It is strongly arguable that this conduct amounts to incitement to genocide, criminalised under the 1948 genocide convention."

Rudd also said a Labor government would not support the use of military force on Iran, but would support further sanctions, and that diplomacy was the best way to deal with the issue of Iran's "nuclear ambitions".

Getting Mahmoud Ahmadinejad before the ICC on a charge of "inciting genocide" is never going to happen, and Rudd knows it. Despite the constant attribution of the quote "wipe Israel off the map" to the Iranian president, by supposedly accurate, fact-checking media like the Washington Post and the New York Times, Ahmadinejad never actually said those words.

Ahmadinejad did say he wants to see the "Zionist regime" of Israel deposed or "wiped away", which is no less inflammatory than the recent run of American NeoCons who've repeatedly stated they want to see the Iranian president's regime overthrown, violently if necessary, or the nation bombed at the minimum.


Demented NeoCon Fantasises About Days When US Violently Overthrew Democratic Governments - Dreams Of Deposing Iranian President

Gruesome Bush Aide Tells British MP : "I Hate All Iranians"

Dear Mr President, Please Bomb Iran, America Needs To Feel Proud Again

Cheney Wanted Israel To Bomb Iran, To Provoke Iran Into Retaliating So US Could Hit Iran

APEC : Welcome To Australia, President Putin

Thank Russia For 'Winning' World War 2 , Says Former Australian Prime Minister

Former Australian prime minister Paul Keating believes it's time for Australia to make an historic shift away from the America-first focus of our international relations and foreign policies.

Keating recognises Russia under Vladimir Putin as a rising star on Australia's trade horizon, and also thinks its time for Australia, the US and the rest of the former Allies, to finally recognise the enormous sacrifices the Russian people made to "win" World War 2.

If APEC really is about expanding Australia's trade frontiers, as prime minister John Howard claims, then clearly Russia should be of particular focus, as there is enormous new wealth there to soak up our coal, uranium and mineral exports. Along with a good, solid push to ramp up Australia as tourist destination number one for all those cashed-up Russians.

That Australia under John Howard is even thinking about spending billions to help the United States establish its Russia-and-China-baiting global 'missile shield' in our part of the world shows we're still doing the bidding of the US, even when no nation in the world poses a credible threat to Australia.

That Australia is still willing to help the US 'contain' and surround Russia and China in such relatively peaceful and prosperous times shows just how big the American thumb pressing our foreheads still is.

Instead of baring our teeth, t's time to pay homage to the Russian people, then and now, says Keating.

No doubt, Vladimir will be very, very pleased with the former prime minister's editorial :

Russia was offered a place at the APEC table not because it was a natural constituent, but as a consolation prize by the Americans, for their having taken strategic advantage of it in the years immediately following the Cold War.

No one should ever forget that the Russians carried the primary burden of winning World War II, losing 26 million of their people in the process. More than the present population of Australia. A level of death, destruction and misery on a scale unprecedented in human history.

When Hitler failed to smash Britain with his blitz, he unleashed on Russia the full might of his army and air force, then the largest in history. What followed was carnage and human suffering on an unimaginable scale as the Russian people absorbed his ferocious power. A battering they took for four solid years before a second front was opened in the west at Normandy.

The 20th century was nothing but a century of suffering for the Russian people; first the revolution, then the famine and the purges of the 1930s, then the war through the '40s, followed by the belt-tightening and deprivation of the Cold War.

Now the United States and NATO wish to build a series of anti-missile facilities around Russia's front lawn and side driveway, purportedly against rogue states, while none of the so-called rogue states have missile systems capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction.

The Russians know that despite the Soviet Union having been fragmented into 15 nations, with Russia becoming a democracy, the extension of NATO and the ring-fencing of Russia with an anti-missile shield is aimed at Russia itself, the state under permanent suspicion.

Four US presidential terms - the two Clinton ones and the two Bush ones - have witnessed a continual deterioration in relations with Russia. Russia is the state which still has the capacity to threaten Europe, yet its pleas for inclusion and to be taken seriously, have gone unheeded.

The problem is that when the Cold War finished the Americans cried victory and walked off the field. In strategic terms, the world is still set up on the template of 1947, with countries like Germany and Japan not even permanent members of the UN Security Council, while states like Italy and Canada remain part of the G8 at the expense of countries like China and India.

Seventeen years on, the Russians are still on the outside looking in, while the Chinese seek to garner their legitimacy by subjecting themselves to external bodies like the World Trade Organisation. The fact is, the world is run unrepresentatively. This is the problem.

For were it to be run otherwise, Russia, China and India would be part of the world growth amalgam, naturally aligning their security interests with their economic interests.

At least Russia is in APEC with us. Australia won't be circumscribing its interests knowing that inclusion and understanding are the only pathways to peace and progress.

We should welcome Putin on his first visit to Australia and tell him we have not forgotten the 26 million of his countrymen who died for our liberty as well as for their own.

Russians died for our liberty? That can't be right. All those American war movies piped through Australian television sets continually throughout the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s and 1990s taught us that it was the Americans, not the Russians, that won World War 2 and saved Australia from numerous nasty -isms.


A few recent Russian news stories, of interest :

Russia Flexes Its Muscles Across Asia-Pacific In Bid To Restablish Itself As 'Great World Power'

NATO Hostile Towards Russians, Or So The Russians Believe

Russian Foreign Minister Says There Will Be No Bargaining Over Kosovo Or Missiles

It's Time For Russia To Become One Of Us

Russia Looks To Play Balancing Role In The World

Russia Engages Central Asia In War On Terror

Russia To Deploy More InterContinental Ballistic Missiles In December

PM Finally Admits Iraq Was A War For Oil

Howard To Iraq : We're Not Leaving Until You Say We Can

Howard Shoots For National Security Poll Rise In Desperate Attempt To Stave Off Leadership Challenge


Update : According to this story from the Melbourne Age, on today's speech by PM Howard on national security and the Iraq War, detailed below, Howard will say that Australia has a "major stake of oil dependency", and this is one of the key reasons why we had to become involved in the invasion and occupation of Iraq. So it was a war for oil after all.

Perhaps by no coincidence, The Australian newspaper also features a major story today on how we are now entering an age when Australian will suffer from major oil deficits, where in the past we had enjoyed locally sourced oil supply surpluses.

Update II : Both John Howard and defence minister Brendan Nelson discussed the need for Australia to continue the occupation of Iraq to secure future oil supplies, and all hell broke loose.


Original Story Follows :

John Howard will move today to dispel any doubt about his intention to keep more than 550 Australian combat troops in Iraq until the Iraqi government says they can go home.

Which raises doubts about this story from last week, which claimed Howard had a secret plan to pull out most of Australia's fighting forces from Iraq in early 2008. The doubt raised, then, is that the leak used in the story was a plant, a set-up to gauge the public reaction to a withdrawal of Australian troops. The reaction from most Australians was "yeah, so what?" Howard can now dismiss any notion raised by Labor on the way to the federal election that he is planning to pull troops out once the election is over.

Off the back of the currently very weak links between the spectacularly hopeless car bombing attempts in London and Glasgow and an Australian-based doctor, Howard is expected to ramp up both the threat of homegrown terror, and the threat of terror attacks from non-Australians who are visiting, or working, here.

Howard's core message will be simple : Australia is not pulling its fighting forces out of Iraq, and Australia is not withdrawing from Afghanistan. Not until the governments of Iraq and Afghanistan say our troops are no longer needed :

In a major security speech, Mr Howard will stress the stark consequences of a failure by the US and its allies to secure Iraq.

He will argue that the military coalition cannot allow weariness, frustration or political convenience to dictate strategy in Iraq.

Mr Howard today will launch a new defence policy statement, which underscores the strategic importance of the Middle East to global security and Australia's broader national interests.

The document warns of a far more complex and challenging global environment facing Australia's military.

It says Australia's new security challenges dictate a military force able not only to play a lead role in the region, but also to operate in an expanded range of operations further afield with close allies.

The 65-page defence update declares that violent extremism will remain a threat around the world for a generation "and probably longer".

It says the stakes are high in Iraq and Afghanistan, not only for the peace and stability of those countries, but also because the outcome will influence how the US will deal with future global security challenges.

A critical danger remains the prospect of terror groups such as al-Qa'ida getting hold of weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons.

Increasingly, military technology once available only to nation states is being used by terror groups and other non-state actors. Organisations such as al-Qa'ida are unlikely to be deterred from using WMDs by the threat of military retaliation.

The update says extremist terrorism continues to draw funding, support and people from Middle Eastern states.

"For as long as that is true, Australia and like-minded countries need to fight terrorism at its source rather than wait for it to come to our shores.

"To help defeat terrorism Australia must have patience, a sustained military commitment, a willingness to adapt to conditions on the ground and work closely with our friends and allies."

It forecasts the defence force will increasingly be called on to fight irregular opponents and be capable of mounting counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism operations.

In short, Australia will keep fighting the 'War on Terror' for as long as the 'War on Terror' helps to keep spawning new terrorists.

Which also means Australia will keep spending more than $23 billion a year on defence, the second highest per person defence spend in the world (after the United States) for years to come. Not much is expected to change on that front even if Kevin Rudd, and Labor, win the federal election later this year.

Don't expect Howard to do much talking up of the Australian-United States alliance between now and the federal election. He will acknowledge it, but he is unlikely to be seen publicly praising President Bush. At least if his advisers have any say in it.

Pledging a strong and ongoing commitment to fighting the 'War on Terror' is now a coded way for Howard to say that he will continue to support Bush-led American military misadventures around the world for the foreseeable future.

It will be surprising if Howard has anything to say about Australia's involvement in the US 'missile shield' between now and the election, or Australia's involvement in helping the United States to 'encircle' China, in anticipation of a coming trade war between China and the US.

Howard's speech today on Australia's future security "challenges" and his government's role in helping to fight the 'War on Terror' will be seen as probably Howard's last major chance to buzz up his own dismal standings in the polls before Parliament resumes, and to tamp down the grumblings within the Liberal Party on whether or not Howard will destroy their chances of holding onto power in the coming elections.

There was speculation a few months back that Howard had to score a decent rise in national polls, like Newspoll which will begin collecting data on Friday, after Howard's key speech today, or he could be rolled by his own party and removed from the leadership. If Howard was replaced, the coalition government could delay the federal election until early 2008 to give themselves a fighting change. But they still need someone to replace Howard. Someone from the front ranks of the government who doesn't make most Australians wince every time they open their mouths.

Howard may see a slight rise in the polls from today's speech, partly due to unease caused by the, however weak, Australian links to the London car bombing attempts, but he will really have to rally the nation to knock Rudd and the Labor Party off their election winning perch, which they have enjoyed for all of 2007. This seems incredibly unlikely.

The chief problem for Howard today is that while he can pledge to try and keep Australians safe from terror, Australians are more concerned about who is going to keep them safe from Howard and his dishonest, double-dealing, secret agenda heavy, gang.


March, 2007 : Howard Sees Only "Faint Glimmer Of Hope" In Iraq

February, 2007 : Howard Keeps "Own Interest" Option For Early Troop Withdrawal From Iraq

Australian Defence Minister Says There Is No Hope Of Victory In Iraq War