| |
The CIA itself has warned that deployment of a national missile
defence scheme could trigger a regional arms race by raising insecurity
in the region.
A decision to deploy the National Missile Defence program is expected
to force Russia and China to retain their nuclear weapons on high-alert,
making the world a more dangerous place.
US Defence Secretary William Cohen said in Australia on 16 July
that Pine Gap had been "very much" involved in NMD since
October 1999. Yet two days later on 18 July, Foreign Minister Alexander
Downer said the Australian Government did not know if Pine Gap had
been involved in National Missile Defence tests.
This echoes the complaint in 1999 by the parliamentary Joint Standing
Committee on Treaties that MPs were kept in the dark about information
that was given to the US Congress or was publicly available.
Members complained that although US Congress officials had visited
Pine Gap and received classified briefings about its functions,
the Treaties Committee was "entrusted with less information
than can be found in a public library".
This abrogation of Australia's sovereignty should not any longer
be tolerated.
Over the years Pine Gap has quietly been converted into a front-line
base for the controversial National Missile Defence system.
During a May 1992 visit to Australia, the then US Defense Secretary
Dick Cheney confirmed that the US bases in Australia were playing
a role in the Strategic Defence Initiative or "Star Wars".
Alternatives
A rational reassessment of our security priorities would lead to
a number of conclusions which may be at odds with the Federal Government's
stated intention of increasing defence spending.
However, they would contribute to an independent policy which would
make a major contribution to Australia's security. They include:
 |
using
more defensive and less costly systems as opposed to the long-range,
aggressive capabilities currently in use; |
|
developing a proper coastal protection system; |
|
committing
Australia to possess enough military force to defend our territory
but not to threaten the territory of other states; |
|
focussing
on dual-use equipment (for example, aircraft which can be used
for water bombing bushfires as well as for coastal surveillance
and interception); |
|
investing
time and effort in regional arms control through bodies such
as ASEAN; |
|
working to develop transparency and confidence building in the
region and to restrict a regional arms race; |
|
increasing
the share of GDP allocated to overseas aid; |
|
contributing to the elimination of the foreign debt problem; |
|
expanding trade, co-operation in the development of science
and medicine, educational and cultural exchanges.
|
These are strategic
positions we believe should be taken and should underpin decisions
on defence spending if Australia and the region are to be genuinely
stable and secure.
Non offensive defence
The Australian Government must adopt an independent and non-aligned
non-offensive defence policy which will be efficient, affordable
and genuinely serve the defence needs of our country and the need
for peace and stability in our region.
A non-offensive defence policy is the best way to ensure our nation's
security. This will take advantage of cheaper but efficient alternatives,
contributing to national security without diminishing military capability.
Non-offensive defence requires that armed forces and military postures
should be (re)structured by simultaneously maximising their defensive
and minimising their offensive capabilities.
A meaningful distinction can be made between offensive and defensive
postures, strategies and tactics. This is not a distinction between
offensive and defensive weapons, but between the nature of delivery
systems and, more importantly, between complete formations and postures.
Non-offensive defence is intended to facilitate arms control and
disarmament by eliminating one element in competitive arms build-ups,
namely reciprocal fears. If a state's armaments are strictly defensive,
they will constitute no threat to its adversaries.
Non-offensive defence strengthens peace and security by ruling out
pre-emptive attacks and preventive wars. If a state can strengthen
its defensive capabilities in times of crisis without posing an
increased threat to other states, the vicious circle of competitive
military escalation can be avoided.
Non-offensive defence provides effective, yet non-suicidal defence
options. Every state has an inalienable right to defend itself and
it is preferable that this should be done without risking suicide
or global conflagration. Eliminating this risk is also important
since it could deter a state from defending itself at all.
Non-offensive defence should be based on affordable low to medium
technology as compared with the current high tech and expensive
models being used by the Australian Government and encouraged, through
arms transfers, in the Asia-Pacific region. Ideally, dependence
on arms exports should be replaced by self-sufficiency.
Australia should develop a naval force suited to our needs and entirely
within our budget. What we need most is a large fleet of very fast,
heavily armed vessels, capable of being swiftly relocated from one
port to another so they are never collectively exposed to possible
enemy action.
Non-offensive defence would permit a reduction in Australia's military
budget - currently $13 billion annually. This could in turn generate
a "peace dividend" which would provide major financial
resources to satisfy the needs of the people for jobs, housing,
education, health care, welfare services, environmental protection,
transport and communications, culture and leisure, as well as for
social, economic and environmental projects that can help build
peace, confidence and security in the Asia-Pacific region.
The Blue Paper Project is a national NGO initiative
which was established in 1993.
It represents over 60 peace, environmental, religious, trade union,
women's and
political groups from across Australia.
The Project works to inform and stimulate community discussion
about our country's security and foreign policies
|
