NSAukus Defense Pact between UK, US and Australia It becomes cloudy day by day.. In essence, it is the result of an industrial dispute over who will build eight submarines for the Australian Army. Australia ordered France worth £ 48 billion of diesel cars and then changed its mind and resumed trading. Now we need nuclear power plants in the United States and the United Kingdom.
Crew submarines are becoming obsolete “Transparent” sea And underwater drone. Like tanks, they drip with cost, inefficiency, and a thirst for fighting outdated warfare. However, defense contracts have a corporate and political presence that goes beyond practicality. If Australia seriously considers China a threat, it may be ready for some new gold-plated weapons.
However, this particular equipment contract appears to have transformed into a new military alliance in the Asia-Pacific region. Johnson’s defense adviser, Stephen Lovegrove, called it “Significant strategic shift“. Unless the Downing Street was ignorant, it was clearly intended to infuriate China, It has legitimately, And humiliating France, It also has..
Boris Johnson said it was “Not hostileBut when Theresa May asked if she was serious about the war over Taiwan, he refused to say no. “The UK continues to be determined to defend international law, which is … strong advice given to the Beijing government.” Is he just playing with words? In July He sent an aircraft carrier Called a warning from Beijing near the conflict area in the South China Sea. This was just a roaring mouse, a huge amount of public money that wasn’t involved in maintaining Johnson’s vanity.
Exaggerated statements made for political effects, such as sudden alliances and unnecessary snabs, have consequences. Western defense interests from the Cold War, with the end of the Soviet Union, refused to let NATO redefine its purpose in the 1990s. This was how Britain was sucked into Afghanistan and Iraq, apparently to protect the United States from new threats of terrorism. High rhetoric and military heartbeats also fueled World War I qualifying.
Britain has no reason to take an active position in the Pacific. It’s all mysterious post-empire nostalgia. If the United States is so angry that it will return to war over Taiwan in Southeast Asia, it has nothing to do with Britain and is more than Vietnam did. France also raises concerns about “citizens” in the Pacific. Europe’s second-largest state seems to have been unable to part with its empire.
China’s emergence as a world economic power in the last quarter century has been a political economy miracle. It was achieved by marrying the field of capitalism with the field of dictatorship. The West may not like some of its symptoms and is free to say so. They are not a western business. China It does not fall under Western sovereignty.
That new With a strong position, China has embraced all the syndromes familiar to the United States, including increased military power, sensitivity to criticism, and regional spheres of influence. Only time will tell you where this will lead. But now it is not stupid for the West to start the Cold War with China, and it must be especially fatal to Britain.
So-called western diplomacy is currently a disaster area. It could not adapt to post-communist Russia, and its treatment of the Islamic world was resentful and tragic.The most expensive army in the world in Afghanistan The packaging has been sent With a handful of AK-47s.
Half a century has passed since Harold Wilson officially withdrew Britain from “East of Suez”. Johnson is clearly anxious to return to prove that he can somehow punch beyond his weight and bring Britain back to the world stage after Brexit. Such an empty foreign policy is reckless. British diplomacy should now be overwhelmingly focused on Europe. One of the things Brexit hasn’t changed is geography.
Boris Johnson’s military alliance in the Pacific is a reckless post-empire nostalgia.Simon Jenkins
Source link Boris Johnson’s military alliance in the Pacific is a reckless post-empire nostalgia.Simon Jenkins