I'm confused. When Obama speaks to the media or the public, he always talks about how he wants to limit spending on the military. Yet, isn't this going to increase expenses dramatically? Yes, there are benefits to partnering with Australia, but aren't there also extreme expenses? Isn't this the opposite of his stated goals? I'm probably not qualified to comment, since I deal mainly with developing online business ideas, but nonetheless I think this needs to be brought to most people's attention.

I can easily tell the strategic significance of having a substantial military base in Australia. From there US can point a dagger at the throat of China’s energy supply line, but it is less clear to me why Australia is eager to get itself involved in the coming conflict between China and the US

“Coming” my not be the correct word for the conflict is already in full play. Still, it is in its initial stage. What strategic advantages could Australia gain by choosing side so early? With a permanent US military base on its soil, Australia runs the risk of becoming an advance guard for US strategic design. Once you are part of a design, there is little left for you to do. In other word, you are limited to influence the US long-term planners.

Putting all your marbles into the US basket, Australia could undermine, if not destroy, its own ability to influence China which unfortunately is its largest trading partner and will grow in importance to Australia. Caught between two larger powers, Australia could play one against another to maximize its profit to Australians.

If two 800-lbs gorillas are about to fight, I stay out of it.

If I join Gorilla A in fighting, I might get punched as collateral damage by either side.

If Gorilla A wins, I will surely get crumbs while Gorilla A eats the whole pie. If A loses, I’d be faced with the wrath of Gorilla B. If two gorillas fight and I am neutral, both would need to make me happy to ensure I will at at least stay neutral. I would certainly be in the driver’s seat to extract most from either or both gorillas.

What are Australian long-term planners thinking?

If I were the President of US, I would certanly strengthen the military tie with Australia. As a matter of fact, US had always been doing that since world war II. Why now spotlight it? There is a possibility. President Obama realized that he had a very slim chance of getting reelected. But if he can trigger a war with China, the next President of US, which is likely to be a Rupublican, will be in a extremely difficult situation. Even if US can win the war over China, the economy of US will be definitely in miserable conditons. US voters will discard a Republican regime, and return the power to Democrat Party. Remember that almost all leading politicians after WW-I and WW-II were sacked by voters. A doomed thing. Mr. Obama may have a malice of intent.

We just want to hear the loudspeakers on base say "and for you Marines, the big hand is on the 12 ..."

>> ....All they saw of the *leader of the free world*

What free world?
The leader of those heavily indebted countries controlled by the 1%?

This is the 21st century and many are still fighting the wars of the last century. China is a nuclear power with easy reach of the central asia and the middle east by land. It can not be blockaded the same way as Japan or Germany in the last century.

As many would point out, The dimension of China's power in the early 21st century is economic. It already has the world's largest GDP PPP, nominal national budget, and money stock. It could easily afford just as many carrier battle groups, aerospace projects, or military hardwares. And it has more people, more engineers and technicians, and could mobilize far more boots during a military conflict. It's only a matter of time before China becomes a global military power.

The key question is: by encircling China the way US is doing these years could China be slowed down, thwarted, and contained? Perhaps, and with Patreus speed, strategic vision, and ingenuity. But Patreus does not run the US Congress, and even if Patreus is US president he would not be able to run the country like the military.

The fact of the matter is that the US could not bring a 20th century style military fight to China fast enough as China could bring a 21st century peaceful economic expansion over the next decade. Even if the US could it would have to consider the fact that China is a nuclear power with the capability for intercontinental delivery and just as much ASAT firepower even today.

2500 marines, or even 25000 marines, stationed in Australia's northern territory would be a much ado about nothing. To stop China's economic expansion even un-squarely or unfairly with US incumbency would require a lot more real effort in lifting US education and mitigating a slew of domestic social, political, and economic ills. Otherwise, the more plausible trajectory of the 21st century would be more of friendly and constructive competition between the two superpowers.

China needs and is planning to take "lebensraum," that is, living space in the word used by the Third Reich and cited by the former PRC Defense Minister Gen Chi Hotian, who also was vice chairman of the Central Military Commission (Hu Jintao is chairman). The Politboro in Beijing sees human rights as "living rights," that is, global living space for the Chinese.

Gen Chi burst onto the world after his notorious 2005 speech, "War Is Not Far From Us and Is the Midwife of the Chinese Century." In his speech Gen Chi discusses using biological warfare to surprise attack and conquer the United States, without the destruction of it by nuclear weapons. The aim of the PRC is to colonize the United States. Says Gen Chi: "It is indeed brutal to kill one or two hundred million Americans. But that is the only path that will secure a Chinese century, a century in which the CCP leads the world. Biological weapons are unprecedented in their ruthlessness, but if the Americans do not die then the Chinese have to die. If the Chinese people are strapped to the present land, a total societal collapse is bound to take place. Only countries like the United States, Canada and Australia have the vast land to serve our need for mass colonization."

That's the view from Beijing. And here's more from Gen Chi about lebensraum:

"Our party's historical mission is to lead the Chinese people to go out. If we take the long view, we will see that history led us on this path. First, China’s long history has resulted in the world’s largest population, including Chinese in China as well as overseas. Second, once we open our doors, the profit-seeking western capitalists will invest capital and technology in China to assist our development, so that they can occupy the biggest market in the world. Third, our numerous overseas Chinese help us create the most favorable environment for the introduction of foreign capital, foreign technology and advanced experience into China. Thus, it is guaranteed that our reform and open-door policy will achieve tremendous success. Fourth, China’s great economic expansion will inevitably lead to the shrinkage of per-capita living space for the Chinese people, and this will encourage China to turn outward in search for new living space. Fifth, China’s great economic expansion will inevitably come with a significant development in our military forces, creating conditions for our expansion overseas. Even since Napoleon’s time, the West has been has been alert for the possible awakening of the sleeping lion that is China. Now, the sleeping lion is standing up and advancing into the world, and has become unstoppable!

"What is the third issue we should clinch firmly in order to accomplish our historical mission of national renaissance? It is to hold firmly onto the big “issue of America.”

"Comrade Mao Zedong taught us that we must have a resolute and correct political orientation. What is our key, correct orientation? It is to solve the issue of America.

"This appears to be shocking, but the logic is actually very simple.

"Comrade He Xin put forward a very fundamental judgment that is very reasonable. He asserted in his report to the Party Central Committee: The renaissance of China is in fundamental conflict with the western strategic interest, and therefore will inevitably be obstructed by the western countries doing everything they can. So, only by breaking the blockade formed by the western countries headed by the United States can China grow and move towards the world!

"Would the United States allow us to go out to gain new living space? First, if the United States is firm in blocking us, it is hard for us to do anything significant to Taiwan and some other countries! Second, even if we could snatch some land from Taiwan, Vietnam, India, or even Japan, how much more living space can we get? Very trivial! Only countries like the United States, Canada and Australia have the vast land to serve our need for mass colonization.

"Therefore, solving the “issue of America” is the key to solving all other issues. First, this makes it possible for us to have many people migrate there and even establish another China under the same leadership of the CCP. America was originally discovered by the ancestors of the yellow race, but Columbus gave credit to the white race. We the descendents of the Chinese nation are entitled to the possession of the land! It is said that the residents of the yellow race have a very low social status in United States. We need to liberate them. Second, after solving the “issue of America,” the western countries in Europe would bow to us, not to mention to Taiwan, Japan and other small countries. Therefore, solving the “issue of America” is the mission assigned to CCP members by history.

" It is historical destiny that China and United States will come into unavoidable confrontation on a narrow path and fight each other! The United States, unlike Russia and Japan, has never occupied and hurt China, and also assisted China in its battle against the Japanese. But, it will certainly be an obstruction, and the biggest obstruction! In the long run, the relationship of China and the United States is one of a life-and-death struggle.

"One time, some Americans came to visit and tried to convince us that the relationship between China and United States is one of interdependence. Comrade Xiaoping replied in a polite manner: “Go tell your government, China and the United States do not have such a relationship that is interdependent and mutually reliant.” Actually, Comrade Xiaoping was being too polite, he could have been more frank, “The relationship between China and United States is one of a life-and-death struggle.” Of course, right now it is not the time to openly break up with them yet. Our reform and opening to the outside world still rely on their capital and technology, we still need America. Therefore, we must do everything we can to promote our relationship with America, learn from America in all aspects and use America as an example to reconstruct our country.

"Even though we are presently imitating the American tone “China and United States rely on each other and share honor and disgrace,” we must not forget that the history of our civilization repeatedly has taught us that one mountain does not allow two tigers to live together.

"We also must never forget what Comrade Xiaoping emphasized “refrain from revealing the ambitions and put others off the track.” The hidden message is: we must put up with America; we must conceal our ultimate goals, hide our capabilities and await the opportunity. In this way, our mind is clear. Thus we will understand why we constantly talk loudly about the “Taiwan issue” but not the “American issue.” We all know the principle of “doing one thing under the cover of another.” If ordinary people can only see the small island of Taiwan in their eyes, then you as the elite of our country should be able to see the whole picture of our cause. Over these years, according to Comrade Xiaoping’s arrangement, a large piece of our territory in the North has been given up to Russia; do you really think our Party Central Committee is a fool?

"To resolve the issue of America we must be able to transcend conventions and restrictions. In history, when a country defeated another country or occupied another country, it could not kill all the people in the conquered land, because back then you could not kill people effectively with sabers or long spears, or even with rifles or machine guns. Therefore, it was impossible to gain a stretch of land without keeping the people on that land. However, if we conquered America in this fashion, we would not be able to make many people migrate there.

"Only by using special means to “clean up” America will we be able to lead the Chinese people there. This is the only choice left for us. This is not a matter of whether we are willing to do it or not. What kind of special means is there available for us to “clean up” America? Conventional weapons such as fighters, canons, missiles and battleships won’t do; neither will highly destructive weapons such as nuclear weapons. We are not as foolish as to want to perish together with America by using nuclear weapons, despite the fact that we have been exclaiming that we will have the Taiwan issue resolved at whatever cost. Only by using non-destructive weapons that can kill many people will we be able to reserve America for ourselves. There has been rapid development of modern biological technology, and new bio weapons have been invented one after another. Of course we have not been idle; in the past years we have seized the opportunity to master weapons of this kind. We are capable of achieving our purpose of “cleaning up” America all of a sudden. When Comrade Xiaoping was still with us, the Party Central Committee had the perspicacity to make the right decision not to develop aircraft carrier groups and focus instead on developing lethal weapons that can eliminate mass populations of the enemy country.

"From a humanitarian perspective, we should issue a warning to the American people and persuade them to leave America and leave the land they have lived in to the Chinese people. Or at least they should leave half of the United States to be China’s colony, because America was first discovered by the Chinese. But would this work? If this strategy does not work, then there is only one choice left to us. That is, use decisive means to “clean up” America, and reserve America for our use in a moment. Our historical experience has proven that as long as we make it happen, nobody in the world can do anything about us. Furthermore, if the United States as the leader is gone, then other enemies have to surrender to us.

"Biological weapons are unprecedented in their ruthlessness, but if the Americans do not die then the Chinese have to die. If the Chinese people are strapped to the present land, a total societal collapse is bound to take place. According to the computation of the author of Yellow Peril, more than half of the Chinese will die, and that figure would be more than 800 million people! Just after the liberation, our yellow land supported nearly 500 million people, while today the official figure of the population is more than 1.3 billion. This yellow land has reached the limit of its capacity. One day, who knows how soon it will come, the great collapse will occur any time and more than half of the population will have to go.

"We must prepare ourselves for two scenarios. If our biological weapons succeed in the surprise attack [on the United States], the Chinese people will be able to keep their losses at a minimum in the fight against the United States. If, however, the attack fails and triggers a nuclear retaliation from the United States, China would perhaps suffer a catastrophe in which more than half of its population would perish. That is why we need to be ready with air defense systems for our big and medium-sized cities. Whatever the case may be, we can only move forward fearlessly for the sake of our Party and state and our nation’s future, regardless of the hardships we have to face and the sacrifices we have to make. The population, even if more than half dies, can be reproduced. But if the Party falls, everything is gone, and forever gone!

"In Chinese history, in the replacement of dynasties, the ruthless have always won and the benevolent have always failed. The most typical example involved Xiang Yu the King of Chu, who, after defeating Liu Bang, failed to continue to chase after him and eliminate his forces, and this leniency resulted in Xiang Yu’s death and Liu’s victory (during the war between Chu and Han, just after the Qin Dynasty (221-206BC) was overthrown). Therefore, we must emphasize the importance of adopting resolute measures. In the future, the two rivals, China and the United States, will eventually meet each other in a narrow road, and our leniency to the Americans will mean cruelty toward the Chinese people. ??

"It is indeed brutal to kill one or two hundred million Americans. But that is the only path that will secure a Chinese century, a century in which the CCP leads the world. We, as revolutionary humanitarians, do not want deaths. But if history confronts us with a choice between deaths of Chinese and those of Americans, we’d have to pick the latter, as, for us, it is more important to safeguard the lives of the Chinese people and the life of our Party. That is because, after all, we are Chinese and members of the CCP. Since the day we joined the CCP, the Party’s life has always been above all else! History will prove that we made the right choice!!!"

Here's the excellent link to the awful truth about China and the CCP leading it to, in the Nazi German word, "lebensraum", i.e., global "living space." http://en.epochtimes...-8-8/31055.html

I glanced through a line about Australia's Pearl Harbor but did not dwell on it. The historic trauma tends to play a more decisive role in today's decision that it deserves to.

I don't know enough about Australia's history. Maybe you can help explain something to me.

For the same historic lesson, I would deride an opposite conclusion. Australia was part of British Empire during WW II. Precisely because of it, Japan felt no other alternative but to attack Australia. UK, then with her military bases in Singapore and India, was so weakened to come to Australia's rescue. If history repeats itself again, Australian, with an American base close to South China Sea through which China's energy supply line passes, will have little comfort guessing China may think just like Imperial Japan. The military alliance could increase, not lessen, the potential danger to Australia.

Unless, Australian Government has found China to be totally untrustworthy so that Australia must have a strong ally to lean on to. Or, as GJS suggests, Australian domestic politics is the driving force behind this military base.

Or, as WICKBAM and COMETLINEAR imply, it is just comfortable and easy for Australians to come to ally themselves with Americans so that they don’t have to deal the difficulties in long-term strategic planning. Easy comfort is a reason, but I can’t believe Australians to be that simple.

Increasingly unable to counter China economically and ideologically (soft power) a declining American hegemon is leaning on its military power (the area where it is still vastly superior to all others).

But this is truly a short-sighted move. How are the Chinese supposed to feel about US moves that encircle them with military bases (don't forget our presence in Central Asia) and cut off their lifeline to natural resources?

A smarter strategy would be to engage Chin at this and look to give them more responsibility for security in the region. What we are doing now only plays to hardliners in Beijing and will lead China to take a tougher military line.

But maybe that's the point? To draw China into a ruinous arms race like they did with USSR, the last challenger to US hegemony.

I hope the Chinese are smart enough not to take the bait.

Last time I checked, Canadians, Australians, Indians and Europeans couldn't vote for America's president. Accordingly, he is not our leader.

I hope the US Marine is fair to all its personnel. No marine should be allowed to station in Darwin, ie, be on vacation, for more than a couple of weeks.

By the time this military gesture is significant, these marines will have retired.

There is no chance that US presence of this nature and magnitude will have material impact on China’s conduct.

China’s conduct is that of assertiveness with the correct restraint to avoid military conflict. It is the biggest and most powerful in the region, and will be bigger and bigger and it know it; when such a power has the gumption to assert to measured degree, it eventually will get enough of what it wants to avoid war.

China can achieve enough of what it wants by gradual comprehensive national development, and measured compromises, to avoid conflict with the USA, marines in OZ or not.

This is not the first time the world is witnessing the expansion of the Chinese nation. They entered the pages of history as Mongols during the thirteenth and fourteenth century and colonised vast areas of south central Asia. Their military leaders encouraged them to attack Japan and Indonesia and both campaigns ended in failure.The present leaders may have a similar desire to seek new territories for settlement but if history is to be used as a guide SOUTH CENTRAL ASIA is their only hope, therefore the USA should not impose itself in that region, their NATURAL PATH OF EXPANSION. However a strong bond with the nations of the former British Commonwealth ie India , Australia , New Zealand etc is a sound foreign policy goal. The world is large enough to accomodate all nations in their LAWFULL DOMAIN without strife or contention but misguided generals have led IMPERIAL JAPAN and numerous other nation to their destruction by setting false foreign policy goals.

President Obama’s visit to Australia is best understood in the context of US domestic politics. His Congressional opponents have shown that they are determined to make his presidency a failure, even if this means damaging the US economy (if the economy is bad, voters blame the administration). So with his re-election prospects not good, he turns to international affairs, and especially to grand strategy, in which he plays the glorious role of Commander-in-Chief.

The move showcased in Canberra and Darwin is presented as a “pivot”, by which the US turns from the Middle East--Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan--where Obama claims all is now under control, to the Pacific, to take on China. This wedges his opponents, who would normally applaud an American challenge to China. (Indeed, many of them would applaud any exercise of US power against anyone any time.)

Did the President consult his hosts, to ask whether they wanted such a belligerent speech to be made in Canberra? Probably not, but if he had consulted Julia Gillard she would have agreed to whatever he wanted. Obama gets some political advantage in the US, Gillard basks in reflected power.

But internationally the move will make no practical difference. US military power is already deployed in the Pacific anyway. China already knows that the US will fight to the death if necessary. China also already knows that Australia is a happy outpost of the US empire, but will also continue to sell minerals to anyone.