Pentagon shuns Asia for Canberra's
embrace By Alan Boyd
SYDNEY -
The Pentagon has skirted Asian ambivalence over its
forward defense strategy by bypassing the ASEAN
(Association of Southeast Asian Nations) countries in
favor of three new bases in northern Australian that
will pack the same regional punch but which are unlikely
to lower the diplomatic heat.
US Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his Australian
counterpart, Senator Robert Hill, said two training
centers and a bombing range in Queensland and the
Northern Territory would be adapted for joint use by
"tens of thousands" of troops from both countries.
US equipment and munitions will probably be
stored permanently at the camps for use in regional
conflicts, while Canberra also agreed to deploy several
other facilities as part of the so-called Son of Star
Wars missile defense shield program.
However,
Hill said the US would not be stationing troops in
Australia, ending speculation that the camps might
accommodate units that are being withdrawn from Japan
and South Korea as part of a global realignment of US
forces.
"There's no benefit to the United States
in [having] permanent bases in Australia. What they are
looking for in our region are further training
opportunities and ... training facilities that are up to
the world's best standards," Hill said.
Nonetheless, much of Asia will view the
maneuverings as confirmation that an increasingly
hawkish Pentagon intends to play a more proactive role
in regional security, and especially in
counter-terrorism, even if this means having to operate
in Australia's shadow.
Canberra has been anxious
to play down suggestions that it will be acting as the
US "deputy sheriff". Government officials said privately
that Australian bases were chosen because Southeast
Asian countries were either unwilling to act as hosts or
lacked the necessary infrastructure.
Undoubtedly
the Pentagon would have preferred a more central
location that could perform some of the same logistical
and resupply functions as the former US naval facilities
in the Philippines.
The search for a forward
positioning base began in earnest after the 1991 Gulf
War, which exposed the long US supply lines and raised
the specter - realized in later Middle East campaigns -
that US offensive capability would become overstretched.
Resources have been spread even thinner since the
September 11, 2001, attacks brought greater emphasis to
anti-terrorism. One outcome was a global realignment
that will mean fewer static troop concentrations and
more reliance on fast-response units.
South
Korea has already lost the bulk of its permanent US
garrison, and as many as 15,000 of the 20,000 marines
based on the Japanese island of Okinawa are likely to be
redeployed by 2015, when the prefectural government has
said it wants all bases vacated.
Okinawa's main
appeal is its geographical location: only two hours of
flying time from Korea, the most unstable security
hotspot. By contrast, the peninsula is five hours from
Guam, the other key US marshaling area, 11 hours from
Hawaii and 16 hours from the continental US. For these
reasons it is highly unlikely the Marines will be sent
to Australia or Southeast Asia, which would offer few
strategic benefits. The most likely solution is that
they will simply be relocated to the Japanese mainland,
where they can draw on existing infrastructure.
According to diplomats, another option is to
funnel some ground units out to bases in Singapore,
Malaysia and the Philippines, while naval forces might
be spread between Cam Ranh Bay in Vietnam and possibly
Sattahip in eastern Thailand. But the post-Iraq
political reality is that few countries are prepared to
be seen as pro-American, even while they discreetly
build strong anti-terrorism networks with Washington and
freely exercise with US troops.
Thailand has
agreed to accept an equipment stockpile, but no troops
or permanent naval presence. The Philippines will take
more troops because it needs all the help it can get in
counter-terrorism. But Chinese sensitivities may
frustrate the Vietnamese negotiations.
Singapore, already an emerging refueling and
maintenance center for US vessels, was willing to take
on a bigger role, but lacks facilities capable of
handling large numbers of ground troops. It is already
training many of its own troops and pilots in Australia.
"Australia offers a level of technological and
operations convergence that is not available anywhere
else in the region outside Japan and Korea. They operate
the same equipment, have some of the same communication
systems, and they are used to working together," said a
defense attache. "If you are talking primarily about
training, these are aspects that will have influenced
defense planners, plus the availability of underutilized
facilities that can be used as a springboard for fast
deployment of munitions or vehicles anywhere in the
region."
Shoalwater Bay, a base in the
northeastern state of Queensland that is already used as
a storage facility for Singaporean equipment, would be
the most logical forward-deployment facility for US
forces, as it offers relatively easy access to both the
Pacific and Indian oceans.
Rumsfeld said in
Washington that the three bases would be directly linked
through advanced communications systems to the US
Pacific War Fighting Center in Hawaii, which would
enable strategists to coordinate a quick response to
perceived security threats.
Canberra has gained
access to this technology, as well as preferential
equipment transfers. The bases announcement was
accompanied by a separate deal for the purchase of
Abrams tanks and Hercules Armored Recovery vehicles that
will be used in the joint training exercises.
An
even bigger commitment is Australia's decision to sign
up for the George W Bush administration's much-derided
"Son of Star Wars" missile defense shield, probably by
utilizing satellite and communications facilities that
are jointly operated with various US agencies. China and
North Korea, widely seen as the two main targets of the
US$50 billion shield, are unlikely to be amused by the
25-year agreement, which will firmly position Canberra
with 10 other nations in the US alliance, including
South Korea and Japan.
The deal could be
canceled if the opposition Labor Party wins a pending
general election. Labor leader Mark Latham said this
week that the shield was a waste of resources and would
"increase missile proliferation and insecurity in our
region".
Beijing, a close trading partner of
both Australia and the United States, has already spoken
its mind on the revamped US defense strategy and the
deals with Australia, which it charges are a reward for
Canberra's support of US policies in Iraq. A commentary
by the state-owned China Daily claimed that Washington
"had become accustomed to orienting its relations with
allies based on whether or not those countries provide
military assistance or bases".
"To further
expand its military presence in Asia, the United States
has greatly increased military aid to several countries
in the region, including Pakistan, the Philippines,
Nepal, India, Thailand, and Mongolia.
"Obviously, current US diplomacy is mainly
focused on how to ensure and expand America's global
military presence and how to gain promises of military
aid from other countries. This has unavoidably led to
militarization of US foreign policies," the newspaper
said.
(Copyright 2004 Asia Times Online Ltd. All
rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com for
information on our sales and syndication policies.)
