Essay On Australia's Threats And Uncertainties

Defense is an ongoing major issue within Australia and our economic status. The government is committed to an equipped,

The purpose of this paper is to compare the 1971 White Paper on Defence and the 2008 Canada First Defence Strategy. More specifically, this paper will compare the strategic environment, Canada’s greatest allies, the alliances Canada supported, and Canada’s security and defence priorities in the 1970s and under the Canada First Defence Strategy (CFDS). As this paper will demonstrate, the key differences witnessed in the 1971 White Paper on Defence and in the 2008 Canada First Defence Strategy is in terms of the specificities of the foreign and defence policy presented, the perceived types of threats to national and international security, and the Canadian Forces’ capability to respond to such major challenges. However, both the 1971 White Paper and the 2008 CFDS clearly demonstrate that the Canadian Forces are there first to defend Canada and Canadians, then to defend North America in cooperation with the United States, and finally to contribute to international security. Furthermore, both papers emphasize on the importance of defence policy in achieving foreign policy objectives.

The general aim of a foreign policy is to aid the guidance of international relations and enhance foreign relations. Internal and External affairs may impact the policies created at any point in time for example, Australia as a young nation suffered from tyranny of distance, it was still under imperial control however was on the other side of the world to Britain. Australia had the right to formulate its own foreign policies but did not do so until 1942. Prior to seeking its own independence and creating its own foreign policies the main theme of Australian foreign policy in the 1930’s was appeasement, due to its geographical location and fear of invasion. Although a part of the commonwealth Australia was fairly detached from imperial

In this essay I will be talking about the impact of the fall of Singapore on Australia’s immediate security, and also be giving a brief background of important events during that time.

Illustrating the actual and potential impacts of climate change this paper seeks to dramatize the impacts climate change could have on Australia’s national security if action to cut carbon emissions is not taken.

Australia’s response to the threat of communism after WW2 was extraordinary. Australia and its politicians immediately recognised what could happen of a result of the domino theory. With the Soviet Union influencing so many countries and causing China, Vietnam, and North Korea to turn Communist it was only matter of time until it reached Australia, and all in all this was when Australia took action.

Throughout the years the Treaty has existed the alliance has been questioned, “In the 2005 Australia and United States at Ministerial Consultations, both sides emphatically affirmed the enduring significance and relevance of the alliance and its firm basis in shared values, interests and sacrifice”. The alliance is very important as it provides Australia with access to world leading defence hardware and technologies without this Australia could become very vulnerable to security

Therefore, the recipient countries over reliance on Australian aid money places a strain on the Australian economy, as well as the risk of witnessing a downfall of a nearby nation, which could result in the endangerment of Australia’s national security.

Australia is nation with strong relationship with America since the end of cold war. However Australia and Asia share a close and complementary economic relationship. International security is currently one of Australia’s problems the government is dealing with. Under the foreign policy Australia became a member of the US- led coalition in Islamic State/Daesh in Iraq and Syria . Since the early century Australia has always play it part in the international community when it needed. Looking at 9/11 terrorist attacks in the United State, this situation was seen as a major threat to international peace and security . Since Australia is allied with the United State and

Australian foreign policy has undoubtedly been subject to vast changes over the past century, particularly as a response to the increasing role Asia has played in shaping the contemporary global market. Having identified the importance of multilateralism and regionalism, policy continue to be increasingly focused on our geographical position as part of the Asia-Pacific region, and the relationships with our immediate neighbours, as a means to better achieve stability. The word stability in this context does not simply refer one single aspect, but rather encompasses several different areas which are equally important if we are to continue advancing our country in both a domestic and international sense. There are several key areas of policy

During the past 25 years, Australian Foreign Policy has consisted of a balance between economic and security priorities. No government can afford to focus on one to the detriment of the other. During the Hawke and Keating era (1983-1996), economic factors were of significant importance as we were in a region that was growing rapidly, faster than any other region in the world. Although having said this, it can be argued that there were exceptions whereby security initiatives were of equal concern to the government. In the current day (Howard era), it is possible to view that there is a higher emphasis on security initiatives than ever

Although Howard introduced his response to the ‘China problem’ during his election campaign, his government first systemically present the problem in the 1997 Australia’s Foreign and Trade Policy White Paper entitled ‘In the National Interests.’ Australia’s national interests include pragmatically grasping economic benefits; strengthening relations with the US, and obtaining an upper hand in technologies and military forces in the next fifteen years; and contributing to regional peace and stability, the basis

The Australian-Chinese relationship stands as an important symbol for international relations in the Asian region. Presently, Australian face an important juncture in their relationship with China. Should Australians be concerned with Chinese military aggressions in the South China Sea or be more focused on strengthening an already strong Australian-Chinese economic partnership? China is Australia’s largest trading partner and has been a vehicle for Australian economic growth in recent decades (Drysdale & Xiaoqiang). Australian leaders must value the self-interest of the people of Australia. Leaders must focus on ensuring long term survival and prosperity of the great nation of Australia. I advocate a mostly defensive realist approach for Australian foreign policy towards China. I believe a policy of economic engagement suits the short and long term interest of Australia and will provide needed stability to the region.

The US is a vital strategic ally to Australia. The two countries have a long – if problematic – history of foreign policy collaboration, including joint military engagement. But they are facing two significant foreign policy challenges that require nuanced and delicate leadership – the exact opposite of Trump’s style

primarily about US-China relations and the role Australia would play in any conflict between the two powers. The journal article is highly critical of neoconservatism as a political ideology and views neoconservatism as an ideology that is likely to cause the escalation of war between the two nations. He gives three primary reasons for this belief. The first is the neoconservative push for strategic encirclement in the region, Secondly the neoconservative belief that the United States should prepare for war against China, and lastly supporting Taiwan’s independence instead of the “One China” policy. Some may be critical of Pan’s views on this topic since he is attempting to blame conflict between the inevitability of conflict between our nations on one political ideology, neoconservatism, but Pan goes onto explain that many of these neoconservative views are actually shared by liberals as well. Neoconservatives have essentially codified the idea that US-China conflict in East Asia is inevitable into foreign policy. Pan goes on to explain what he would suggest for Australia in case a war breaks out between The United States and China. While Pan is concerned with Australian foreign policy, his views on the US-China relationship are still astute. He believes that if neoconservative ideas continue to hold sway over US foreign policy with China, conflict will occur. President Trump has already questioned the “One China” policy, threatened China over the South China Sea, and attempted to strong-arm China over North Korea. It is clear that even if neoconservatism does not have a place in the White