You’ve got to raise an eyebrow at the chutzpah of the United States demanding to know how Australia would behave militarily in the event of a Chinese conflict with Taiwan when its own president is the epitome of unreliable and unpredictable.<\/p>\n
It’s the equivalent of one partner in a marriage demanding that they receive an ironclad commitment that you will never leave them while they strongly reserve the right to walk out whenever they like. Sounds like a terrible relationship, toxic even.<\/p>\n
US President Donald Trump has proven unprepared to stick to a consistent position in the current active theatre of Ukraine, let alone a crisis that hasn’t yet materialised but looms large in Taiwan.<\/p>\n
US foreign policy looks chaotic and confused\u00a0<\/p>\n
The US wants us to clarify our own position on a future war in our region while its own positions on defence are anything but clear.\u00a0 (Reuters: Ken Cedeno)<\/p>\n
Late last month, officials at the Pentagon signed an order stopping the delivery of a wide variety of weapons to Ukraine just as Russia was launching its most intense attacks. The reasoning was that the US needed to safeguard its own stockpiles.<\/p>\n
Trump \u2014 the actual commander-in-chief \u2014 then admitted he actually didn’t know that the deliveries had been halted and that the arms shipments would resume.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The confusing tale \u2014 with a thankfully positive outcome if you believe in the defence of a democratic nation that is facing a violent invasion \u2014 is a cautionary one about the erratic way US foreign and defence policy is now being made. What this all means in our own region is troubling. Some hardheads point to the outcome \u2014 Trump did change the policy after all. But that’s a very optimistic way of viewing something that looked chaotic and confused.<\/p>\n
This is the situation in a current war playing out in Europe. A backflip, uncertainty and confusion. But the US wants us to clarify our own position on a future war in our region.<\/p>\n
It comes amid reports of a push by US Defense Undersecretary Elbridge Colby for allies to make clear if they would commit troops to a conflict with China over Taiwan.<\/p>\n
Colby has been pushing defence officials from Japan and Australia to declare their positions in meetings over the issue, according to a report in The Financial Times<\/a>.<\/p>\n This is the man leading a US review of its nuclear submarine deal with Australia under the three-nation AUKUS partnership following concerns the plan to supply the subs would harm the US Navy and the “America First” approach.<\/p>\n Exercise Talisman Sabre war games with the US are commencing at a politically sensitive time for Australia. (Supplied: Department of Defence)<\/p>\n AUKUS complicates relationship<\/p>\n Acting Defence Minister Pat Conroy told me on Insiders that the Albanese government would not commit troops to possible future conflicts in advance, saying the decision to go to war would be one for the government of the day.<\/p>\n Conroy says Australia’s policy has long been clear.<\/p>\n “The sole power to commit Australia to war or to allow our territory to be used for a conflict is the elected government of the day. That is our position,” he said.<\/p>\n When pushed on what Australia was telling the US behind closed doors about the prospect of war over Taiwan, Conroy said he did not engage in “hypotheticals”.<\/p>\n Loading…<\/p>\n Conroy is correct to defend Australia’s right to decide when all the facts are known \u2014 but the complicating factor here is we are already deeply tied to the US through AUKUS, which leaves a large question mark over the expectations that might indeed come loaded with that arrangement down the track. Those expectations may or may not be in our national interest, and it is still unclear what they might look like.<\/p>\n According to Conroy, the Trump administration’s review of the AUKUS partnership is unfinished<\/a> as its slated deadline arrives. Conroy told Insiders the Australian government was “engaging at the most senior levels” and was optimistic the US review would endorse the military pact. But would it remain status quo? The same as was originally intended under the Morrison and Biden governments? Who knows. Certainly not us.<\/p>\n China is love-bombing us\u00a0<\/p>\n All this uncertainty comes as the Chinese government rolls out the red carpet for Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.\u00a0<\/p>\n We are in an upside-down world now, where our greatest potential geopolitical adversary in our own region is love-bombing us and acting like the “adult” trading partner, while our real ally demands commitments from us it is not prepared to make itself. Awkward?\u00a0<\/p>\n Spare a thought for the prime minister who must, over the next week, walk the delicate line of taking the relationship to a higher level economically while remaining staunch in our message around aggression in the South China Sea and human rights issues. Issues that matter enormously and must be vigorously raised at the highest levels.<\/p>\n Timing is everything of course and this all comes while the Talisman Sabre war games start on Australia’s northern coast. The biennial exercise for allies is led by the Australian and US forces.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n