There has been plenty of diplomatic semantics around the American presence in Darwin but many including the Chinese are still not satisfied. The United States has long wanted a permanent military base in northern Australia.

Just smile and say 'rotational presence' three times. Pic: Brad Fleet

But they are not stupid. 

So when Australian officials conveyed that a fixed establishment would not be politically palatable here they saved us the embarrassment of having to say no in a high-level bilateral meeting if the request was made.

Instead, we will now find ourselves with the more politically convenient ‘rotational presence’ of 2,500 Marines eventually. But not even this would not have been possible under President Obama’s predecessor.

The joint facility will become the third biggest deployment of American troops in the region behind the 40,000 based in Japan and the 28,500 in South Korea.

And while the figure on our shores pales into significance it is still much larger than the couple of hundred a piece roughly based in Diego Garcia, the Philippines, Thailand and Singapore, as well as the couple of dozen based in Malaysia and Jakarta that make up the rest of the regional presence.

So it is hardly surprising the newfound home of what was two-and-a-half battalions in the old currency, that is likely to be commanded by a 1-star Admiral, has inevitably raised a few eyebrows in the region.

But just how do you separate the semantics from the substance?

Firstly, it is important to keep in mind that most countries in the region would in fact welcome a heightened presence by the United States. Washington’s membership of the East Asian Summit – which met for the first time with the United States at the table last month – was in large part a product of a long diplomatic campaign waged by the region to increase the superpower’s regional involvement.

For their part, the United States – with the help of Australia – have tried to dampen the confrontational nature of the presence by focussing its mission on disaster recovery in the region. This will no doubt play a role – and a noble one at that – but it would be naïve to assume this is the motivating factor.

China’s immediate response – through a spokesman at the Foreign Affairs Ministry – was stock standard as diplomacy goes. It was not possible for there to not be a response at this rudimentary level. Indeed, had a response been communicated via a Minister – which is unusual for the Chinese – this would have raised alarm bells.

However, Beijing for its part knows that Darwin (which will only consist of troops) is further from the South China Sea than the home of the United States Navy’s 7th Fleet in Japan which comprises over fifty ships. This would be the force called into action during any heightened tension around the much praised sea lanes of commerce that flow through the South China Sea.

Ultimately, the presence of American Marines in Darwin represents nothing more than what many have termed a “tripwire” to Beijing. It is no more of a strategy of containment than China’s own “String of Pearls” strategy of building military bases and shipping dockyards all the way from Hong Kong to the port of Sudan.

And this is certainly how Beijing views it.

A fortnight ago following military talks with the Americans, an official explanation for the Darwin presence was demanded from Washington. One renowned hardliner, Major General Luo Yuan from the People’s Liberation Army Academy of Military Science, even went so far as to say “Australia is just a pawn in this arrangement”.

But Indonesia’s reaction has perhaps been more surprising.

While President Yudhoyono said on the eve of President Obama’s visit that an American military presence in Darwin did not bother him – a view that was reiterated following their bilateral meeting in Bali – his Foreign Minister, Marty Natalegawa, has been less consistent.

Despite Natalegawa having been briefed personally on the plan by Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd almost a week before the announcement (China, India and New Zealand were also delivered briefings by different officials) he subsequently proclaimed the proposal could upset the regional balance only now to suggest this may now pave the way for joint exercises with the Chinese.

With so much of the region’s reaction to the announcement hinging on Beijing it is possible that Jakarta’s comments were little more than chest beating designed to reiterate their role in the region and immediate proximity to Darwin.

For his part, President Obama has received largely positive coverage back home for the announcement, though it has been minimal. While some in Congress were upset by his ring fencing of funding to deliver on his military strategy in the Asia Pacific (particularly only months after the possibility of withdrawing troops from the region was suggested as a means to save money) they were pleased to see the first self-described ‘Pacific President’ putting a down payment on that promise.

While the Americans might not have got everything they wanted they have certainly paved the way for that to occur in the future. Upgrading a ‘rotational presence’ to a base is much easier than the outright establishment of a base in the first instance and Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has already lent his support for this to occur under his watch.

So all this begs the question, when is a base a base?

Thom Woodroofe is an associate fellow of The Asia Society. Follow him on Twitter @thomwoodroofe.

Most commented

39 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • acotrel says:

      05:28am | 28/12/11

      What is the reality about Australia being able to defend itself ?  Every time we make a purchase of defence equipment we hear rumblings from Indonesia about our ‘territorial aims’.  I’ve never heard of Australia having ‘territorial aims’ before, so what does that tell us ? - who has the ‘aims’ ? Having a US base in the Northern Territory, is like having a police station in a country town.
      Welcome Yankee, we love you long time !

    • Trevor says:

      07:35am | 28/12/11

      The reality is that Australia doesn’t stand a chance if we stand alone in the event of serious invasion or other military adventures by our regional neighbours. Hence the ‘big brother’ policy of having a strong military benefactor. This goes back to before federation, with the Brits playing the part before WWII and the US afterwards. Hence our involvement in all sorts of theatres of war with no direct relationship to our own defence. From the Boer War to Afghanistan, via Gallipoli.

    • Ricky_B says:

      08:45am | 28/12/11

      My god! I actually agree with something you said acotrel! Well said!! smile

    • Don says:

      09:39am | 28/12/11

      Dear acotrel , Your not saying something I can agree with ? I will not not say bugger me .

      Australia does need American military strength , because just in case of a case like Timor 1999 comes again .

    • Dieter Moeckel says:

      02:06pm | 28/12/11

      Reminds me of the foreplay for the first world war. The assurance that war is inevitable - It has never been inevitable to the Swiss.
      The expenditure of money on war machinery in Australis is stupendous and we quibble about a few boat loads of refugees invading.
      The America is surrounding China its new found potential worst best friend to maintain a continued cold war to supports its weapon and defence industries. Just another escalation of potential threats to justify an economy reliant on military production.
      And as always Australia is sucked right in ...
      Can anyone suggest who? why? or when? any other sovereign nation will invade Australia?
      Not only are we selling off our land to foreigners we are giving away our sovereignty.

    • acotrel says:

      04:01am | 29/12/11

      @Dieter
      Since the late fifties , it has always been about Indonesia with it’s massive population. - If it implodes, it will come our way.  Our involvement in Vietnam was about a possible communist take over in Indonesia. By the time Australians were in Vietnam, the issues in Indonesia had been resolved - the military killed off the agitators.  In the meantime Hasluck had been to Washington lobbying the Yanks to put GIs into Vietnam, and we were committed to following them.

    • Brian says:

      02:08pm | 29/12/11

      Dieter - might I remind you that the reason the Swiss (who actually fought quite a few wars before turning to neutrality) were able to keep out of the world wars was due to their strong military (relative to their size) and aggressive defense of their borders? They had the most successful air force in the war, at least in terms of kill ratio.

    • John says:

      06:12am | 28/12/11

      If Ron Paul gets elected this policy will fall through. As all military base’s are going to by retracted in 2012 when Ron Paul win’s the 2012 elections. America’s death and destruction policy’s will be a thing of the past. The world will then deal with a legitimate constitutional US government, instead of hired corrupt crooks such as the bush’s, Obama, and the Clinton’s.

    • Trevor says:

      07:27am | 28/12/11

      I have mixed emotions about Ron Paul. He is the only choice the republicans can make with all the other contenders being bad jokes. I look forward to him legalising drugs, not so much abolishing social security. His stance on abortion is pretty scary too, but he is all about state rights. 

      Oh yeah, audit the fed!

    • Gratuitous Adviser says:

      07:40am | 28/12/11

      He is the dark horse and you may be right.  However, even if he did lead the Republicans and then beat Obama (a long shot on top of a long shot), I would think that it would take a few Ron Pauls’ to overcome the inertia of America being the worlds’ policeman.  In my opinion, the Obama Government has already started the withdrawal, mainly because the American public (the taxpayer, not the arms manufacturers) are sick of paying for other countries disputes and religious wars.  I can see protectionism and a “Neutrality Act” on the horizon and then we (Australia) will have something to worry about.

    • Direct says:

      07:46am | 28/12/11

      Ron Paul will never get elected president. The media establishment in the US will never let it happen. Even if he does become the leading Republic candidate, he’ll be torn to pieces just like Mark Latham.

    • acotrel says:

      09:00am | 28/12/11

      @John
      So our chance to become asylum seekers is about to arrive ?

    • John says:

      11:16am | 28/12/11

      I’m all aware of cabal who control the triangle of power in the west, politics, banking and media. They clearly don’t want him in power. They have already started their operation character assassinate Ron Paul, using so called racist literature. But this is the same media that covered up their puppet obama’s history. Just look at the US, bush is out, obama is out, the cabal’s puppets are not lasting very long, even if they manage to get another puppet in, and fool the american public once again. He is not going to last very long. The foundation of their power is starting rattle and weaken and it’s only a matter of time their controlled media networks collapse’s, banking structure collapses, the political structure (house of puppets) will also dwindle as their source of their corruption is no more.

      The state America is today, i think that is a possibly of radical moves by the american people, meaning Ron Paul has a chance.
      Maybe even a military coup in the US, as the generals are starting to see the country has been hijacked by insane lunatic internationalists.

      The same in Europe is also a possibly, as the Nationalist party in French Front National also has a chance to topple the internationalist puppet leaders of France. 

      So in 2012, if Front National get in power, we can see the dismantling of the European Union. Ron Paul takes the US and we can see the end internationalist pirate control of the US.

      If this does not occur, then it will be another wait till 2018. By this time the europeans and the Americans will of most likely had enough of their internationalist puppet leaders and their foreign and internal policy’s.

    • Tony Bee says:

      12:15pm | 28/12/11

      Gee, John, do you wear an aluminium hat as well? Ron Paul won’t get elected simply because he’s an even bigger idiot than Bush. Obama’s re-election is virtually guaranteed since the Republicans have no quality candidates to run against him. Obama is no one’s “puppet”, but is at the mercy of a very corrupt and ineffectual political system.

    • John says:

      01:40pm | 28/12/11

      Tony Bee says:

      What options do the Americans have? 5 puppets and 1 legitimate politician? This democratic theater show can only go for so long. American’s can’t be stupid for eternity. Will there be round three of stupidity? or have the Americans awaken too much?

    • James Hunter says:

      02:08pm | 28/12/11

      John, Republicans are all known collaborators of Big Business and if you are lookigng for crooks thats where youll find them

    • John says:

      02:38pm | 28/12/11

      James Hunter

      It seems like you have been suckered into the left, right paradigm. Coke and Pepsi. It’s all theater, to deceive the mass’s into believing they have a democracy and a free society. I don’t see Ron Paul as representing business’s and bankers and oligarchs. If he ends up doing it, people will be quick to realize it. It’s highly unlikely with his type honest character.

      Politicians argue amongst themselves, to justify their existence, but the reality is the fine line is always the line they walk. They are the same party.

    • acotrel says:

      04:07am | 29/12/11

      @John
      ‘It’s all theater, to deceive the mass’s into believing they have a democracy and a free society. ‘

      Heve you been reading George Orwell’s writings - something must be feeding your paranoia?

    • John says:

      07:28am | 29/12/11

      acotrel

      I never read the book, i watched the movie. Which seemed like a bunch retarded mass commie lemmings walking around. It’s more reality, self realization maybe the 1000 wakening documentary’s i watched helped. 9/11 was the the door opener for it.

      I still wonder why the hell the Orwell was a socialist. I’m a hybrid advanced christian nationalist. I think the reason was that Orwell fail or ignored to see the real purpose of communism. Maybe he seen as some type of utopian ideal, which latter found not be, but still failed to despise it like he should of.

      It’s interesting, now I’m watching the machine attack Ron Paul, they been have doing back flips, going into fits, their heads have rocketed off their bodies and they are going insane. Their phoney democracy and puppet leaders are not getting any support. Literally their puppets are falling apart, the only person at the end of elections will be Ron Paul and Obama, but Obama will just disintegrate in the elections. It’s like establishment have ran out of effective puppets, or an effective mass marketing manipulation campaign. The minority’s are supporting Ron Paul also, so are white Americans. The establishment have lost control of divide and conqueror strategies. Their command and control structure is desolate. It’s game over. The more they attack Ron Paul the more powerful he and his supporters get.

    • Gratuitous Adviser says:

      06:52am | 28/12/11

      Australia is too far away from anything or anyone to be a concern to the players in this high stakes game so if both sides of our political divide consider this the best for us, the so be it.  I’m all for bi-partisanship. 
      To top off my support.  If the Greens policy is to “there should be a parliamentary debate before this proposal is decided, taking into account the opinion of experts that other nations such as China will be riled by the news of a US base at Darwin.””  then I’m definitely all for it.  I’m over the Greens with their smart but obvious manipulation of a debate!!!

    • mick says:

      08:41am | 28/12/11

      The greater fear is an economic war which Australia would lose hands down.  The Japanese worked this out decades ago.  The Chinese are now having their crack at buying up agricultural land and minerals in Australia fuelled by one ignorant government after another from both sides of politics.

    • acotrel says:

      09:11am | 28/12/11

      It doesn’t matter about the Chinese buying up Australia, as long as the top end of town get their money !

    • NESLIHAN KUROSAWA says:

      08:46am | 28/12/11

      Hi Thom,

      Most definitely, we do need the extra troops & US bases in the Northern Territory.  Because you can not trust anyone these days, who is true neighbor & who is not?? Just in case of any deadly attack & an invasion from the Asian, Indonesian, Chinese, Korean & Japanese direction!  And it has happened before & it might happen again, right?

      It might sound funny right now, but who knows what will happen in the future? It might also attract more tourists from the USA, Canada & South America just to see, taste the culture & beautiful scenery for themselves alone. It would be the ultimate experience when it comes to meeting the people of Northern Territory.  I am sorry to say that I have never had the chance so far. May be I will travel there myself one day!

      I personally want to say that I grew up right next door to the US Bases in Turkey during my teenage years.  I totally loved the idea, it was a bit like travelling overseas!  Little bit of cultural exchange never hurt anyone.  May be we could learn something new from them.  Best regards to your editors.

    • A Dose of Reality says:

      05:49pm | 28/12/11

      NESLIHAN KUROSAWA:

      Deadly attack?  From whom?

      Seriously, can someone name a serious contender to
      (a) project force overseas to the Australian shore,
      (b) establish and maintain a secondary supply line onshore whilst travelling through the most inhospitable continent other than Antartica and
      (c) maintain such a projection of force against the ADF?

      Firstly - and rather obviously - this requires a ‘blue water fleet’ of some substance.  There is no power in this region that has one, and China will not for another 30 - 40 years, India is probably even further behind.

      Secondly, and even more obviously, air power.  there is no nation in the region that could extend air power over Australia in the face of the FA18’s we have (even just a squadron of them).  Those nations that do have relatively advanced aircraft have developed/bought them for defence capability.

      The only nations that have the capacity to launch a conventional attack on Australia is the USA, perhaps France and ……… (even the UK no longer can project that kind of force).

      The fact is that Australia maintaining a ‘rip an arm off’ capability (whereby any attacking force might succeed, but will be so reduced in capacity that it becomes vulnerable in itself) is enough.

      An airforce will do that (get 200 gen5 planes that can smash anything on the water or in the air).
      OR
      An undersea fleet will do it (let them get here, sink their boats and watch the desert kill them).

      An American base of any sort simply serves as a projection of US force.  The only way to negate that projection is long range (guess what).

      If you paint a target someone will take aim.

    • NESLIHAN KUROSAWA says:

      07:32am | 29/12/11

      Hi A Dose of Reality,

      Thanks so much for your reply!  I just wanted to say that “so much information in so little time”.  You definitely seem to know what you are talking about.  Which is really great & I was only speaking based on my own experiences alone!

      It was only a hypothetical situation, I am not really into starting any wars, anywhere in the world.  However, I am all for anyone trying to defend their rights, freedoms & basic human rights.  I also wanted to know “how did you get all that information, by the way”?  Thanks once again & Happy New Year.  Kind Regards.

    • Ricky_B says:

      08:56am | 28/12/11

      I think its about time our pissweak government lets China & Indonesia know that they do not dictate our foreign or military policies & that we are a hell of a lot closer to the US historically & culturally than either of them.We have been allies for a long time, so deal with it.I find it mind boggling that Indonesia has plenty of cash to build up its military while still screaming poor & accepting our aid money.Maybe if we spent that aid money on our own armed forces we wouldnt have to rely so much on the US. Its great the US is coming here because i wouldnt trust China or Indonesia as far as i could throw them.

    • Anabaru says:

      02:13pm | 28/12/11

      Wow Ricky! Really?
      Such an astute and penetratingly deep comment. I succumb to your rich argument,. Really the power of national debate.

    • Ricky_B says:

      03:57pm | 28/12/11

      Gee Anabaru, you sure put me in my place with that witty, hard hitting reply!! I guess with your powerful penmanship backing us we dont need the U.S. alliance.  Dickhead. smile

    • malohi says:

      12:29pm | 29/12/11

      How did I miss this gem of a quid pro quo yesterday?

    • acotrel says:

      09:14am | 28/12/11

      There’s a similarity between Mark Latham and Tony Abbott.  Both talk fight, and both are all piss and wind !

    • RyaN says:

      10:05am | 28/12/11

      There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead!

    • embracedmadness says:

      12:38pm | 28/12/11

      After reading you first comment Acotrel, I thought we would get through a post without you attacking Abbott… Seriously mate, grow up!

    • James Hunter says:

      02:37pm | 28/12/11

      Tony has small mens syndrome to a “T”

    • holden says:

      10:03pm | 28/12/11

      Hey folks, look at this! RyaN has this terrifically novel slogan about no Carbon Tax. And it must have worked because we don’t, and won’t, have one. We have penalties for going over the allowed limit of pollution, but no Tax. Well done Ryan, and so very original.
      Do you write scripts for the idiot who said, “If you are going to have anything you should have a Carbon Tax”? They call him Brother, (or Brer), Rabbit, and he is a very stupid man who can’t tell the truth without a script, (and then not always).
      But again, well written. Ryan, you are a truly a man of words. Hahaha.

    • Mitch says:

      10:21am | 28/12/11

      The Joint Chiefs will have the Cigarette Smoking Man take care of Ron Paul, just like Kennedy, before the US goes back to 1930s isolationism. Besides we could always build nukes. I wouldn’t worry.

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      10:22am | 28/12/11

      Technically U.S has already had permanent bases in Australia. One base detected Soviet Union missile launches, another was for signals intelligence and a couple were for submarine navigation. Mostly operated by Australian personnel now, I think.

    • Dieter Moeckel says:

      02:19pm | 28/12/11

      I had a gas bottle delivered from the Richmond Airbase near Sydney to Alice Springs in a US Star Lifter transport ‘plane because Ansett and TAA wouldn’t transport it. (my brother was in the RAAF)
      The same aircraft delivered a three lane ten pin bowling alley to Pine Gap. At the time Alice had a US Post Office discretely in a side street. You don’t need 2 500 marines to have a base in Australia, but they do the R&R industry a world of good and the red-light industry won’t suffer either I dare say.

    • stephen says:

      08:33pm | 29/12/11

      Indonesia’s defense exercizes with Beijing would be effective if they were not done on one of their - the latter’s - trains.
      Otherwise, it should be done, from the Indonesian side,  on old wooden boats, the captain should be local - approved, of course - the Chinese subs should be copies stolen from US blueprints stolen via subterfuge, and if Providence were chief of either side, then God might be invoked : The Indonesians would bribe him, the Chinese would shoot him.
      We’re not in any trouble, really ; but I sure as hell don’t have any self-respect living in a country that gives a half/billion aid to a country which cuts our beef imports as a punishment, (the Indo cow/murder scandal) ...  no doubt, Kevin Rudd has a white paper deciding if this, apparently, and conclusively, and without a doubt, is, in fact, the case.
      We’re donkeys, and maybe we should let Marilyn Shepherd take public office : she at least believes in bloody something.

    • OchreBunyip says:

      08:15am | 30/12/11

      Unfortunately the US government only has a hammer in its toolbox and every problem looks like a nail. If they learned some diplomacy, or practiced what they cunningly conceal they know, then maybe their increased presence on Australian bases would be a good idea. At the moment they are as constructive as a bull in a china shop.

      Its a setback for your country. I’m surprised Garrett could forget his own lyrics so quickly, or conveniently.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter