Obama pulling back the United States from the role of global superhero is a good thing. For too long countries have implicitly outsourced their security to us. That gave them the ability to plow those dollars into social programs. I’m thinking particularly of Europe and our direct manning of German borders, and France’s location behind Germany’s borders.

Hopefully it’s not too late. These countries will need to ask hard questions about how to generate the funds to create modern forces. Hopefully they will look to their conservative leadership and the example of the United States on how to be prosperous.

Looking to flee a Marxist state????

Can we apply for political asylum?

Australia is not worried about most goings on in the world, only what’s going on in Indonesia.

With a Northern part of the country having a sparely populated (less than 500K people) temperate area the size of Texas with water and good land, oil and other resources very near a country that has a booming population what would you do?

If Indonesia decides to solve it’s population crowding problems with an invasion of the Northern Territory, far North Western Australia and NE Queensland, would Obama honor this long term commitment to Australia in the face of an invasion by a Muslim country? It’s a bet that Australia seems to not want to take.

As history has proven the best defense against neighbors with ambitions on your country is a strong military defense. Australia is making sure that it’s own security is sound, no matter who is the White House.

SEATO (whose members included Australia, France, New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippines, Thailand, United Kingdom and United States) was intended to be a Southeast Asian version of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), in which the military forces of each member would be coordinated to provide for the collective defense of the members.

Because SEATO, unlike NATO, had no joint commands with standing forces. and an attack on one member was not automatically considered an attack on all, SEATO never was an effective alliance. Just like with the UN security council, any one member could effectively block any collective SEATO action.

SEATO folded in 1977, following the withdrawal of Pakistan from the organization in 1972 and France the following year.

ANZUS (The Australia, New Zealand, United States Security Treaty) is the military alliance which binds Australia and New Zealand and, separately, Australia and the United States to cooperate on defense matters in the Pacific Ocean area, though today the treaty is understood to relate to attacks in any part of the world.

Yes, it is good that at least one of our allies is willing to stand up to defend itself. However, it’s a sad day when one of America’s staunchest allies can no longer trust the U.S. to honor its solemn commitments.

- JP

I hope not, for the country’s sake, because the article says that we’re going to be the dominant power until 2030. That’s like 5 more Obama terms in office!

will continue to be the dominant power until 2030. That’s just an estimate, and Obama could, by his actions, significantly compress that time frame. Especially if he does what he said he would do:

“First, I’ll stop spending $9 billion a month in Iraq. I’m the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning. And as president I will end it.”

“Second, I will cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending.
I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems. I will not weaponize space. I will slow our development of future combat systems. And I will institute an independent ‘Defense Priorities Board’ to ensure that the Quadrennial Defense Review is not used to justify unnecessary spending.”

“Third, I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal, I will not develop new nuclear weapons; I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material; and I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert, and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenals.”

Depends on what Obama’s definition of “unnecessary spending” is, does it not? He’s managed to triple our deficit in just 100 days, and he’s just getting started with his irresponsible spending, none of which is justified by the Constitution. Meanwhile, he aims to curtail responsible spending, i.e., defense of the nation as required by the Constitution.

So no prudent person should take that 2030 date to the bank

- JP

After our initial military victories in Afghanistan, America was the undisputed leader of the world in nearly all respects. By overextending our military in Iraq, Bush exposed the limits of American power. America may never regain that stature. American supremacy collapsed during the Bush administration.

Instead of warning that Australia will no longer put her troops at risk “in distant theatres of war where we have no direct interests”.

Instead of warning that Australia will no longer put her troops at risk “in distant theatres of war where our allies will not appreciate our efforts or return the favor”.

No good deed goes unpunished and Thank you, John Howard

Josh, you write: “U.S. supremacy is on the wane under President Obama, and Australia can no longer depend on its number one ally to protect it. That’s the assessment of the Rudd government, and it is taking steps to ensure that Australia can defend herself.”

But the White Paper is a long-term planning document. It tries to deal with Australia’s defense needs and policies over the next 20 years or so. It never mentions, nor does it even implicitly refer to, nor does it rely on any assumptions about, the specific policies of the Obama administration.

The White Paper was commissioned more than a year ago. I wonder if you can identify any of its conclusions that would have been different if a Republican were now in the White House.