Public expenditure must instead address the climate emergency and other urgent social needs. There is no evidence that China presents a military threat to Australia. Continued trade and pursuit of mutually beneficial relations in our region offers our best security.
Wednesday’s announcement by Defence Minister Richard Marles of a $50 billion boost over a decade to defence spending for a future war, is not what our country needs. This represents an increase up to 2.4% of GDP by 2030.
“Where is the spending on peace building measures?”, asked the spokesperson for the Independent and Peaceful Australia Network (IPAN) Mr. Cameron Leckie, a retired Army Major.
“This increased defence spending is not for the defence of our territory, but is part of preparations for Australia to participate in a U.S. war against China”, stated Mr. Leckie. “Australia and China have a mutual interest in protecting their respective sea lines of communication. Australia’s ‘defence’ strategy is logically incoherent.”
“In fact, there is actually no evidence that China presents a military threat to Australia”. “Continued trade and pursuit of mutually beneficial relations in our region offers our best security”, stated Mr Leckie.
“In addition, increased spending such as what has been proposed, represents a bonanza of funds for the likes of weapons companies such as Lockhead Martin, which are already reaping massive profits from the war in Ukraine and the Israeli war against Palestinians,” stated Mr. Leckie.
If Australia were to join in another US-led war, it would be in stark contradiction to the findings of the 2023 Essential Research Poll which found that 67 per cent of Australians support keeping of out such a war and adopting a position of neutrality.
“Any war is disastrous for the countries involved as well as the planet. Wars divert resources and attention away from the real need to focus on climate disruption and the social needs of housing, health and education.”
“Australian public funds, to the tune of $16-21 billion, are proposed to be spent on a long-range missile domestic manufacturing industry while at the same time Australia has urgent social needs for housing, health and the climate emergency”, stated Mr. Leckie.
Additionally, the outrageous wastage of money - $368 billion – on AUKUS, the nuclear submarines and lethal technologies, will surely increase the risk of involvement in any future US led war as well as making Australia a dumping ground for high level nuclear waste.
“IPAN calls for Australia to adopt an independent, peace-promoting foreign policy in the interests of genuine security for the Australian people”, said Mr. Leckie.
Comments
Sheila Newman
Mon, 2024-05-06 22:46
Permalink
Senate Inquiry into Australian support for Ukraine - ends May 10
https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Foreign_Affairs_Defence_and_Trade/UkraineSupport47/Terms_of_Reference
Terms of Reference
Australian support for Ukraine, with particular reference to:
(a) whether the support is timely, coordinated and comprehensive;
(b) whether support is appropriately coordinated on a whole-of-government
and whole-of-country basis;
(c) efforts to hold Russia to account, including by addressing mis- and dis-
information in Australian public debate and the region; and
(d) any related matters.
[The terms of reference (ToR) are quite brief - but it might be worth raising questions that are not directly addressed in the ToR
i.e. The ToR ask “…whether the support is timely, coordinated and comprehensive” but do not ask, for example,
whether the support provided by Australia is appropriate – i.e. should we be sending short-range air defence systems, drones for the Ukrainian military
or whether Australian involvement is actually required for a war so far away from the Asia-Pacific region
or whether Australia should be focusing more on matters in our own region
Given (d) any related matters, submissions could also focus, for example, on what role Australia might be able to play in working towards a sustained negotiated settlement]
Add comment