Gradual changes are happening in defense dispositions in Australia, in terms of future possibilities and actual happenings. Perceptions of a withdrawal of US forces and any decline in the US's relative power may depend on the country and the officialness of the country's institutions.
Precise details remain tightly guarded but senior defence and federal government figures concede the proposal may risk angering China even though it's a commercial port, not a new military base.
Projected site of Glyde Point Port (which may accommodate US warships) relative to Darwin Port (leased to a Chinese company for 99 years). (Map above courtesy ABC News June 2019)
---
The folly of leasing Darwin Port for 99 years. Map illustrates Darwin's key position in relation to some strategic concerns (eg. Indonesia, now independent East Timor and Papua New Guinea). Originating map-maker unknown.
---
Following Submarine Matters’ article “US
told 2 Days After Sale of Port of Darwin to a Chinese Company” November 24,
2015, Australia’s ABC News reported
June 23, 2019:
“Secret plans for new
port outside Darwin to accommodate visiting US Marines”
"Secret planning has begun for a new port facility just
outside Darwin which could eventually help US Marines operate more readily in
the Indo-Pacific.
Precise details remain tightly guarded but senior defence and federal government figures concede the proposal may risk angering China even though it's a commercial port, not a new military base.
Multiple officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity,
have confirmed to the ABC the multi-use development would be in the Glyde Point area, roughly 40 kilometres
north-east of Darwin's existing port.[see map above]
In the past, the location has been earmarked by the Northern
Territory Government as a possible future industrial port site given its
relatively deep waters, but funding arrangements for the yet-to-be announced
project remain unclear.
Darwin port, which was controversially leased to a Chinese
company in 2015, has existing defence facilities such as a multi-user barge
ramp, but the new proposed facility would have the additional advantages of
being less busy and less visible.
If approved, the new [Glyde Point] port could eventually be able to
accommodate large amphibious warships such as Australia's Landing Helicopter
Docks, and American vessels such as the USS Wasp, which recently arrived in
Sydney. Strategic experts believe a new deep-water port would be ideally suited
for the more than 2,000 US Marines and their equipment during regular rotations
through [Australia's Northern Territory].
"The Americans
are clearly not withdrawing from the Indo-Pacific, whether it's because of
their strategic competition with China or more generally," said [Professor
Rory Medcalf, Head of the National Security College at the Australian
National University.]
Pete
6 comments:
Hopefully Lundrum, Coccos, Christmas and Darwin, dare I say it that 2% of GDP is looking mighty light on children friends!.
Hi Lee McCurtayne
Thanks for your a tad cryptic comment.
I take it you are referring to the new "Lombrum" Naval Base in Papua New Guinea (PNG) that PNG, US and Australian armed forces are building and will use - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lombrum_Naval_Base
Yes Australia's undefendable and (could be one day inundated by sea-level rises) Cocos (Keeling) Island and Christmas Island micro-territories.
Australia's intention to always devote 2% or more of its GDP on military spending - particularly aimed as down payment-insurance premiums to countries (the US, France and UK) that can hopefully help defend Australia's region from China.
Cheers
Pete
I just don't get the part on "Chinese anger" over the alternate port arrangement. What Australia does in terms of security arrangements within its own territory is none of China's business. Secondly, China is in perennial anger mood over everything and anything. Australia should care less about what China thinks and more about how we improve our own defenses against China's aggression. Whether China is happy or angry, its intended trajectory is to take over the world. Dancing around China's feelings is not going to change their plans.
I would much rather they built it as a naval base. Lease some of it out if they want, but a naval base that takes over the entire area stops the like of governments doing another Darwin & stops the problems of fleet base east, where the NSW government, Sydney city council & local residents are at odds with the Navy.
Hi Anonymous [at November 22, 2019 at 5:13 PM]
A lot of this "Chinese anger" may be commercially motivated.
The Chinese company that leased/owns Port of Darwin for 99 years may be concerned that its future Australian Navy and US Navy customers will take their business/money to the future Glyde Point Base instead.
For example in 5-10 years time the 4 months or so berth-rental and supply services for the 40,000 ton USS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Wasp_(LHD-1) and one or two 30,000 "USNS" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Military_Sealift_Command_ships will no longer be paid to the Chinese company that owns Port of Darwin.
Cheers
Pete
Anonymous [at November 24, 2019 at 6:54 AM]
The RAN/Defence has tried for years to find an alternative Fleet Base East venue that:
- meets strategic and political concerns
- meets environmental concerns - also includes no bad tides and must be deep water
- meets the naval personnel criteria ie. near/in a major population center
- won't cost too many $Billions for building whole new base facilities, eg. for all the ship repair and maintenance, dry docks etc, and
- satifies the concerns of state and local governments AND "not in my backyard" (NIMBYs) AND Greenies
See Executive Summary pages 5 and 6 of https://www.defence.gov.au/FOI/Docs/Disclosures/373_1718_Documents.pdf
Post a Comment