Why did the US, UK and Australia military "iron triangle" come from?
(Hot conversation)
According to foreign media reports, under the leadership of the United States, the United States, Britain and Australia recently announced the establishment of a new "Trilateral Security Partnership" (AUKUS).
Under this mechanism, the United States and Britain will support the Australian Navy in establishing a nuclear submarine force.
Australia unilaterally tore up the tens of billions of dollars of submarine orders signed with the French naval group.
From the "four-sided mechanism" to the "Five Eyes Alliance" to the "Group of Seven", the United States, which has always been keen to form cliques and engage in "small circles", has also launched the US-UK-Australia military "iron triangle."
What are the political calculations of this mechanism?
What does this move mean for the other Western allies of the three countries?
What impact will the cooperation between the United States, Britain and Australia in the field of nuclear submarines have on the international nuclear non-proliferation regime?
What threats does it pose to regional and world peace?
This newspaper talked to three international experts for interpretation.
Australia:
Jumped into a dangerous chariot
According to Reuters news, Australian Prime Minister Morrison argued when talking about AUKUS a few days ago that he "does not regret the decision to put Australia's national interests first." On the 70th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Alliance, the United States stated that it would continue to "defend the common principles of the two countries, including freedom and openness in the Indo-Pacific region" with Australia.
The Australian side also announced a series of related arms purchase and defense cooperation plans, and stated that it will spend 270 billion Australian dollars (approximately US$205.4 billion) in the next 10 years to strengthen the Australian military's long-range attack capabilities, and defense spending has therefore risen by 40%.
"Australia is taking risks!" Hugh White, a well-known Australian strategist, issued such a warning.
Li Haidong: The establishment of AUKUS, the United States and Australia can be described as a hit.
On the one hand, Australia has always regarded the US-Australia alliance as the cornerstone of its national security policy and has shown its loyalty to the United States through practical actions.
In recent years, under the agitation of the United States, Australia has become more eager to demonstrate its importance in Asian and Western Pacific affairs.
On the other hand, for a period of time, the United States has repeatedly suffered setbacks in handling foreign affairs, its international reputation has been declining, and domestic calls against expanding overseas military operations have increased.
Under this circumstance, the United States wants to strategically contain China in the Western Pacific region and has insufficient strength and confidence to participate in the competition among major powers, and it urgently needs the assistance of reliable allies.
Australia has a strong desire to play this role to make up for the relative decline in US global influence.
Obviously, Australia has made a bad short-sighted decision, which can be called "playing with fire".
Some Australian politicians ignore the objective facts of increasingly close economic and trade relations between Australia and China and completely ignore the welfare of the people. They only consider coordinating with the United States and competing with China at the strategic level, and abandon the practical consideration of mutual benefit with China at the economic level.
Australia's final outcome will be: strategically used by the United States, it will pay a huge price economically.
Chen Xiaochen: Australia's military deployment in recent years mainly includes two aspects: one is to strengthen its military presence in the Asia-Pacific region, and the other is to strengthen its alliance with the United States and other Western countries.
Its direction is very clear: take the so-called "China threat" as a response target.
Australia is not only the "little brother" and "follower" on the American "anti-China" tank, but also an "acting sheriff" mentality, trying to "independently assume responsibility", adopting targeted and more aggressive policies against China, and taking the initiative in The Asia-Pacific region has filled the US's vacancy, and even tried to provoke geo-competition and even the so-called "new cold war" in order to seek benefits from it.
Some Australian scholars summed up Australia's China policy as a contradiction between "greed" and "fear": it used to be "greed overwhelming fear", and it was embodied in Australia's development of economic and trade relations with China; now it is undoubtedly that "fear overwhelms greed".
It must be pointed out that China does not pose any substantive threat to Australia.
Under the influence of factors such as ideology, values, and US-Australia relations, Australia has developed a "fictional fear" of China, pushing it to play the role of anti-China vanguard.
Guo Chunmei: In recent years, Australia’s military actions have continued: from a substantial increase in defense spending to the expansion and upgrading of military bases in Asia; from strengthening the security dialogue mechanism between the United States, Japan, India and Australia, to strengthening weapons and equipment with the United States, Japan, India and other countries. , Logistics support, exchange of visits and other aspects of cooperation; from significantly increasing the frequency and types of joint military exercises with allies, to now joining AUKUS and developing nuclear submarine cooperation with the United Kingdom and the United States... Australia wants to be further bound to the US tanks. The role of the "deputy police chief" in the good region is striving to be the forward base of the American hawks in the Indo-Pacific region, and to serve the maintenance of US hegemony in the Indo-Pacific region.
Biei:
Setting up a stage to sing is only for self-interest
According to CNN, the White House Press Secretary Psaki said at a recent press conference that "The President will continue to maintain the close relationship between the United States and the leaders of France, Britain, and Australia, and achieve our global goals. Including the security of the Indo-Pacific region." British Foreign Secretary Truth said in the "Sunday Telegraph" that the AUKUS agreement shows that the United Kingdom is ready to "calmly" defend its own interests.
Some analysts pointed out that unlike the "Five Eyes Alliance" which focuses on intelligence sharing and the "four-side mechanism" which focuses on policy coordination, AUKUS intends to strengthen military technology exchanges and cooperation between the United States, Britain and Australia, with a focus on enhancing Australia's defense capabilities.
Chen Xiaochen: AUKUS undoubtedly serves the so-called "strategic competition with China" of the United States.
While the United States is adjusting its strategic focus and strategic opponents, its main strategic means will also be adjusted with changes in its strategic objectives.
At present, the United States has a sense of ineffectiveness in its foreign policy, so it tries its best to win over its allies in the Indo-Pacific region, while also creating a so-called "international anti-China atmosphere."
This reveals the fact that the closed anti-China "small circle" in the United States is difficult to get the support of most countries, and it is also difficult for Western countries to reach agreement on many issues.
Therefore, the so-called "small multilateralism" has become an important way for the United States to win over some Western countries to implement the "Indo-Pacific strategy."
Under this circumstance, the United States hopes that Australia will play an anti-China "benchmark" role and act as the "Southern anchor" of the United States' entire "Indo-Pacific strategy."
Li Haidong: From the perspective of the United Kingdom, the special relationship between the United States and Britain has existed for a long time, and there is a Commonwealth system between Britain and Australia.
Britain has always regarded itself as an important coordinator between Anglo-Saxon countries, English-speaking countries, and white-dominated countries, and hopes to represent the common interests of these countries in the transformation of the international structure, so that it will always be in a leading position in the international structure.
Joining AUKUS, the UK hopes to use its special status to coordinate US-Australian relations, make up for the US’s lack of competitiveness in participating in major power strategies, and enhance its own importance in current international affairs.
At the same time, the post-Brexit Britain can’t wait to show the world its ambitions as a great power, proving that it can play a more active role in Europe and the Western Pacific.
Guo Chunmei: The United States and Britain armed Australia mainly out of interest considerations.
On the one hand, Australia straddles the Indian Ocean, the Pacific Ocean, and faces Asia. Its geo-strategic position is very important.
On the other hand, Australia is the most loyal ally of the United States, participating in almost all US military operations overseas after World War II.
For the United States, Australia is an important springboard and stronghold for disturbing the situation in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait.
For the United Kingdom, after “Brexit”, it seeks to create a “global Britain” and is eager to intervene in the Indo-Pacific region.
Australia and Britain share the same origin and belong to the Anglo-Saxon culture. Coupled with the guarantee of the "close ally" of the United States, Britain has chosen Australia as its partner in the Indo-Pacific region.
This time, under the framework of AUKUS, the United States and Britain have transferred highly sensitive nuclear submarine technology to Australia. To a certain extent, it is a reward and comfort to the "loyal Australia".
The nuclear submarine technology is a blessing or a curse to Australia, and it is obviously not within the scope of the United States and Britain.
France:
"This is stabbing a knife in the back of an ally"
The huge loss of a large order made France "injured." What made France even more angry was the way the United States and Australia handled the matter.
According to foreign media reports, Australia only notified France a few hours before the announcement.
French Foreign Minister Le Drian said, “This is not something that allies should do, this is a knife in the back.” At present, France has announced the recall of its ambassadors to the United States and Australia, and also cancelled the planned French and British defense ministers. Summit.
EU leaders have also intensively spoken out in support of France in recent days.
European Council President Michelle bluntly stated that what the EU sees is the lack of transparency and loyalty of its allies, and believes that the United States "lost the trust of the Transatlantic Alliance."
Chen Xiaochen: For France, it has lost not only tens of billions of dollars in arms contracts, but also military strategic interests in the Asia-Pacific region.
France has several colonies in the South Pacific. In recent years, it has continuously strengthened cooperation with Australia, New Zealand and other countries, and has become an important participant in Asia-Pacific affairs.
It can be said that AUKUS is a slap in the face of France, fully demonstrating the hypocrisy of the so-called "spirit of contract" that the United States and Western countries have been proclaiming, and exposing the contradictions within the United States and Western countries.
In addition, the anti-China "small circle" is not monolithic, and the follow-up development of AUKUS remains to be further observed.
Guo Chunmei: The "small circles" formed by the United States can be temporarily established because they do have some common interests or goals.
However, for a country, its national interests are multi-dimensional, and its foreign relations are multi-dimensional.
The "small circles" in the United States and the West emphasize short-term, "zero-sum" goals, rather than long-term, win-win goals. The result of this is that it seems that the benefits are not small, but the risks are actually high.
The formation of AUKUS by the United States, Britain and Australia triggered opposition from many allies.
The European Union believes that Australia is betraying its faith and that it must carefully consider negotiations with Australia on the free trade agreement; New Zealand, Canada and other "Five Eyes" countries believe that they are excluded, and there are complaints; Australia relies on the United States and Britain to develop nuclear submarines, triggering the South Pacific region to insist on no The dissatisfaction of nuclearized countries has greatly damaged the reputation and credibility of the region.
In essence, all allies participating in the "small circle" are nothing more than a chess piece or a beater of the United States.
At present, Australia's domestic anti-epidemic recovery is under great pressure, but the Australian government has invested huge sums of money in defense spending, which has caused domestic public opinion to question.
For Australian politicians, it seems that they have earned some political resources in a short period of time, but the cost is borne by their own people.
Australia should learn from the painful lessons of following the United States in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, learn from history, and make sensible choices.
Li Haidong: The essence of the "small circle" formed by the United States is to exploit alliances to exploit its allies and to satisfy its own self-interest.
This time the United States seized the large submarine order from France, which is a typical selfish act of disregarding the interests of its allies. It reflects the one-way nature of the United States' handling of allied relations, that is, the United States can use its allies to achieve goals, but not vice versa.
It is foreseeable that such "small circles" will not only bring more turbulence, confrontation and disputes to the world, but will also eventually present a chaotic situation due to internal differences.
Regional situation:
The risk of nuclear proliferation suddenly increases
Although the three countries of the United States, Britain and Australia have made a grandiose declaration that they "will continue to fulfill their nuclear non-proliferation obligations", public opinion generally believes that the AUKUS agreement means that Australia will become the seventh country in the world to have nuclear-powered submarines, which undoubtedly opens up the possibility of nuclear proliferation. "Pandora's box".
Recently, many countries have expressed protests against the AUKUS agreement.
Malaysian Prime Minister Ismail warned that the agreement could lead to a nuclear arms race in the region.
The Indonesian Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement stating that it is "deeply concerned about the continued arms race and military power projection in the region."
Australia’s close neighbor, New Zealand, also issued a statement immediately stating that the decades-long ban on nuclear-powered ships from entering New Zealand will not be lifted.
Chen Xiaochen: When talking about AUKUS, the United States again mentions "rules-based international order". The essence is to emphasize a hegemonic order centered on the United States rather than a true global order.
Under the framework of AUKUS, the United States and Britain, as nuclear countries, help Australia, a non-nuclear country, develop nuclear submarines and transfer technology. This is a threat to the international nuclear non-proliferation regime including the South Pacific Nuclear-Free Zone Treaty, and to the purpose of the United Nations. And the destruction of the international order with principles at its core.
The "South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty" has three principles: refusal to participate in nuclear proliferation, stop the nuclear arms race, and prevent radioactive contamination of the entire South Pacific region.
Australia is one of the signatories of the treaty.
Today, the actions of the United States, Britain and Australia have seriously threatened the three principles of the treaty and opened the door to nuclear proliferation in the region, which is very bad in nature.
In particular, AUKUS goes against the denuclearization wishes of the people of the Pacific island countries, which have so far suffered from nuclear pollution by Western countries, and poses a huge threat to regional peace and environmental security.
Li Haidong: The "small circle" view of security and order will have a negative impact on normal international cooperation.
From the perspective of the establishment of "small circles", it is generally based on the so-called "common crisis." If there is no conflict and confrontation, the "small circles" will continue to shrink.
Under this kind of security concept, the "small circles" on the one hand continue to aggravate the deterioration of the global security situation, leading to more crises, and on the other hand, they use these crises to strengthen their own existence.
Therefore, "small circles" and global security cannot coexist.
The stronger the "small circle", the more damage the global security landscape will suffer.
AUKUS is a very destructive "small circle".
The sharing of nuclear submarine technology by the United States and the United Kingdom with Australia is extremely irresponsible. It is a contempt for and sabotage of the international nuclear non-proliferation regime, which has brought disputes and chaos to the region.
At the same time, this move has once again exposed the "double standards" of US foreign policy-imposing maximum sanctions and pressure on Iran and North Korea, while at the same time conniving and even helping allies to develop nuclear military technology.
Guo Chunmei: The United States engages in "small circles" to amplify its strategic advantages.
Australia is rich in uranium resources and is capable of achieving self-sufficiency in nuclear fuel.
When the United States needs it, the nuclear technology transferred to Australia can be converted into nuclear weapons, forming a certain deterrent to the hostile country. This is a small calculation made by the United States and Australia.
Although Australia has now pledged not to develop nuclear weapons, with the support of the United States and Britain, it has the ability to transform.
AUKUS played a "side-by-side shot" in an attempt to take advantage of the loopholes. In fact, it has violated the purpose and core obligations of the International Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
In order to maintain its hegemony, the United States draws in "small circles" to provoke regional arms races and military games.
Australia is acting like a tiger, and all sorts of acts of playing with fire will not only not cool down the situation in the region, but will add fuel to the fire. It is also harmful to Australia's security and development.
Li Jiabao
Li Jiabao