the anzus treaty?

captiva303

captiva303

Active member
the ANZUS treaty was signed in 1951 and originally was a three way defence cooperation treaty between new zealand, australia and the united states.The treaty is now only between australia and the united states after new zealand withdrew (1984) over disagreements on nuclear issues. The ANZUS treaty is now understood to require the signatories to come to each others defense, like how after the september the 11th 2001 attacks australia responded under provisions of the ANZUS treaty, and considered the attack on the twin towers as an attack on australia its self which justified our actions in the Afghanistan war.

enough of the history lesson... what i wanted to know is that if australia was attacked directly would the united states come to our aid?
i personally believe the US would but many have suggested that they may not and this has shaped our defence policy...

so what i would like to know is would the US assist us militarily?
what would be the public's opinion if they did ?
and more importantly do you personally think they would?

please raise any other points you think is relevant to this...


 
Last edited:
The United States, in my humble opinion, honors it's treaties with all nations, and would come to aid Australia if it were attacked.
 
captiva303 said:


please raise any other points you think is relevant to this...
Click to expand...

Err ok.
The ANZUS treaty is effectively dead as the NZ part of it pulled out of it in 1984.

Also just in case someone claims we havent "formally" withdrawn from it I offer you this from the New Zealand Prime minister...
“National Party leader John Key says there will be no nuclear powered ships entering New Zealand's harbours as long as he leads the party and he accepts the ANZUS treaty is dead.”

So you may wish to discuss the AUS treaty.

:)
 
Last edited:
so what i would like to know is would the US assist us militarily?
for an all out invasion from another country- definitely. but quite often the benefit of the ANZUS alliance has not been military but diplomatic- the intervention into East Timor had the possibility of becoming something nasty but US diplomacy with the Indons helped smoothe things over.

what would be the public's opinion if they did ?
the Australian public? i think that given Australian support for American Foreign policy in the last 60 years it would be expected.
the American public? i think that there would be an initial support to help an ally but lets be honest- if things dragged on or got nasty the public support would dissipate as quickly as it has for the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts.


 
captiva303 said:
yer i mentioned that

we still keep the same name, don't ask me why but we do...
Click to expand...

Yes well that is something that I think the government needs to sort out, Australia has pretty much hijacked the ANZAC name and it seems incapable of dropping the NZ from ANZUS, I think perhaps we should be looking into why this is.
 
i think it is because that is treaty was signed under the name so there is probably some stupid legal rules to it...
i don't think the name is all that important what it is meant to do is more important...
 
i don't know that it (ANZAC) has been hijacked as such- i think there is just a bias that concentrates on the Australian efforts to the exclusion of all else. simply put there is an aversion to really teach military history in Australian schools so the knowledge of military history of most Australians is VERY basic.
 
hmm..

well through much political discussion, the reason that it retains the ANZUS name is simple because New Zealand refused to continue in the alliance knowing that America intended to use nuclear weapons. However Australia and New Zealand both remain allies, and ANZUS reflects Australias relationship with both the US and New Zealand, as it is an Australian treaty. Australia believed the treaty to still be relevant so sees no reason to change the name.

Hope I could shed some light....
 
In 1982 the US secured Britain's Sea Lanes of Communication and that allowed them to take back the Falklands, the US had no stake in that conflict at all, but we provided critical support to the Brits.
It is inconceivable to me that if Austrailia were attacked that the US wouldn't respond regardless of the status of the ANZUS treaty. For that matter if New Zealand was attacked we would help if asked.
As far as the anti-war sentiment in this the US, remember that this is largely a rhetorical construct of liberal politicians looking to make political hay and poll results say what the person paying for the poll wants. When was the last time a pollster asked your opinion?

_________________________________

"There are lies, then there are Damn lies, then there are Statistics."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top