Team Infidel
Forum Spin Doctor
The Australian
February 25, 2008 By Paul Maley
PINE Gap may become part of a US-led strategic missile defence shield as Labor considers reversing its opposition to the controversial scheme - a move that could create tensions with China and Russia.
In Opposition, Labor was against Australian involvement in a program to build a national missile shield protecting the US, but supported a limited theatre-based system that could be deployed in war zones.
But Foreign Minister Stephen Smith yesterday said missile defence technology had evolved and that the Government was now giving "careful consideration" to participating in the missile shield.
Last year, then defence minister Brendan Nelson told parliament the US-Australian defence facility at Pine Gap could form part of a missile shield by providing early warnings of ballistic missile launches.
Any about-face on missile defence could stoke tensions within the Labor Party, with opposition to the joint facilities being an article of faith for many on the party's Left.
In his former incarnation as lead singer of activist rock group Midnight Oil, Environment Minister Peter Garrett was a trenchant opponent of Pine Gap.
However, Mr Smith said yesterday: "The technology has moved on, and so what we've said is that in conversation with our ally, with the US, we're happy to give consideration to the missile defence arrangements."
A strategic missile defence system, or strategic defence initiative, as it was originally known, was first proposed in the 1980s by then US president Ronald Reagan. The idea was shelved by president Bill Clinton, but revived by President George W.Bush.
The system would offer protection to the US, but could in the future be extended to provide limited cover to Washington's allies, including Australia, through the use of ship-based missiles.
Critics say the system would spark a regional arms race and relies on uncertain technology.
Any Australian involvement in a missile shield would generate tensions with nuclear powers China and Russia, both of which are implacably opposed to the scheme, which they fear is aimed at containing their strategic influence. But it would guarantee that Australia would continue to benefit from US intelligence and would give Australian defence contractors access to lucrative work during its development.
Mr Smith said the Government had yet to be persuaded about the viability of a such a system, citing the unknown high cost as well as doubts over the technology.
"We're not rushing to embrace it, we are just giving very careful consideration to it and we'll do that in conjunction with our US ally," he said.
Mr Smith said the matter had been under discussion during the weekend's Ausmin talks with US Defence Secretary Robert Gates.
He denied the two governments were locked in secret talks over the idea, but said certain aspects of the discussions had to remain confidential.
The Rudd Government would consider the matter in a "deliberative and sober way", but no decision was imminent.
Participation in the scheme might prove to be in Australia's national interest, Mr Smith said. "We don't want to make any decisions which would deprive us of technology which might in the end be in our national security interest and be able to protect our forces in the field," he said.
Opposition foreign affairs spokesman Andrew Robb said Mr Smith's remarks were inconsistent with Labor's pre-election position on the subject. "They need to clearly explain what their position is," he said.
Strategic and defence expert Ross Babbage said that Mr Smith's remarks were a case of "reality biting".
"Australia is already involved in a range of things related to missile defence, particularly in monitoring launches," he said.
Improved detection, tracking and targeting technology was rendering the distinction between theatre-based and region-based missile defence systems indivisible, Professor Babbage said.
He said Australian co-operation in the project would come in the form of research and development as well as surveillance and technology.
Mr Smith also expressed alarm at the trend towards trade protectionism in the US.
February 25, 2008 By Paul Maley
PINE Gap may become part of a US-led strategic missile defence shield as Labor considers reversing its opposition to the controversial scheme - a move that could create tensions with China and Russia.
In Opposition, Labor was against Australian involvement in a program to build a national missile shield protecting the US, but supported a limited theatre-based system that could be deployed in war zones.
But Foreign Minister Stephen Smith yesterday said missile defence technology had evolved and that the Government was now giving "careful consideration" to participating in the missile shield.
Last year, then defence minister Brendan Nelson told parliament the US-Australian defence facility at Pine Gap could form part of a missile shield by providing early warnings of ballistic missile launches.
Any about-face on missile defence could stoke tensions within the Labor Party, with opposition to the joint facilities being an article of faith for many on the party's Left.
In his former incarnation as lead singer of activist rock group Midnight Oil, Environment Minister Peter Garrett was a trenchant opponent of Pine Gap.
However, Mr Smith said yesterday: "The technology has moved on, and so what we've said is that in conversation with our ally, with the US, we're happy to give consideration to the missile defence arrangements."
A strategic missile defence system, or strategic defence initiative, as it was originally known, was first proposed in the 1980s by then US president Ronald Reagan. The idea was shelved by president Bill Clinton, but revived by President George W.Bush.
The system would offer protection to the US, but could in the future be extended to provide limited cover to Washington's allies, including Australia, through the use of ship-based missiles.
Critics say the system would spark a regional arms race and relies on uncertain technology.
Any Australian involvement in a missile shield would generate tensions with nuclear powers China and Russia, both of which are implacably opposed to the scheme, which they fear is aimed at containing their strategic influence. But it would guarantee that Australia would continue to benefit from US intelligence and would give Australian defence contractors access to lucrative work during its development.
Mr Smith said the Government had yet to be persuaded about the viability of a such a system, citing the unknown high cost as well as doubts over the technology.
"We're not rushing to embrace it, we are just giving very careful consideration to it and we'll do that in conjunction with our US ally," he said.
Mr Smith said the matter had been under discussion during the weekend's Ausmin talks with US Defence Secretary Robert Gates.
He denied the two governments were locked in secret talks over the idea, but said certain aspects of the discussions had to remain confidential.
The Rudd Government would consider the matter in a "deliberative and sober way", but no decision was imminent.
Participation in the scheme might prove to be in Australia's national interest, Mr Smith said. "We don't want to make any decisions which would deprive us of technology which might in the end be in our national security interest and be able to protect our forces in the field," he said.
Opposition foreign affairs spokesman Andrew Robb said Mr Smith's remarks were inconsistent with Labor's pre-election position on the subject. "They need to clearly explain what their position is," he said.
Strategic and defence expert Ross Babbage said that Mr Smith's remarks were a case of "reality biting".
"Australia is already involved in a range of things related to missile defence, particularly in monitoring launches," he said.
Improved detection, tracking and targeting technology was rendering the distinction between theatre-based and region-based missile defence systems indivisible, Professor Babbage said.
He said Australian co-operation in the project would come in the form of research and development as well as surveillance and technology.
Mr Smith also expressed alarm at the trend towards trade protectionism in the US.