Australian made Chinese navy stalks Australian navy

Via the ABC:

Australian warships have encountered the Chinese navy in the South China Sea during a voyage that saw them sail close to contested islands claimed by Beijing.

The ABC has learnt an Australian Defence Force joint task group consisting of five warships last week travelled through the disputed waterways, including close to the Spratly Islands, which China claims as its own.

It is understood the Australian warships did not come within 12 nautical miles of the contested islands, unlike American warships, which have recently conducted freedom of navigation exercises to challenge Beijing’s territorial claims.

The preposterousness of our position laid bare. Here we are patrolling waters to protect freedom of navigation from the CCP menace, so that our iron ore bulkers can sail through unmolested, to build the very Chinese navy that requires ours to be there at all.

I am not implying that we should cut the flow of iron ore to the CCP. That path leads directly to war.

But I am suggesting that no sane nation would hang its prosperity on such an absurd proposition.

What we should do is apply export tariffs to iron ore, and raise taxes on miners, and put all of that dough into a program of economic diversification urgently.

David Llewellyn-Smith
Latest posts by David Llewellyn-Smith (see all)

Comments

    • The Traveling Wilbur

      Er, we should use it to buy some real subs. From the Americans. With weapons systems with extremely large payloads.

      Now that would be a conclusion. In real terms I mean.

      • Yes but if the most cost effective and logical path was followed, then Christopher Pyne would have lost his seat one election cycle earlier than his golden parachute exit.

        The pompous poodle plays the Game of Mates like a fixer.

        He fixed us up real good.

        • And the Motherfixer Pyne parachuted into the right job: EY prepared unqualified audit for Wirecard in early June (Financial Times, 24 July 2020) : EY prepared an unqualified audit opinion on Wirecard’s accounts in early June, conditional on a few actions from the company that weeks later collapsed in one of Europe’s biggest accounting frauds. The Big Four firm delivered a draft version to Wirecard of its official audit opinion, which accountants typically share with clients to give them the opportunity to fact check numbers and assessments. The draft opinion rejected allegations made by whistleblowers as well as serious concerns raised by a KPMG special audit into Wirecard’s accounting which was published in late April. KPMG’s report, which Wirecard commissioned last year to allay concerns over its accounting, had stunned investors after the firm was unable to verify the existence of half of the payment group’s business and €1bn of cash. The group’s shares tumbled by a third in the week following its publication. In the draft opinion dated June 2, a copy of which has been reviewed by the FT, EY said that “based on the findings of our audit, the attached annual financial statements comply in all material respects with German commercial law applicable to corporations and give a true and fair view of the net assets and financial position of the company”.

        • drb1979MEMBER

          Prehaps both!

          I’m only half joking. UK planning on spending $55b AUD on replacing their Trident nuclear subs, and from the latest research I can find the Australia Barracuda sub program now estimated to cost $90bn. Sure, both programs could blow out more however I’d bet the Poms have it more in hand than Australia does trying to retrofit a French Nuclear Sub for convential purposes

          Historically Australia stepped away from anything nuclear in case it goaded Jakarta into a arms race, however with Indonesia much more worried about China would Australia getting Nuclear subs really be such a problem?

          Buying some UK Astute Subs at $3bn AUD per boat (generous high estimate) for a fleet of 12 would still only be $36bn, an extra billion or two to set up onshore servicing and maintenance and/or UK doing the Nuclear maintenance under contract. They come with Tomahawk cruise missiles, UK/US would have no issue with a close partner having

          Its doable technically, could it be the right time poltically given China’s recent actions?

          • The right time to buy nuclear submarines was 20 years ago, but on the basis that we might still have enough time, then yes now is the right time. We certainly do not have 20 years to build 1 diesel submarine, and then a second in 22 years etc etc. We have a large gap that has to be filled in the mean time, so we should be speaking to the US and UK about alternatives.

            Back on the first point, it is madness to feed the monster that is preparing to kill us.

      • Make that Russian subs………we need the new pocket battleships of our age that are coming out now but still be able to protect out trade. These are the subs with cruise missiles not SLBM’s……soon to have hypersonic missiles. I think that some of India’s come off lease with the Russians soon.

        China can now construct 10 navy vessels at once…….this soon adds up.

  1. “What we should do is apply export tariffs to iron ore, and raise taxes on miners, and put all of that dough into a program of economic diversification urgently.”

    Yes you are exactly right. Its insane we bend over backwards to sell them the material to build weapons they will use in the shooting war that i believe will occur in about 5 years.
    Given that they already have been given the rights to mine that huge hi quality iron ore mountain in Africa they will be less reliant on our iron ore once its up and running in about 5 years or less. They will be looking more and more to Africa for resources so we are going to be forced to diversify asap.
    Now is the time to start putting a tax on all shipments to the china.
    And just to rub the lemon juice right into their eyes and make it sting, the tax should be legislated as The Covid reparations tax.
    Also if they become more depended on resources from Africa, it will be easier for us to interdict and confiscate any supply ships to the china when the shooting starts.

    • China is a bully, not a threat. All the sabre rattling is just about “Face” for internal politics. They have no friends and are surrounded by enemies. Add to that the one child policy with their close family ties and they cannot afford the body bags. Considering the swine fever outbreak and the current floods china is facing a inflation crisis if not outright food shortage. A billion hungry mouths make for revolution, I’m sure there are plenty of hungry Generals lining up to fill the current despots shoes. Also their first point of conflict is Taiwan. You cant strategically leave an enemy fortress on your doorstep it you want to go to war.

  2. Arthur Mosley

    Do you really trust Australian politicians to enact a program of ‘economic diversification’? Its better to just use any money to lower taxes dramatically, eg. abandon payroll tax and sales tax, and let the free market take over. Let States finance their spending with land taxes.

  3. Ulrike Meinhof

    economic diversification
    Wow Did you come up with that idea all by yourself?
    Maybe we should back up a few steps and discuss the period from 2004 to 2010 when Australian economic diversification was definitely on the nose and actively slaughtered to make way for mining.
    Maybe you don’t remember this period but others do, as a general rule those of us who worked in diversified industries will never forget that lesson.
    So what’s different now?
    What has really changed?
    How will these diversified industries survive in the global market?
    How can these new industries attract employees while house prices remain at insane levels?
    Don’t get me wrong I will gladly take the governments handouts, (after all it would be very unAustralian to turn down a handout), but when it comes to really building these new industries to succeed in the global market, well lets just leave it at I won’t let myself get distracted again by such ambitious goals.
    Fool me once shame on you etc.

    • I read David’s comments as nudging us to have the political will to undertake the necessary reforms. The Future Tax System, even the cherry-picked bastardised form previously attempted, is a good place to start.

      • Ulrike Meinhof

        Today’s market for manufactured products (even highly differentiated products) is much more competitive than it was in 2010. China’s emergence has changed everything. Everyone is chasing product margin and looking at niche products which they previously wouldn’t have even dreamed of touching. This is not just a local problem its true for most US companies and all European manufactures and then we have all the wannabe manufactures in countries like South Africa, Israel, UAE Brazil, Russia …its a very long list.
        Why would I bother to start a company in Australia with aspirations of cornering the market for some product only to have our politicians change their minds.
        Nah, its a much better plan to just pretend to be globally competitive and soak up as much public money as possible while the diversification song is being sung.

  4. Looks like the ABC is making the USA responsible for the agitation. It’s time to tear up ANZUS. You can only talk out of both sides of your mouth for so long.

  5. Provocative. And ludicrous!

    China has long laid some territorial claim to the SCS region. In 2010 Hillary Clinton announced the SCS was in US national interest – part of its Asia doctrine as it pivots away from conflicts in the Middle East to war in Asia.

    This brief Wiki history clearly shows the US and unfortunately its number one lackey, Australia, are new kids on the block. We should exit these wargames immediately.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_South_China_Sea_dispute

  6. smokey_del_rossaMEMBER

    Xo, Aust doesn’t need to lick America’s proverbial to know China is an “A” grade liar & threat…Rather like to see our govt give tax breaks to value add industries in iron and our other minerals but not manufacturing…as then we are not competitive although I hear the Country Women’s Association make fantastic scones..export potential!

  7. UpperWestsideMEMBER

    Long ago I was involved with the sea acceptance trials and first major scientific voyage of HMAS Cook (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMAS_Cook) , what a floating mess of design ideas that was.
    Bendigo, made the gears for the big winch ( which wasn’t big at all), they were too soft , we went through two sets trying to get a small probe back up off the seafloor . The designers put the computer lab just behind the bridge ( as opposed to dead center of the ship) and ships wicked shimmy ( another design flaw) would shake everything loose.

    We went through a cyclone off Sumba, huge waves, green water rolling up the deck to smack the bridge (they played Ride of the Valkyries full volume over the PA , it was effing awesome). The damn seals around the windows started to give way and there was discussion of abandoning the bridge and running it all from a secondary bridge with tiny portholes a few desks lower.

    In they end they gave up trying to fix it and sold it off for next to nothing. It did some great science, but we could have bought a rig tender and retro fitted it with the science gear for less than 10% of the total spend.

    I agree with other comments, we should just buy some slightly worn subs on eBay.

Leave a reply

You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in now