Pearls and Irritations

The ownership and direction of a majority of the media, in Australia, is based in London and New York. They have no intrinsic interest in Australia and its welfare as a nation but only as a source of revenue and, as a piece of what they see as the western cause. They influence our foreign policy formulation, through their editorial choices and, we help them do it.

A rational outsider, with no prior knowledge of the Australian foreign policy formulation process, could be expected to draw a couple of key conclusions from their observation of it – we are principally concerned to protect white interests, even very distant from our land; we speak English, and have some difficulty in maintaining close relationships with those who don’t, even though we live in close proximity to hundreds of millions of non-white non-English speakers. We invest very little in language training of our people; we try to include, in some way, amongst our friends the more economically more successful non-white non- English-speaking countries (Japan and ROK); we participate enthusiastically in a military alliance with a major power external to our region, in the belief that this will make us secure within it.

This last of these salient facts raises the oddest of the observations our rational outsider would record – there is an unacknowledged presence, in our national foreign policy and security deliberations – the United States; through its diplomats, intelligence agencies, think tanks in Australia established by them, and its arms manufacturers.

US interests in our policy process are large, both politically and economically.

Over the years, arms sales to Australia have, delivered billions to  US corporations, and promise to do so in the future, as the notion of the interoperability of equipment held by us and them, continues to be the hallowed by-word. Think about the self-serving logic of “interoperability”.

The political interests rest, predominantly, in the US bases in Australia, although we almost always provide coalition cover for their wars of choice.

The US command control and communication bases we have allowed to be situated in Australia are central to its global strategic network, including that relating to the use of nuclear weapons.

What this does to Australia’s sovereignty and, whether it does, in fact, protect us are serious questions, when, in the event of a serious conflict, we could expect to be a primary nuclear target, because of the role played by the bases.

Within our community, there is another basic influence exerted over Australian foreign policy – the media, owned and directed from London and New York (the WMM).

The WMM asserts that Australian society is deeply similar to UK and US society, that they share the same values. This is questionable in so many ways, as is well known by those of us who have lived in the UK and/or the US. And, the extreme political disfunction of both the UK and the US, (Trump, Brexit etc.) have deepened this reality. It is not unlikely that the UK will break up and, the US is for most practical political purposes, has become two countries.

A more important factor than this WMM propaganda, about our alleged “family” relationship with the UK and the US, which is also found extensively in the editorial decisions of our own broadcasters, the ABC and the others, is the existence of two central convictions or prejudices, on the part of virtually all those who seek electoral office in Australia, from the two main parties – xenophobia/racism and, continuing psychology of virtual colonial dependency, for our national security.

These are traditional phobias within Australia. They are amongst our most negative instincts. They are fostered and exploited by the WMM, both as directed from overseas and, within Australian media.

On the first of these, it is not to say that all candidates are personally racist. That would be a stretch, but it is to assert that there is acceptance amongst them that the electorate is substantially xenophobic.

Xenophobia has deep roots in Australia, beginning in relation to Chinese coming to our goldfields over a century ago or Islander cane cutters a bit later, which so exercised the ALP.

John Howard’s ploy to win the 2001 election – “children overboard” worked and, it led to a further policy and propaganda development – “stop the boats” and, “we will decide who comes to live here” (as if, somehow, we didn’t before he became PM). This policy of securing our borders by any means, including by ignoring international law on refugees, was adopted by the ALP as well.

If there is any doubt about the grip held by xenophobia on Australia’s political class, then look at the billions of dollars Governments have spent to maintain handfuls of alleged asylum seekers on offshore Islands. More outrageous and irrational than this fact, as such, is the relative silence of the electorate about it.

It must be recognized that in addition to our xenophobia/racism being wrong and unworthy of us, it provides fertile ground for the current US and Australian hostility towards China.

The US is pressing us to join in whatever war it might initiate with China in the South China Sea. It must reckon that it can, again, push our “yellow peril“ button, as it did over Vietnam. The Morrison government has signalled that it will comply willingly.

The  WMM is already well on board with this loyal, Alliance, effort. It routinely publishes plainly anti -Chinese opinions and propaganda. The absence of any other perspective is not simply dishonest but more importantly, dangerous. It is the stuff of which wars are made.

The phenomenon of off-shore media direction is hardly significant in today’s world. But, the actions of the WMM, how they use their influence, is. They habitually exclude relevant news which might fuel informed debate on an important range of subjects dealing with Australia’s independence of action – the US Alliance issues, the future of the UK Monarchy, after Elizabeth is gone.

They have a clearly visible interest in the income from their Australian operations. They oppose any change in our policies or attitudes which might threaten that. They reckon our traditional white Australian interests and its associated identification with and cultural dependency on the former colonial power, the United Kingdom, and now its contemporary replacement, the United States, will ensure the continuation of this comfortable set-up.

This gut judgement by them has proven to be, largely, accurate. Crucially, it has been buttressed for most of the period since the end of WWII, that is, possibly excluding the heavily disputed Vietnam war period, by those seeking elected office from both major parties.

Virtually all candidates believe that if it were assessed that when in office, they would disturb the Alliance, they would lose the election.

This view is out of date. Current surveys show that a majority of Australians have a negative opinion of the US role in the world and, of the Alliance.

It would seem that the attachment of the US to wars and militarism is well known ( see John Menadue’s article in Pearls and Irritations; August 11^th, 2021).

It would be fascinating to poll how many Australians today, have even heard of the Battle of the Coral Sea – the favoured narrative of the “we cannot defend ourselves alone” crowd.

Australia is no longer simply a white country. We should reject the censorship of the news and propaganda of the WMM. The world we come from is no longer that represented by the British Isles.

We should not be pressed to America’s purposes; they are not necessarily ours. And, the protection it is claimed they afford us needs to be thoroughly re-examined. Nuclear protection is illusory, not to mention, if employed, would entail a crime against humanity and, likely, our own destruction.

We need to make clear to those who seek election in Australia that we need greater independence and to define for ourselves, how we keep ourselves safe.  We need our own assessment of threats, not the Americans’, and those touted by its arms manufacturers.

We do not need to seek to terminate the Alliance but it is urgent that we change our conduct within it and, tell the Australian people the truth about our obligations and rights under the Treaty. Sycophancy, colonial dependency, is not one of them.

Telling the truth about these things is something the WMM resists resolutely. They continue to profit from exploiting our residual colonial dependency.

These things can be done and would benefit Australia.  For it to work in our electorates, we will need new media laws restricting monopolistic tendencies in the media.

Now there’s a real fight, in the national interest.

For the other articles in this series, please see here.