Secretary Hagel’s New Strategic Defense Agreement with Australia

0
185

 

Strong Balancing Move or New Cold War Provocation?

 

…by  *Lee Wanta  and  Preston James

 

lrs_140812-O-ZZ999-45678
U.S. Secretary of State John F. Kerry, center left, and Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop, center right, flanked by U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, left, and Australian Defense Minister David Johnston, right, sign a force posture agreement during bilateral defense and diplomatic meetings in Sydney, Aug. 12, 2014. State Department photo

U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel has just successfully negotiated a new Strategic defense Agreement with Australia.(1)

Was this a brilliant counter-move to block China’s efforts to negotiate a strong trade Agreement with China which seemed imminent, and which has now been delayed?

Could China view this Agreement as a provocation to set off a serious trade war between America and China?

Recently there have been trade negotiations between Australia and China and it appeared that a Trade Agreement between both parties was close to being signed, but has become delayed.

In a creative move perhaps best viewed as a brilliant effort to counter-act the ongoing Trade Agreement negotiations between Australia and China, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel successfully negotiated a new Defense Cooperation treaty with Australia.





This Agreement involves calls for rotational deployment of 2,500 U.S. Marines in Darwin and American airmen in northern Australia. Certainly it is fair to conclude that the USG has clear intentions of maintaining a strong Defense arrangement with Australia as a part of the USG’s overall long term defense strategy in the region.

This new Defense Cooperation Agreement between Australia and America was signed on August 12, 2014.(2)

Chinese Defense Ministry spokesman Geng Yansheng had previously made a warning about such a plan unveiled in mid-November by U.S. President Barack Obama and Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard to form a de facto base in north Australia for up to 2,500 U.S. Marines.

China was in fact been involved in serious negotiations with Australian Officials to get a Trade Agreement signed. China had hoped to get this Agreement signed by the end of June 2014, but it has been delayed.

China’s military denounced the United States and Australia on Wednesday for upgrading military ties, warning that such moves could erode trust and fan Cold War-era antagonism.

Chinese Defense Ministry spokesman Geng Yansheng made the warning about a plan unveiled in mid-November by U.S. President Barack Obama and Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard to form a de facto base in north Australia for up to 2,500 U.S. Marines.

Geng’s comments came on the same day Australian Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd was reported as backing the formation of a security pact with India and the United States, another step that could fuel China’s worries of being fenced in by wary neighbors. “Military alliances are a product of history, but we believe any strengthening and expansion of military alliances is an expression of the Cold War mentality,” Geng said in answer to a question about the U.S.-Australian announcement, according to a transcript on the ministry’s website (www.mod.gov.cn.).(3)

Is the U.S. Department of State attempting to provoke the Chinese? In a recent veterans Today article, Managing Editor Jim Dean has argued that recent remarks on China by the U.S. Secretary of state John Kerry are outrageous and part of Washington’s psychological operations against Beijing.(4)

On Thursday, Kerry said the US firmly opposes the “use of intimidation and coercion” by China in territorial disputes in the South China Sea, adding the US takes its interests in the Asia-Pacific region very seriously.

“The United States is an Asian-Pacific nation, and we take our enduring interests there very seriously. We know that America’s security and prosperity are closely and increasingly linked to the Asia-Pacific,” the top US diplomat said.(5)

Jim Dean believes that Kerry’s accusations against China are a psyops measure which actually reflects what Kerry himself has been doing to China on behalf of the USG and its foreign policy objectives, which apparently are to provoke China.

What this all means remains to be seen, but perhaps the U.S. Department of state is operating on a script provided them by World Zionist Infiltrators and Dual Citizens, NeoCons and PNACers who appear to want the U.S. to go to war with China, either in a full scale trade War or even a nuclear WW3.

Without some new major war with either the Russian Federation or China (or both) it certainly seems obvious the days of power for the World Zionists and their private central Bank FIAT debt-based “funny money” are undoubtedly going to be quite limited. They know this and are pushing hard to create worldwide chaos and war to prevent their impending loss of world hegemony.

References:

*Lee Wanta was a former Presidential Secret Agent under the Totten Doctrine [92 U.S. 105, 107 (1875), National Security Decision – Directive Number 166, dated March 27, 1985, inter alia] under U.S. President Ronald W. Reagan, whom some experts consider to be our last legally and duly elected President. Ambassador Wanta served – under Presidential Mandate – as a close personal consultant to President Reagan and was credited with having a major role engineering an end to the Soviet Union Cold War and the “tearing down of the Iron Curtain”.

 

(1) http://www.defense.gov/home/features/2014/0814_hagel1/

(2) http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=122910

(3) http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/30/us-china-usa-australia-idUSTRE7AT0PZ20111130

(4) http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/16/kerrys-remarks-on-china-are-outrageous-jim-w-dean/

(5) Ibid.

 

_______________________________

Author Details
Social Psychologist with Doctorate from Major Midwest Big Ten University. Retired after serving the community for over 36 years during which time there were numerous contacts with those associated with Intel and Law Enforcement.

EDITORIAL DISCLOSURE
All content herein is owned by author exclusively.  Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians or Veterans Today Network (VT).  Some content may be satirical in nature. 
All images within are full responsibility of author and NOT VT.
About VT - Read Full Policy Notice - Comment Policy