Most Australian political leaders have condemned China’s decision to undertake live fire naval exercises directly beneath the most trafficked air route between New Zealand and Australia.
It is unlikely that China’s provocative act will lead to any material response but it doesn’t help our relations and creates distrust between us. And, if China acts more aggressively in our region in the future, Australia would remember acts like this and it would colour our response.
Others would not understand this history and may therefore not understand our response. The same goes when we think of other conflicts.
So much of the discussion around Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has centred around slogans uttered by people who would not have been able to place Ukraine on a map before February 2022.
An understanding of Ukraine’s history does not justify Russia’s invasion but it is important to understand for anyone serious about trying to deliver peace. And, after perhaps 1 million or more people have died in this tragic conflict, peace should be the number one goal.
For example, few would know that, as reported by The New York Times, the CIA operated 12 “secret operating bases” in Ukraine before Russia’s invasion. Or that the US played a key role in the 2014 coup which removed the democratically elected Ukrainian President from office. At the time, US Senator Chris Murphy said, “I think it was our role, including sanctions and threats of sanctions, that forced, in part, Yanukovych from office. We have not sat on the sidelines.”
In the months after the chaos of the coup, more than 40 pro-Russian activists were burned alive when their encampment in Odessa was attacked. Almost none of this was reported in our media but it was in Russia. This, and the violence between Russian speaking and Ukrainian speaking peoples in eastern Ukraine since, explains Putin’s continuing popularity in Russia despite what you hear in the western media.
Just think how Americans may respond if China operated intelligence bases in Mexico or helped organise a coup of a pro-American Mexican leader.
While most of the focus has been on the argumentative public debate between Trump, JD Vance and Zelenskyy in the Oval Office, few have focused on the fundamental disagreement on the way forward.
Zelenskyy understandably does not want to sign a peace deal without the Americans giving Ukraine a security guarantee from future attacks. President Trump has been elected to get the US out of such alliance frameworks that risk continuing US involvement in wars. The American people are wary of war after almost 25 years of continuous fighting since September 11.
A lot of non-American people get very angry when the American government does not commit troops to help their country. But why is it America’s job to protect everyone else? And is it smart for American troops to be placed so close to Russia’s border creating a tripwire for a potential World War?
Even at the height of the Cold War American forces were not deployed to protect Afghanistan from Soviet attack, or to help freedom fighters in Hungary. These conflicts also did not prevent US Presidents from negotiating with the Soviet Union on arms deals.
It is time for people who do not themselves have to fight in these wars to drop the Hollywood, superhero approach to foreign policy. Not everything is as simple as goodies v baddies.
For all the controversy of the Oval Office stoush, the good news is that all sides are now talking. That gives the prospect that we all might understand each other better and maybe that will help deliver peace.
