1. INTRODUCTION
   The Communist Party of Australia welcomes this public review of Australia's defence policy. We believe it is vitally important to have a clear, objective evaluation of the changes that have taken place, and of the necessary steps to avert the danger of war, to protect Australian independence and sovereignty, and to advance the interests and the security of the peoples of Australia and other countries.
   
   In today's international climate, Australians expect the government to project a foreign and defence policy which creates the most favourable conditions to maintain peace, achieve common security, and overcome urgent problems of hunger and injustice, and the reckless plunder and destruction of the natural environment.
   Such a policy orientation will require, in our opinion, a qualitative shift away from the traditional policy direction which has been pursued by Australian governments over many decades.
   
   
2. THE CONTEXT
   The dismantling of the Soviet Union has upset the balance of forces on a world scale, eliminating the socialist system of states as an important check on imperialism and its aggressive aims. The most important issues of war and peace still remain.
   
   In the past 25 years the richest fifth of the world's population has seen its share of the planet's wealth grow from 69 per cent to more than 80 per cent while everyone else has been squeezed.
   
   The true nature of economic globalisation is becoming increasingly clear. It is causing severe economic damage to countries around the world -- and it can do this virtually overnight, as it did to South East Asia.
   
   The developed capitalist countries are attempting to consolidate their position in and grip over the world economy. These countries are currently going through a new phase of adjustments and reforms to achieve these objectives. The European Union, free trade zones, etc. are the reflection of such efforts.
   
   Globalisation remains predominantly in the hands of US imperialists who are using their relatively unchallenged position internationally to impose their will by economic methods backed by their overwhelming military superiority and their willingness to use force to gain their objectives.
   
   The US vision of a new world order is leading to increased efforts on its part to impose its control of resources, cheap labour, markets, trade and finance around the world. It is also seeking to encircle the remaining socialist countries, particularly China.
   
   As a result of these policies, there is greater instability and a greater likelihood of conflicts and wars. Peace and development are threatened, the international community is facing more complicated contradictions, national and religious conflicts have increased, and many regional and local wars have broken out.
   
   It has been effectively argued that war is an inherent feature of capitalism, especially in its last, imperialist stage of development. The history of the 20th Century, is replete with examples where the struggle to capture and control economic markets (so-called "spheres of influence"), natural resources, and cheap labour have led to policies of aggression, colonialism, regional conflicts and major wars between rival imperialist powers.
   
   The transformation of the United Nations from a truly representative forum of international dialogue, aimed at achieving political solutions to the problems of peace, war and global development, into a vehicle for furthering U.S. and other narrow foreign policy objectives, including military objectives, is an additional dangerous development.
   
   
3. ASIA PACIFIC REGION
   As the countries of the Asia-Pacific region recover from the recent economic crisis, the region is once again a centre of economic growth and trade.
   
   The general economic dynamism of the Asian-Pacific region must be viewed in the light of the fact that the competitive edge of these countries owes a great deal to cheap labour costs, highly disciplined workforces and varying degrees of political repression.
   
   Australian capital, with the assistance of Australian governments, participates in a process of investment and aid in regional countries which results in few benefits for the great majority of the indigenous populations while significant profits are extracted from these states.
   
   In the post-war era, Australia has become a middle-ranking imperialist power, whose governments have participated in imperialist military interventions in Malaya, Korea and Vietnam.
   
   Australian governments seek to be the dominant imperialist power over Papua New Guinea, Fiji and the other island nations of Melanesia and Polynesia, which have only recently won their independence as nation states and face many economic and social problems.
   
   While there is a marked decline in the arms trade in the industrialised countries. In Asia and the Middle East armaments sales are increasing. Today 80 per cent of the arms trade is with underdeveloped countries, compared to 50 per cent before the cold war ended in 1990.
   
   Between 1989 and 1998 there was a 34 per cent drop in global military spending but a rise in such spending in the Asia-Pacific region.
   
   In underdeveloped countries, total expenditure on defence is more than for education and health combined. Even in the least developed countries, spending on defence is almost equal to that on education and health combined.
   
   Recent events on the Korean peninsula should be welcomed by all who have a commitment to peace and development. The leader's dialogue, contacts between relatives, prisoner releases and a generally more positive and optimistic attitude towards reunification should translate into an expansion of friendly contacts between the people of Australia and the DPRK at all levels.
   
   
4. THREATS TO AUSTRALIA
   There is no readily identifiable threat to Australia of major direct attack. This has been so for decades and there is no evidence it will change in the foreseeable future. This is not a pious hope but official government (both Liberal-National and Labor) estimations, on record and repeated on a number of occasions.
   
   The regional strategic environment is clearly complex and changing, but this does not necessarily mean it is more dangerous for Australia.

   Conflicts in the region are predominantly internal. They are not directed against Australia and they cannot be solved by military means.
   
   Australia does face threats from refugees, drug smuggling and international terrorism, but a military response is ineffective in such circumstances.
   
   Alarmist assessments are made of alleged potential threats to Australia in a region pictured as full of changing power relationships and dangerous military and political developments.
   
   Given the degree of agreement that Australia faces no credible threat, it is difficult to escape the conclusion that such assessments are driven not by realistic predictions of political and military trends but by the need to justify military spending.

5. THE "ARC OF INSTABILITY"
   A strong emphasis in Federal Government arguments for increased military spending is that Australia faces an "arc of instability" to the north which threatens this country.
   
   It is significant that President Carter's national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski came up with the theory of the "arc of instability" which was used to justify growing American military activity in the Middle East and the Persian Gulf.
   
   Imperialist countries frequently seek to justify continuing aggressive, militarist policies by arguing that the world is now increasingly unstable and unpredictable, in other words "chaotic."
   
   The theory of chaos has become the main justification for militarism today. The irrational, dangerous nature of chaos theory has its roots in reactionary, "Big Power" chauvinism, or in the growing crises which capitalism is unable to resolve. Chaos theory easily combines with a negative attitude to national sovereignty.
   
   In place of the lawful view that all nations are equal and have the right of self-determination, as stated in the United Nations Charter, chaos theorists tend to support aggressive imperialist "power politics". The chaos theory denies the basis of all international law, that sovereignty implies the right of nations to resist arbitrary acts within the whole system of concepts comprising international law.

6. RELATIONS WITH THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
   Australia's foreign and military policies are strongly influenced by the economic and political ties which bind it to global imperialism. Australian governments acting in the interests of the capitalist class have made Australia a regional tool of their global interests.
   
   After World War II, Australia became tied into the nuclear weapons systems of the United States, hosting communications and spy bases and allowing nuclear capable warships and aircraft to use Australian territory.
   
   The ANZUS treaty does not provide any guarantee that the US will assist Australia in times of need. The treaty contains no specific commitments; instead it speaks in vague terms of "consultation" and "action in accordance with constitutional processes".
   
   Instead of a military alliance, Australia needs friendly and mutually beneficial relations with all countries, particularly with other non-aligned and independent nations.

   Over the years Pine Gap has quietly been converted into a front-line base for the controversial United States National Missile Defence(NMD) system.
   
   Australia is made a nuclear target by Federal Government support and the use of the Pine Gap base for NMD. Additionally, Australia's reputation and influence internationally is injured by the government's support for NMD.
   
   NMD is not a benign, defensive nuclear umbrella. It is a controversial space battle system, an offensive program which aims to provide a shield behind which the US could fire its nuclear arsenal at an enemy. In other words, it is intended to allow the US to attack other countries with impunity, without fear of retaliation.
   The Pentagon claims that NMD is defensive, but the US Space Command is committed to space "control and domination".
   
   NMD will destroy the existing international arms control and disarmament regime, provoke a new nuclear arms race, trigger a wave of destabilising events around the world, and once more open up the prospect of nuclear war.
   

7. COALITION WARFARE
   Despite the official rhetoric of "self-reliance", the Australian Defence Force remains closely linked to the United States military and Australian interoperability with US forces has been increasing in recent years. Australia remains dependent on US assistance in critical areas, notably the supply of guided weapons, without which defence in depth is unachievable.
   
   During his recent visit to Australia, US Defence Secretary William Cohen stated that the US "expects" Australia to increase military spending. He said Australia needed to boost its defence spending to make sure its forces were on a par with the US in case of future joint missions.
   
   CINPAC Admiral Dennis Blair at a press conference in Canberra on May 4 said interoperable Australian submarines and naval forces would play a substantial role in future operations with the US.
   
   "They have in the past and I would like to have them be able to do so in the future," he said.
   
   Admiral Blair indicated that the US wants Australia to maintain a high technology defence force that would allow the two countries to work closely together on regional military operations.
   
   He revealed that the US had agreed to release radar technology that the RAAF wants for the $2.8 billion fleet of Airborne Early Warning and Control aircraft it plans to order from Boeing.
   
   The US has planned a role for Australian forces in any conflict in North Asia - meaning first and foremost China. But this is not in our interests.
   
   Australia cannot afford a continued cold war paradigm which defines regional engagement as interoperability with the United States in potential high intensity conflicts.
   
   This would require expanding strategic strike and force projection capabilities, maintaining a 'knowledge edge' over regional states and remaining a substantial maritime power. Australia simply cannot afford such an approach economically, politically and socially.
   
   
8. CHINA
   There is clear evidence that the Pentagon is looking at China as the most likely arena for future military conflict, or at least competition.
   
   This orientation is reflected in many small but significant changes: more attack submarines assigned to the Pacific, more war games and strategic studies centered on Asia, more diplomacy aimed at reconfiguring the U.S. military presence in the area.
   
   About two-thirds of the forward-looking games staged by the Pentagon over the last eight years have taken place partly or wholly in Asia.
   
   Although much of the current discussion in Washington is about North Korea, in the longer run many American policymakers expect China to emerge as a great power with significant influence over the rest of Asia.
   
   James Bodner, the Principal Deputy Under Secretary for Defense Policy, has commented: "The centre of gravity of the world economy has shifted to Asia, and U.S. interests flow with that."
   
   This focus is the basis for arguments
   
   However, such an option will not only be prohibitively expensive but it will also not contribute to Australia's security and defence.
   
   Australia is not threatened by the prospect of involvement in high-intensity warfare and should not be drawn into this by United States policies which do not serve our interests but will increase tensions and instability in our region.
   
   
9. AUSTRALIAN POLICIES
   Australia's current defence policy is not about self-defence of our people and territory, but about ensuring the stability of Australia's "area of direct military interest" -- defined as stretching over 7,000 kilometres from the Cocos Islands to New Zealand and the islands of the South West Pacific, and over 5,000 kilometres from the archipelago and island chain in the north to the Southern Ocean.
   
   Emphasis has been given to ensuring Australian supremacy in long-range strike forces providing the ability to launch pre-emptive strikes and to intervene in the affairs of regional nations.
   
   The strategy has in fact been based on offense instead of defence, with a gigantic investment in expensive and inappropriate weapons systems. Increasing reliance on long-range delivery systems which are clearly offensive rather than defensive underline the fact that the Government sees Australia's defence being conducted far beyond our borders and within the land and territorial waters of sovereign Pacific nations.
   
   With the defence budget already $13 billion on Australian and Prime Minister Howard stating that his government will spend larger amounts from 2002 onwards, a very large amount of scarce government funds are committed in this area.
   It has been estimated by State governments that an extra $600 million spent on public hospitals each year would overcome their critical shortcomings.
   
   Similarly huge strides could be made in upgrading schools, reducing the cost of university education, supporting childcare, assisting the needy in our community and maximising employment opportunities in Australia if a good portion of these finances were available outside spending on the military.
   
   
10. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
    In the opinion of the Communist Party of Australia, the conditions for lasting peace and harmony between all nations and peoples will only be guaranteed when the underlying causes of war - the drive for private profit and the racism, nationalism, poverty and oppression that the profit motive The Communist Party supports a defence policy that reflects the interests of the majority of Australian citizens, workers, women, youth, seniors, Aboriginal people and migrants, rather than the narrow, profit-oriented interests of transnational corporations. Under capitalism the threat of wars of different types will not disappear, but it is essential to adopt policies which can reduce the danger of war significantly.
    
    The Communist Party supports a defence policy that reflects the interests of the majority of Australian citizens, workers, women, youth, seniors, Aboriginal people and migrants, rather than the narrow, profit-oriented interests of transnational corporations. Under capitalism the threat of wars of different types will not disappear, but it is essential to adopt policies which can reduce the danger of war significantly.
    
    The Communist Party of Australia recommends the following policies for Australia to be a true voice for security, peace and disarmament in our region and the world. We believe that an independent, made-in-Australia policy of a just peace, reduced military spending and respect for the sovereign rights of nations to equality and self determination would best serve the interests of Australians and our neighbours.
    

Specifically, the CPA recommends the following:

• An end to the hosting of US military-related bases on Australian soil and the termination of the ANZUS Treaty. Adoption by the Australian government of an independent foreign policy.
  
  
• A change in Australia's defence policy and military capability to one of defence of our own territory, ruling out aggression against the territory of other states.
  
  
• No involvement in the US National Missile Defence and Theatre Missile Defence.
  
  
• A reduction in the military budget.
  
  
• A strict policy of non-involvement in the production, testing or deployment of any components of nuclear, space, biological, chemical or any other type of mass-destruction weapons.
  
  
• An end to the supply of military equipment and the provision of military training to or joint military exercises with repressive regimes in the region.
  
  
• A change in overseas aid policies, increasing the share of Gross Domestic Product allocated to the most needy countries. An end to restrictive conditions which specify that a proportion of the aid must be spent on Australian goods and services.
  
  
• Development policies to place priority on helping developing countries to break out of their economic dependence.
  
  
• Legislation so there are no barriers to the establishment of trade unions within the armed services.
  
  
• The compulsory adoption of appropriate peace education syllabuses in all primary and secondary schools, both State and private.

There are additional principles which the Federal Government should support in order to contribute to the security and development of Australia and the Asia-Pacific region. They include:

• Supporting steps to outlaw the use or threatened use of military force against any state or group of states.
  
  
• Respecting each state's national independence, and removing the threat of aggression, domination and exploitation.
  
  
• Settling international disputes and regional conflicts by international negotiation.
  
  
• Solving the problems of foreign debt burdens and other injustices experienced by the under-developed countries; ending discriminatory trade terms and tied aid packages.
• eveloping trade, cultural and scientific exchange on the basis of equality and mutual benefit.
  
  
• Eliminating all forms, direct or indirect. of colonialism.
  
  
• Respecting the rights of all indigenous peoples.
  
  
• Outlawing political, racial and religious discrimination.
  
  
• Replacing current alliances with collective security arrangements from which no country is excluded with arrangements binding all countries to mutual non-aggression. Until these new arrangements are possible, no new alliances should be formed and existing ones should not be expanded.
  
  
• Freeing the Asia-Pacific region of nuclear weapons, particularly naval nuclear weapons, their support systems and bases.
  
  
• Setting up nuclear-free zones, with guarantees from the nuclear weapons powers
  
  
• Working for negotiated reductions in all other forms of military presence in the Asia-Pacific region, including greater transparency and development of confidence-building measures.

In accordance with these principles, Australia's military capability and strategy would be altered to provide an adequate defence without threatening the territory of other states. An independent, peaceful foreign policy requires adoption of a defensive strategic doctrine. Flowing from such changes would come cuts in military spending, the "peace dividend", which would be used for investment in job creating, socially useful and environmentally sustainable areas of the Australian economy.