Beijing's ANZUS warning

CHINA is demanding that the Howard Government review its 50-year-old military pact with the US, warning that the ANZUS alliance could threaten regional stability if Australia were drawn into Sino-US conflict over Taiwan.

Under the ANZUS alliance, Australia is obliged to support the US should China resort to force to resolve its long-running dispute with Taiwan.

But a top Chinese official - Beijing's director-general of North American and Oceanian Affairs, He Yafei - told The Australian that Australia and the US needed to be careful not to invoke the ANZUS alliance against China.

"We all know Taiwan is part of China, and we do not want to see in any way the Taiwan issue become one of the elements that will be taken up by bilateral military alliances, be it Australia-US or Japan-US," he said.

"If there were any move by Australia and the US in terms of that alliance (ANZUS) that is detrimental to peace and stability in Asia, then it (Australia) has to be very careful."

Asked if he were referring to Taiwan, Mr He said "especially so". "It (Taiwan) is our internal affair."

But a spokesman for Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said last night that Australia had no plans to alter any of its commitments. "Neither Australia nor the US have any plans to amend the ANZUS alliance," he said.

But Mr Downer hinted at a policy shift on Taiwan in Beijing last year, when he suggested Australia might not have to go to Taiwan's aid under the terms of ANZUS because a flare-up might not constitute a direct attack on US interests.

He was quickly corrected by Prime Minister John Howard, but the Downer comments raised expectations in Beijing that Australia now considers its more than $20billion-a-year trade relationship with China as too important to sacrifice over Taiwan.

Australian National University Strategic and Defence Studies Centre board chairman Paul Dibb said the warning from Beijing was simply another sign of China's "growing economic strength and predominance in the Asia-Pacific".

"China is gaining confidence and this suggests it wants to throw its weight around a bit," he said yesterday.

But China's objection could not change Australia's policy, which was to make a decision at the time if it came to a conflict in the Taiwan Strait.

"There's little doubt the US would expect Australian support in the event of naked aggression against Taiwan by China," Professor Dibb said.

Lowy Institute security analyst Alan Dupont said he could not recall a Chinese official referring directly to the ANZUS alliance.

"It's a reminder that our relationship with China is rather fragile, and that intervention in Taiwan could have negative consequences for our political and economic relationship," he said.

Dr Dupont said there was also concern in Beijing about how trilateral security talks between Australia, the US and Japan might develop in relation to Taiwan.

A Taiwan government spokesman told The Australian that China had no right to attempt to influence the policies of other nations towards Taipei.

"Those countries have taken a position on Taiwan they believe is in the best interests of stability and security in the region," he said.

The comments come after Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing told Tokyo and Washington on Sunday to drop Taiwan from their joint security pact.

He was commenting after Tokyo and Washington named Taiwan as an issue of "strategic" concern during defence talks in Washington.

China is jut getting all it's ducks in a row. The war I fear will happen sooner rather then later.

The timing is interesting. With the Olympics in 2008 they either have to wait until after or move relatively soon. Too close to the games and a boycott ensues causing a major loss of face. Early enough, and they may have a chance to salvage the games, but only due to so much empty bluster in the world, particularly from Old Europe.

Frankly, I continue to hold the belief that some years from now the free world will mightily regret that they aided and abetted communist China gaining strength. I believe nothing good is going to come of this, and it's going to take a very strong argument to convince me otherwise.

Man, I hope I'm wrong. Being right brings very unpleasant thoughts to mind.

Jeff: I know I'm preaching to the choir here :-) Just thought you might want to watch the thread.

Please provide a quote where Alexander Downer (who is the Foreign Minister - the administration is headed by the Prime Minister, John Howard) has said that ANZUS is solely symbolic.

ANZUS is not just a symbolic relationship. The ANZUS Treaty was formally invoked after September 11 for the first time in its history and Australia committed troops to war in Afghanistan on the basis of the ANZUS Treaty.

What Alexander Downer has said is that the ANZUS Treaty does not automatically mean Australia would become involved in a war between the United States and China. This is a simple matter of fact clearly evident to anyone who reads the ANZUS Treaty.

The ANZUS Treaty is designed to be invoked only under specific, limited circumstances clearly outlined in the treaty. These do not include a war with China over Taiwan. They would include a war where China attacked US forces starting a war.

The relevant section of ANZUS is as follows:

Each Party recognizes that an armed attack in the Pacific Area on any of the Parties would be dangerous to its own peace and safety and declares that it would act to meet the common danger in accordance with its constitutional processes... an armed attack on any of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack on the metropolitan territory of any of the Parties, or on the island territories under its jurisdiction in the Pacific or on its armed forces, public vessels or aircraft in the Pacific.

In other words ANZUS is invoked if the metropolitan territory of Australia or the United States is attacked; if an island territory of Australia or the United States within the Pacific is attacked; or if vessels, aircraft, or armed forces of Australia of the United States within the Pacific are attacked. (NS was initially involved in ANZUS, but the treaty is currently considered suspended as far as New Zealand's part of it is concerned - this did not however prevent New Zealand committing troops to the war in Afghanistan, and from providing some military support in the rebuilding phase of Iraq).

An attack on Taiwan by China, triggering a war between the US and China over Taiwan, does not invoke the ANZUS Treaty (unless that war is, for example, started by China attacking US forces before war is declared by the United States, de facto or de jure.)

The Foreign Minister pointing this out does not mean Australia would not go to war in such a circumstance.

Australia has gone to war alongside the United States because of ANZUS only once - in Afghanistan (because the attacks on New York and Washington DC).

It has however gone to war alongside the United States without ANZUS being relevant three times since the treaty was signed (Vietnam, and both Gulf Wars).

ANZUS is one part of the Australian/US military relationship - an important part, certainly, but it has been used once - even though we've gone to war as allies four times since it was signed.

It's worked the other way too, of course - the US provided massive support to Australian-lead operations in East Timor in 1999, again, without ANZUS being invoked.

All the Foreign Minister pointed out was that ANZUS only applies in certain situations. Historically, these are not the only situations Australia has gone to war alongside the United States.

If a war develops over Taiwan, between the US and China, I would be very surprised if Australia was not involved on the side of the US. Even if we had a Labor government by that time, they'd make, at least, a token commitment.

I do suggest people read the ANZUS treaty if they haven't previously. It's a very short document - takes five minutes to read.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.