
The dangerous folly of Australia's come-what-may sycophancy towards Trump is on full display
The greatest absurdity in Australia's political discourse about the second Trump administration is the mantra that America perpetually remains a 'reliable ally''.
Trump's United States is no longer Australia's dependable big buddy as it was since the second world war. All those imperial conflicts Australia trailed Washington into (Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan) for 'alliance maintenance'' mean nothing to an expansionist Trump who treats far more geo-politically important supposed friends, like Canada, with blatant contempt.
And yet a cloak of major party bipartisanship ensures no mainstream political challenge to the sanctified US-Australia relationship, as embodied in the 1951 Anzus treaty and, more recently, the reckless $368bn Aukus submarine plan.
Asked on Radio National this week if the US remained a reliable ally, Coalition foreign affairs spokesperson, David Coleman, blithely parroted the increasingly risible Australian orthodoxy: 'Yes of course. The US is our most important ally … and has been for many decades and will continue to be.''
But Australians, perhaps never as heightened to global danger since the second world war, the Cuban missile crisis or US-Soviet nuclear tensions of the early 1980s, can decipher the precarious strategic realpolitik, even from way down here.
It's not that complicated, no matter how lacking some of our politicians might condescendingly think us.
In late February when the United Nations considered a resolution condemning dictatorial Russia's invasion of democratic Ukraine, the US voted against it. Their bedfellows? Russia naturally, but also pariah states Belarus and North Korea.
And, so, the US stands solidly with Russia over its invasion of a democratic neighbour, at the UN and for the TV cameras as Trump (with the help of vice president JD Vance) made clear in his White House meeting with Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
What shape might Trump America's support of Putin's Russia ultimately take? Will it go beyond UN resolutions to access to satellite technology currently afforded Ukraine? To intelligence sharing, perhaps? In which case should Canberra simply cut another front door key for Putin to what is in all practical terms a fully American-controlled military base, Pine Gap, in Australia's midst? Might it go beyond Trump America's suspension of critical US military aid to Kyiv towards a shift of more profound military cooperation with – and support of – Russia?
Which, of course, would put America at odds with its other supposed best friend forever, the United Kingdom, as well as the European Union. It is, indeed, as George Monbiot pointed out, a 'troubling question''.
It's one being publicly canvased by some independents, and public figures associated with both major sides of politics who are, thankfully, beyond the reach of party strictures and their inane talking points.
As former Liberal prime minister Malcolm Turnbull recently observed with poignant understatement: 'He [Trump] appears to be at the point of facilitating a victory for Vladimir Putin over Ukraine. Now, just contemplate that. It is mind-blowing … we have to recognise the world has changed, America has changed. And we cannot assume that we can rely on America in the way we have in the past.''
America. Has. Changed.
We've got the memo. It seems like our leaders haven't, or won't.
Former Labor minister Peter Garrett recently pointed out Australia's political elites have long assumed Australia's only viable security option was to have a very powerful friend in the US even if they were an 'unlikeable bully''.
'There was a degree of subservience – that that was the price you had to pay. Now, that has been taken to a new dangerous, illogical and expensive extreme with the Aukus deal''.
These sentiments certainly reflect the deep private concerns of some major party politicians who are concerned by their parties' continued unerring sycophancy towards Trump's America amid its alignment with Russia. And, of course, the bipartisanship protecting Aukus, whose fundamental feature is dramatically enhanced, hand-in-glove, military interoperability with the US. In simple words: it locks Australia in as an unerring military ally at a time when it would be prudent to be anything but.
How? Look to a near future where the EU and Britain and most right-thinking nations, are at odds with an America aligning militarily, morally, strategically with Russia.
And where would Australia be? Despite the consistent major party condemnations of 'murderous dictator'' Putin's invasion of Ukraine, we will be militarily hocked for $368bn – and therefore tied – to the expansionist America of Trump (or perhaps Vance, should Trump not show further contempt for his own country's institutions and somehow engineer another term).
The dangerous folly of it all, Australia's come-what-may bipartisan obsequiousness, was on full cringe-making display when reliable buddy Trump seemed never to have heard of Aukus, despite it being the centrepiece of Australian defence and foreign policy since 2021.
Hearing our leading politicians from both major parties contort to defend him, to forgive his apparent ignorance because, you know, acronyms can be so damn tricky and he's a helluva busy guy, was an Olympic exercise in gaslighting the Australian public.
We – you – deserve better in these dangerous times.
Paul Daley is a Guardian Australia columnist

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Reuters
10 minutes ago
- Reuters
North Korea will always stand with Russia, leader Kim tells Putin
SEOUL, June 12 (Reuters) - North Korean leader Kim Jong Un said in a message to Russian President Vladimir Putin that his country will always stand with Moscow, state media reported on Thursday. In a message for Russia Day, a patriotic holiday celebrating Russia's independence, Kim called Putin his "dearest comrade" and praised their bilateral relations as a "genuine relationship between comrades-in-arms," KCNA reported. "It is an unshakable will of the government of the DPRK and of my own steadfastly to carry on the DPRK-Russia relations," Kim was quoted as saying. The DPRK stands for North Korea's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. KCNA reported on Wednesday that Kim had sent congratulations on Russia Day to Putin. Earlier this year, Pyongyang for the first time confirmed that it had sent troops to fight for Russia in the war in Ukraine under orders from leader Kim Jong Un after months of silence.\


The Sun
13 minutes ago
- The Sun
Trump doesn't rule out arresting California Gov Gavin Newsom over LA riot chaos and says he had to save city from mob
DONALD Trump refused to rule out arresting California Governor Gavin Newsom over his handling of the Los Angeles riots. The pair have been trading blows since Newsom slammed Trump's decision to send federal troops into the city to quell immigration raid rioters. 8 8 8 8 Trump has sent around 4,000 of the National Guard and 700 Marines into LA, where they have clashed violently with protesting mobs and been given to make arrests The Governor accused Trump of manufacturing the flare-ups, saying his actions were "akin to authoritarian regimes" - and was dismissed as "incompetent" in return. He vowed his state is "suing Donald Trump" for "creating fear and terror to [...] violate the US constitution". Trump has previously toyed with the idea of arresting Newsom, and refused to rule it out in an interview with the New York Pos t. Trump's border czar Tom Homan had warned that anyone, including public officials, would be arrested if they obstructed federal law enforcement. On Sunday, Newsom goaded Trump over the threats, saying in a MSNBC interview: "Come after me, arrest me. Let's just get it over with, tough guy." Asked directly if he is going to arrest and charge Gavin Newsom, Trump said: "Well, he's not doing a good job. "In theory you could, I guess. It's almost like a dissipation of duties. Nobody's ever seen anything like it." Before Wednesday's interview, Newsom shared his thoughts on the arrest threats. He said: "The President of the United States just called for the arrest of a sitting Governor. Anti-ICE raid protest carnage spreads across US as Texas deploys National Guard & LA declares curfew after riots "This is a day I hoped I would never see in America. I don't care if you're a Democrat or a Republican this is a line we cannot cross as a nation this is an unmistakable step toward authoritarianism." Trump follow up with a brutal takedown of Newsom's record in office - which included blaming him for the devastating wild fires that ravaged parts of LA in January. Trump said: "First he had his wildfires that burned down half the place [...] I told them water, get the water from the pacific north west [...] I got the water to go down. "They were using environmental as a reason not to give water. They were protecting a certain type of fish - which by the way has not done well. "He should have done it [redirected the water supply] in my first term. You wouldn't have had the fires." 8 8 8 Interviewer Miranda Devine then asked about a much-disputed phone call between Trump and Newsom - with each swearing to a different version of events. The President claimed he rang to discuss sending in National Guardsmen - but Newsom branded him a "stone-cold liar". Newsom insists he "kept trying to bring up" the situation in LA, but that Trump veered onto other subjects. However, Trump doubled down today and said: "Of course I did [talk about it]. The phone call was to deploy the troops. "I said: 'You're city is burning down, your state is in bad trouble.' "All I want is him to do a good job [...] he's doing a poor job." In an effort to checkmate Newsom, Trump brandished a screenshot showing a 16-minute call between the two at 1:23am on June 7. Newsom does not dispute that the call happened - but maintains that Trump "never once brought up the National Guard". Trump landed other personal jibes, mocking the California High-Speed Rail project which has run over budget and claiming that, without him, Newsom "wouldn't have LA". He said: "Between the fires and the riots, there would be nothing left. You have a governor that's incompetent, a mayor that's highly incompetent." 8


NBC News
32 minutes ago
- NBC News
Why Trump could be the X factor in New Jersey: From the Politics Desk
Welcome to the online version of From the Politics Desk, an evening newsletter that brings you the NBC News Politics team's latest reporting and analysis from the White House, Capitol Hill and the campaign trail. In today's edition, Steve Kornacki looks ahead to the general election in New Jersey after last night's gubernatorial primaries. Peter Nichols previews this weekend's military parade in Washington, which occurs against the backdrop of immigration protests around the country. And Andrea Mitchell examines the ripple effects of the new travel ban. — Adam Wollner The Trump factor looms over New Jersey's newly set race for governor By Steve Kornacki The matchup for New Jersey's gubernatorial election is set, but looming over the contest will be a name that won't be on any ballot: Donald Trump. Rep. Mikie Sherrill, who secured the Democratic nomination in Tuesday's primary, is already running ads that attack Republican Jack Ciattarelli for his ties to the president. Ciattarelli, who was also the GOP's nominee in 2021, romped to victory in his party's primary after successfully cultivating Trump's support. In focusing on Trump, Democrats have history on their side. New Jersey voters have a strong tendency to elect governors from the party that doesn't control the White House. This has been the case in all but two races over the past four decades. Plus, Democrats have run this playbook successfully in New Jersey before. Eight years ago, during Trump's first term, Gov. Phil Murphy scored a 14-point win over Republican Kim Guadagno. Murphy sought to tie Guadagno to Trump, whose approval rating in New Jersey that fall stood at just 33%. (Murphy was also aided by the cratering popularity of outgoing Republican Gov. Chris Christie.) Republicans are counting on the Trump factor playing differently this time around. And, at least for now, there are some key variables they can point to with optimism. One is the result of last year's presidential race, when Trump lost New Jersey by 6 points to Kamala Harris. That was a far cry from his 16-point loss in 2020 and his 14-point defeat in 2016. From the outset of the 2017 gubernatorial race, it was obvious that Trump would be a major electoral liability for the GOP. That's not as clear this time around. In fact, a PIX11/Emerson College poll conducted a few weeks ago showed Trump with a 47% job approval rating in New Jersey. That's far higher than he fared during the 2017 campaign, or for that matter, at any point during his first term. It's also higher than the 40% approval rating for Murphy, who is term-limited and provides Ciattarelli with his own opportunity to tie his opponent to an unpopular leader. There's also some history Republicans can point to. Democrats have controlled the New Jersey governorship for two consecutive terms now, with Sherrill seeking to make it three. This is the fifth time since 1981 that one of the two parties has tried for a third straight term. They all failed. Bridget Bowman and Ben Kamisar have five key takeaways from Tuesday's results. Adam Noboa breaks down how each of the candidates in the crowded Democratic field fared on their home turf. Julie Tsirkin, Olympia Sonnier and Bridget explore how Ciattarelli is now attempting to pivot to the general election. By Peter Nicholas President Donald Trump is getting the parade he wanted showcasing America's military power — but he'll also be getting mass protests exposing the nation's partisan divisions. The tanks and artillery launchers rolling through Washington on Saturday will honor the Army's 250th anniversary, which falls on the day Trump turns 79. But in Washington and in all 50 states, organizers are scheduled to stage protests that could dwarf the parade in size. A coalition of pro-democracy, labor and liberal activists is arranging a full day of counterprogramming to make the case that Trump is hijacking the Army celebration to venerate himself. The parade is happening at a fraught moment when Trump has drawn the military — among the nation's most trusted institutions — into a tense standoff in Los Angeles over his aggressive efforts to deport people living in the United States illegally. The Trump administration this week activated about 700 Marines to help quell demonstrations over his immigration enforcement methods, despite warnings from California officials that he is inflaming the situation. ICE is preparing to deploy its Special Response Teams to five cities run by Democratic leaders, according to two sources familiar with the planning of the future operations. The Trump administration is telling immigration judges — who report to the executive branch and are not part of the independent judiciary — to dismiss pending cases as a tactic for speeding up arrests. During an interview with NBC's 'Nightly News' anchor Tom Llamas, White House border czar Tom Homan said that protests in Los Angeles are making immigration raids more 'difficult' and more 'dangerous.' Texas GOP Gov. Greg Abbott said he'll deploy the National Guard across the state 'to ensure peace and order' ahead of a planned protest in San Antonio. California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom warned that 'democracy is under assault' in a speech blasting Trump's immigration tactics. A federal grand jury indicted Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-N.J., on charges stemming from a confrontation with law enforcement at an ICE detention center in Newark last month. The way Trump has responded to protests in California is very different than how he treated the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. By Andrea Mitchell Little noticed amid the uproar over the ICE raids in Los Angeles this week is the imposition of a travel ban 2.0 — a retooled version of President Donald Trump's first-term policy, modified to avoid legal challenges. 'We want to keep bad people out of our country,' Trump said. The last time around, the Trump White House had to rewrite the proposed ban three times before it passed Supreme Court muster. This time, the administration released fact sheets to show they were singling out countries whose citizens had high rates of overstaying their visas or don't properly screen their citizens for terrorism, not because most of the 12 countries banned are in Africa or the Middle East — prompting accusations of racial motivation, which would be unconstitutional. While not facing immediate legal challenges, the decision to bar travelers from Afghanistan in particular is outraging many U.S. veterans, including Trump supporters, who say they could not have survived the war without their Afghan translators. They say the U.S. is abandoning its Afghan allies and their families, who are being attacked, imprisoned and, in some cases, tortured by the Taliban for their past association with the U.S. Shawn VanDiver, president of #AfghanEvac, a coalition of U.S. veterans and advocacy groups, told me: 'The Taliban has made it very clear through their actions, not their words, what's going to happen to them. We get photos and videos every week of people being hunted down and killed.' We met an Afghan man who worked as a translator with the U.S. military for seven years who we can't identify without putting his family at risk. He got a special visa to come to the U.S, became a citizen and enlisted in the Marines to return to Afghanistan for another tour in Helmand Province. He spent years trying to bring his siblings and aging parents to the U.S. from Afghanistan to escape retaliation. They were approved last December and told to prepare to travel within days. Now the travel ban has shut the door. He told me when Trump announced the ban, 'For the first week, I couldn't go to work. I laid in bed, I was shocked for a week.' He added, 'I want to see my parents. They're getting old and I feel so bad. I cannot forgive myself if they pass and I can't see them.' He blames himself. But critics of the travel ban say it's the U.S. that went back on its word — something they warn future allies will remember when America wants their help.