logo
Paris Neilson's next project is a $59m strip in the heart of Redfern

Paris Neilson's next project is a $59m strip in the heart of Redfern

The Town Hall's corner site at 366 Darling Street in Balmain has three levels. It's being sold with development approval for alterations and additions to the existing building and the use of the premises for food and drink.
The site is currently vacant. For the past 10 years it operated as a pub and a mixed-use premises occupied by a massage parlour, gym and bottle shop.
Originally the Town Hall Hotel, the property was built from 1887-1888 as part of the Balmain Civic group of buildings. The sale will be managed by James Cowan and Matthew Meynell from Colliers, along with HTL's Sam Handy and Andrew Jolliffe.
Sydney House
Construction of Sydney House, the former City Tattersalls Club in Pitt Street, into a mixed-use development is entering its next phase.
The 130-year-old State Heritage-listed building, now owned by a consortium led by Singapore-listed First Sponsor Group, and Melbourne-based ICD Property will become Sydney's newest mixed-use tower.
With an end value of about $200 million, the project at 194-204 Pitt Street is on track for delivery in 2027. The project includes 241 premium residences atop of a 135-room boutique hotel.
BVN Architecture designed the tower and interiors, and FJC Studio worked on the heritage podium. Richard Crookes Constructions is the builder and confirmed demolition and bulk excavation are now complete, and major structural activities are progressing at pace.
The site includes four different buildings, of which three will see significant heritage retention and restoration to both facades and key internal elements. Heritage works on site will retain the facade and Lower Bar, Sydney Room, Corinthian Room, and Billiard Room.
Loading
Tightly held
The chance to own the only motel in Lennox Head is now available.
In the tightly held coastal area of northern NSW, which is considered one of the country's most scenic and rapidly growing beachside towns, the Santa Fe Motel and Holiday Units is for sale with vacant possession.
It sits on a prominent 1370-square-metre landholding just 150 metres from Seven Mile Beach and offers direct access to Lennox Head's restaurants, cafes, bars and shops.
Under the same ownership for over 26 years, the motel has13 guest rooms, a manager's residence, reception and office area, swimming pool, guest laundry facilities and on-site parking.
No price was disclosed, but the agents said it is underpinned by solid trading performance and land value of $2.56 million, as assessed by the NSW Valuer General as of July 1, 2024.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Australian company Intrepid Travel fights back against Donald Trump threat to US national parks
Australian company Intrepid Travel fights back against Donald Trump threat to US national parks

News.com.au

timean hour ago

  • News.com.au

Australian company Intrepid Travel fights back against Donald Trump threat to US national parks

An Australian company is fighting back against Donald Trump's planned upheaval of US national parks. Since US President Donald Trump took office, more than 1000 park workers have been laid off (more than 700 others took buyouts), and more are expected to be let go. There is also a proposal to cut more than $US1 billion ($A1.5 billion) in federal funding for the US National Parks Service (nearly 40 per cent of the agency's current budget). NPS oversees 85 million acres of federal land and there are 433 sites in the National Park System, with parks in every state. National Park Conservation Association president Theresa Pierno described Mr Trump's proposed budget plan as 'catastrophic,' arguing that the 'national park system would be completely decimated'. Mr Trump wants to see some parks (that the White House describes as 'not 'national parks' in the traditionally understood sense') go to the states, but there are concerns states don't have the resources to maintain the parks, which will force them to close. The White House claims the proposed budget would 'continue supporting many national treasures, but there is an urgent need to streamline staffing and transfer certain properties to state-level management to ensure the long-term health and sustainment of the national park system'. Aussie-born company fights back A Melbourne-born global travel company, which runs tours across 18 US national parks, has made its stance clear. Speaking to on Thursday, Intrepid Travel's Leigh Barnes described national parks as 'incredibly important' to the US and said the White House's massive proposed funding cuts are 'putting access at risk'. 'We need healthy, vibrant national parks for our business, and also the impact of not having tourism go to national parks in the USA is going to put local businesses underground,' said Mr Barnes, an Australian who relocated to Seattle this year to take up the role of managing director of the Americas. In response to the Trump Administration's actions, Intrepid has now launched limited edition 'Active-ism' trips in the parks, hosted by influential activists and local guides. The trips are about $US500-$600 ($A770-$920) cheaper than a standard itinerary, despite the addition of an activist. 'That has been a deliberate focus, making them as accessible as possible,' Mr Barnes said. 'They're not going to be the world's greatest profit generator for the organisation, but that's not the purpose.' Intrepid will also donate $US50,000 ($A77,000) on behalf of its travellers to nongovernmental organisations protecting the US national parks. Intrepid has 26 trips across 18 national parks, and employs 200 local guides and 60 staff there. The company has taken more than 20,000 travellers and expects to host another 5000 this year. Mr Barnes explained that it's not just direct jobs at the US National Parks Service at risk. 'They (national parks) are absolutely amazing economic drivers for these areas. Having these national parks creates jobs in and around the national parks ecosystem. Not just the national parks employees but all the little smaller businesses and ecosystems it supports,' he said. He added: 'They're a massive pride and icon in the USA. 'We want to ensure these amazing parts of the USA are not just here for this generation but the generations beyond.' Mr Barnes said the more people who experience nature, the more that are likely to advocate for these spaces, so his team simply asked themselves, 'how do we encourage more people to go out to national parks?'. The Active-ism trips include two five-day 'Zion and The Grand Canyon' trips hosted by public lands advocate Alex Haraus in November and environmental advocate Wawa Gatheru in April next year, and then two six-day 'Yellowstone and The Grand Tetons' trips hosted by climate educator Michael Mezzatesta and environmental author Leah Thomas in June next year. The target market is Americans but anyone can book. Discussions guests can expect include the current threats facing US national parks, the impact of climate change, Indigenous land rights, equity in outdoor spaces, and how to turn awareness into advocacy. Mr Barnes, previously Intrepid's chief customer officer in Melbourne, took on leading the Americas side of the business at a challenging time for US tourism. March — the same month Mr Barnes relocated his family to the States — saw the sharpest drop in Australians travelling to the US since during the height of the Covid pandemic, according to US International Trade Administration statistics. Australian visitor numbers fell 7 per cent in March this year, compared to March 2024 — the biggest drop since March 2021. Flight Centre and Intrepid Travel told last month bookings to the US had dropped significantly as Aussies, Canadians and Europeans choose to travel elsewhere. Globally, Intrepid saw a year-on-year 9 per cent decline in US sales for the first four months of the year. US sales for Australian and New Zealand travellers in particular were down 13 per cent. April alone was down 44 per cent on last year. But other areas such as South America are 'booming'. As a result, Mr Barnes said his team had increased their focus on domestic travel within the US, promoting the right products at the right time, and increasing their brand presence (last week Intrepid became an official partner of the Seattle Storm WNBA team). All eyes on American tourism The global tourism industry is keeping a close eye on the impact of Mr Trump's strict border stance and other controversial government policies like sweeping tariffs are having on travel. On Thursday, Mr Trump signed a new travel ban banning people from 12 countries to 'protect Americans from dangerous foreign actors'. The ban targets nationals of Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Flight Centre CEO and founder Graham Turner told it was an 'unsettled climate' impacting business travel, while tourists worry about passport control and others simply don't want to go to the US 'because they don't like what Donald Trump's doing'. Tourism Economics — which forecasts foreign traveller arrivals in the US will sharply decline this year resulting in a loss of $9 billion in spending — said decisions from the Trump Administration are creating a 'negative sentiment shift toward the US among travellers'. The travel data company's April report cited Mr Trump's stance on border security and immigration as one of the factors discouraging visits. Mr Trump rejects the notion that the country's tourism industry is in any trouble — saying 'tourism is way up'. Security checks at US airports have garnered much attention in recent months amid Mr Trump's 'enhanced vetting' for arrivals at US airports and cases of tourists being denied entry on arrival, and at times, strip searched and thrown in prison. Former NSW police officer Nikki Saroukos is one of those people who recently travelled to the US using an Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) under the Visa Waiver Program and was deported, but first she had to spend a night in a federal prison. She said she was subjected to invasive searches and humiliating treatment for trying to spend time with her US military husband stationed in Hawaii. The US Department of Homeland Security later issued what it described as a 'fact check' on X after she went public with the ordeal, accusing her of having 'unusual activity on her phone, including 1000 deleted text messages from her husband'. Homeland Security said 'officers determined that she was travelling for more than just tourism'. But Ms Saroukos strongly denies having any plans to live permanently in the US. The Sydney resident, who married her husband Matt in January after a whirlwind long-distance romance, told she was 'in disbelief at how ridiculous' the statement was and claimed that some of the information included had been 'twisted'. Why denied tourists can end up in federal prison CBP has long had strong powers to deny entry, detain and deport foreigners at their discretion when travellers arrive in the country even if they have a valid visa or ESTA. However, what we are seeing under the Trump administration is described as 'enhanced vetting'. Australians are being warned to not assume they are exempt to more intense checks, including inspections of emails, text messages or social media accounts at the airport. Melissa Vincenty, a US immigration lawyer and Australian migration agent who is managing director of Worldwide Migration Partners, told recently that being taken to federal prison with no criminal record, no drugs or anything that is a danger to society is the reality of being denied entry to the US in Hawaii. Ms Vincenty, a dual-citizen who was a deportation defence lawyer in Honolulu before moving to Australia, explained the state did not have an immigration facility so people were taken to the Federal Detention Center Honolulu, where there was no separate wing for immigration. It meant tourists who were denied entry to the US could be held alongside those awaiting trial — or who have been convicted and were waiting to be transferred to a mainland prison for serious federal crimes, such as kidnapping, bank robbery or drug crimes. 'It's like in the movies — you go there and there's bars, you get strip searched, all your stuff is taken away from you, you're not allowed to call anybody, nobody knows where you are,' Ms Vincenty told in April after the experience of two young German tourists being strip searched and thrown in prison made global headlines. Ms Vincenty said for Australians who were denied entry to the US in other locations like Los Angeles, San Francisco or Dallas, being held in detention facilities until the next available flight home was a real risk as there weren't constant return flights to Australia — meaning you might have to wait until the next day. If not taken to a detention facility, some travellers may stay sitting for hours in what is called a secondary inspection at the airport. A secondary inspection includes further vetting such as searching travellers' electronic devices. 'That period can last from half an hour to 15 hours or more,' she said.

Why the Bank of Mum and Dad is now a necessity
Why the Bank of Mum and Dad is now a necessity

News.com.au

time6 hours ago

  • News.com.au

Why the Bank of Mum and Dad is now a necessity

Parental wealth is fast becoming the secret weapon of first-home buyers, with family help now the difference between getting a home loan approved or being locked out for good. With house prices and required incomes surging beyond what most young Australians can save alone, property insiders say the 'Bank of Mum and Dad' is no longer a bonus, it's a necessity. Canstar research director Sally Tindall said the divide between those with family backing and those without was widening at speed. 'First-home buyers today aren't just up against high prices, they're up against time,' Ms Tindall said. 'Those with family support can move quickly. Those without it are constantly playing catch-up.' Ms Tindall added that many parents were now treating housing help as an investment in their kids' future. 'For some families, it's not just a gift, it's a strategic decision,' she said. 'They want to give their children a head start, knowing how hard it is to build equity from scratch.' Prominent Melbourne buyers' advocate Cate Bakos said she had seen adult children move back in with parents to aggressively save, while others were leaning on their families for emotional resilience as much as money. 'There's often an unspoken pressure,' Ms Bakos said. 'Some buyers don't want to ask for help, but they feel like it's their only option.' 'We're working with families as a unit now — it's no longer just about the buyer.' Ms Bakos said in many cases, parents were attending inspections and auctions, acting as sounding boards and unofficial advisers. Zippy Financial principal broker Louisa Sanghera said one of the most common trends was partial deposits, where parents might match whatever their children could save. 'We see parents say, 'If you save $50,000, we'll match it', it becomes a partnership,' Ms Sanghera said. 'That kind of leverage can mean the difference between winning an auction or walking away.' Ms Sanghera added that buyers were often borrowing at the absolute edge of their serviceability range, so any reduction in upfront cost was hugely helpful. 'We're not just talking about first-home buyers in their 20s,' she said. 'Some clients are in their mid-30s or even 40s, and they're still needing help. 'That's how hard it's become to enter the market.'

Europe, Indonesia or Japan? Can Australia find other allies to rely on if the US disappears?
Europe, Indonesia or Japan? Can Australia find other allies to rely on if the US disappears?

SBS Australia

time8 hours ago

  • SBS Australia

Europe, Indonesia or Japan? Can Australia find other allies to rely on if the US disappears?

Donald Trump's comments, in particular, that Canada should become America's 51st state and threatening to abandon European allies over defence spending have raised concerns about the US' reliability. Source: SBS, AAP For decades, the United States has been a reliable ally to Australia, whose protection has helped to ensure peace in the region. But US President Donald Trump's unpredictable and tough treatment of his nation's allies has raised questions about whether Australia can still afford to lean so heavily on America as a security partner. On Tuesday, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese told reporters the government will make decisions in Australia's national interest and fund the defence capability it needs . The comments came after US defence secretary Pete Hegseth requested Australia increase its defence budget to 3.5 per cent of its gross domestic product (GDP) in a conversation with Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles on the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore last weekend. Australia's defence budget makes up roughly 2 per cent of GDP, which the government plans to increase to 2.35 per cent by 2034. While most experts do not believe the US will withdraw from the Indo-Pacific, Trump's actions raise questions about whether Australia should be seeking to cooperate more with other nations. In May, Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, raised the prospect of a formal defence agreement between the trading bloc and Australia. In response, Albanese said he would consider the proposal but noted a similar agreement was already in place with other European countries such as Germany. Without the US alliance, Peter Dean, director of foreign policy and defence at the United States Studies Centre at The University of Sydney, says Australia would need to massively increase its defence spending or accept it can't defend its own sovereignty. "If you look at the mismatch between the scale of our territory and the scale of our ability to defend it — it's one of the most glaring mismatches in the world," he says. "[You would] effectively be just hoping for the best." Dean says Australia needs to work hard to maintain its security and that a "community of nations" is necessary to support open and free trade, promote a rules-based international order, and counter the use of coercion, aggression, and military force to achieve political objectives. "If you don't have that community of nations, the example of what's happening in Ukraine is very poignant to everybody," he says. [Russia believes] in a 'might is right' world and they believe in a world where they get to shape those rules and that order, and that is not going to be favourable or in Australia's interests ... or for the majority of states in our region. Dean says Trump is more brutally transactional than previous presidents and an example of the adage in international relations that "you have no friends, you only have common interests". Although it's not always clear what Trump's interests are, Dean believes there's still a common alignment between Australia and the US, particularly in the Indo-Pacific region, and in the overall aims and objectives of their security policies. "That simply boils down to — we don't want an Indo-Pacific that's dominated by one particular power — especially China," Dean says. "That is an Australian view clearly articulated in our strategy, and that is a US view, clearly articulated by the US — even under this president." One of the potential problems with a China-dominated region, Dean says, is its desire to "rule by law" and the way in which China would go about setting and enforcing laws. "China particularly wants a hierarchical order where it sits on top and everyone else sits underneath," he says. In contrast, Australia and other like-minded countries support a "rule of law" system in which a community of nations jointly sets the rules through treaties, such as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. But Sam Roggeveen, the director of the international security program at the Lowy Institute, says the US has done very little to address China's dramatic military modernisation since the end of the Cold War. No matter who's in charge in the US, I don't think that will rescue Australia from having to think much more independently about its security. "The harsh truth for Australia and for other allies in the region is that the Americans aren't going to do the heavy lifting for us, and want us to do it ourselves." Dean says the alliance with the US is critical for national security, and forming an agreement with other countries would be very difficult. A strategic alliance involves countries committing to help each other out during a crisis, or to act in accord to address a common threat. This would preferably be set out in a treaty. Australia has an alliance with the US and New Zealand, but despite being part of the British Commonwealth, it does not have a formal agreement with the United Kingdom. Given the geographical distance, Dean believes military support from the UK would likely depend on what other conflicts are happening in its part of the world. When it comes to international alliances, arguably the most important is NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization), which commits Europe and North America to protecting each other from any threat. Rory Medcalf, head of the National Security College at The Australian National University, says there are three crucial elements to establish in alliances. Firstly, there must be clear interests in common. Secondly, the parties must articulate some shared values or political will to provide a foundation for trust. "If their security is threatened, then you have interests engaged," he says. And there must also be mutual capability. "There's not much point being an ally of someone if you bring nothing to the table and they bring everything," he says. Dean says no other state can replace the size, power and influence of the US, which is the world's number one military power. Dean says the US — by partnering with South Korea, Australia, Japan and other states — can aggregate enough power to balance China's influence and there is no "ready-made state" that could easily replace it. Without the US, Medcalf says China would likely seek to dominate countries one by one and break any alliance-like relationships. Even if Australia did more for its own defence, there would still be a good argument for maintaining a close relationship with the US because its military technology is among, if not the best in the world. But Roggeveen says Australia has to accept the US alliance is going to become less important over time. "With that in mind, we have to look geographically much closer to home," he says. While forming a new alliance may prove difficult, Medcalf says it would be possible for Australia to build coalitions with other nations to discourage things like coercive behaviour if there was some degree of confidence the US would still back them up. "It's really about using strategic partnership to make ourselves stronger, rather than building a kind of alliance where we expect to be standing shoulder to shoulder in war," he says. Australia is already part of several small groupings of nations with common interests in the Indo-Pacific, such as The Quad (a diplomatic partnership among the US, India, Japan and Australia) and AJUS (a trilateral partnership among Australia, Japan and the US). Defence cooperation has deepened via AJUS, while the security partnership AUKUS, which exists between Australia, the UK and the US, has laid the groundwork for Australia to acquire nuclear-powered submarines and other advanced capabilities. Australia has also entered into limited bilateral agreements with Indonesia, the Philippines, South Korea, Singapore and others. Medcalf, who is undertaking nationwide consultations to understand Australian attitudes to security, says most of these countries have no prospect of being treaty allies of Australia. But partnerships with countries like Japan, South Korea, the Philippines and Vietnam may be possible. All of these countries, apart from Vietnam, are already American allies. "They have different levels of capability that they would bring to the table," he says. "But the ultimate question is how much risk are we all going to take for each other?" Due to the number of member states that would need to agree to it, Medcalf suspects an agreement with the EU would likely be quite vague in its language and commitment. It may focus on increased technology sharing, access to defence industry resources and possibly some intelligence sharing. There could also be some aspirational statements about the rules-based order, or the intent to discourage and oppose aggressive action. "But it would fall far short of anything resembling a treaty commitment," Medcalf says. Dean agrees it's more likely Australia and the EU would support each other diplomatically to uphold rules and standards both in Europe and the Indo-Pacific. Medcalf points out Australia and many northern European countries share common values, including freedom of expression, the rule of law and secularism in politics. "[Australia's political values] are much closer to countries like Denmark, Sweden and Finland than to any of our neighbours except New Zealand," he says. Australia has previously manufactured a Norwegian-designed naval strike missile and German-designed armoured fighting vehicles. The EU could offer access to other sophisticated capabilities such as warships, drones and sensors. "The risk is obviously an expectation that Australia becomes more involved in Europe security problems ... obviously that's about confronting Russia," he says. While Medcalf believes Australia should be helping countries like Ukraine to defend themselves, there are limitations. What we shouldn't be doing is ever raising the expectation that we could be a frontline military actor on the other side of the world. Medcalf says Europe is in a different region to Australia, and it would be difficult to deploy troops or aircraft to each other's front lines. But Europe is highly trade-dependent and large countries like Germany and France, in particular, have an interest in maintaining the security of shipping in the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea, he says, adding that a significant number of shipping companies are also European. Roggeveen says countries in Europe and other parts of Asia are so far away they are never going to share the same vital interests as Australia. But Indonesia's interests are largely the same as Australia's, given they are neighbours. He says Indonesia is also predicted to be a great power by the middle of the century and likely the fourth or fifth biggest economy in the world. "We've never had a great power on our doorstep before, and we want Indonesia to be on our side when that happens," he says. "We have no more important relationship than Indonesia just to our north," he told ABC's 7.30 show. Other experts are sceptical about the potential for a quasi-alliance with Indonesia. While Medcalf agrees Australia should do more with Indonesia — including to help strengthen its navy and air force, and its ability to monitor what's happening in its waters — he notes its policy is to be "friends to all, enemies to none". "Which sounds great but in practice means that Indonesia is working very hard to be as neutral as it can be in future crisis situations." He says Indonesia has not been willing to speak out about China's behaviour in the South China Sea and doesn't have the capability to help Australia build its own defence technology base. Australia also has to accept that China already has a strong influence in Indonesia, he says. "If you're looking for a country that can partly fill the gap that the US may leave — I'd be looking to Japan before Indonesia. But if Indonesia ends up getting closer to our point of view, that would be wonderful," he says. Medcalf says some experts already characterise Japan's relationship with Australia as a quasi-alliance, and it is the most likely country to form an actual alliance with Australia, although the chances of this happening in the short term remain unlikely. He says both Japan and Australia share a strong belief in a rules-based system, and have different strengths they could bring to the table. They need the resources that we have. We need their technology, we need their investment. Medcalf doesn't think Japan's peace constitution — put in place at the end of World War Two to maintain its military for defensive purposes only — would be an impediment because politicians have been reinterpreting it over the last 20 years or so. "Japan is already moving away from 1 per cent, to 2 per cent of GDP, as its military budget," he says, adding that Japanese forces are increasingly training in Australia. However, Dean believes legal and cultural barriers still make it unlikely Japan will form an alliance with Australia. "But I think if the region was to have some type of strategic shock, or it was to really start to deteriorate, that would drive that alignment even closer together," he says. Medcalf says Vietnam is very good at maintaining a balanced relationship with China because it knows how to stand up to China, while also keeping the peace. "They've been doing both for about 1,000 years," he says. "[Vietnam] can defend itself, but it can also do diplomacy well." However, Medcalf says the Southeast Asian country would be very reluctant to enter into a treaty-like commitment with Australia, although there is potential for more cooperation in areas such as military training. Singapore has long been a valuable diplomatic partner for Australia and already cooperates on military training and exchanging information, Medcalf says. "But Singapore is ultimately a very self-interested and neutral country and I think we would work with them as much as we could without the expectation that either would actually take a risk on the other's behalf." He says he would put Malaysia in a similar camp. South Korea is a militarily significant country because it has a lot of capability, Medcalf says. "They now export defence equipment to Europe," he says. "South Korea is one of the few countries in the world that is genuinely able to do rapid military manufacturing at scale." But the problem is it's overwhelmingly focused on defending itself against North Korea. "Yes, they're slightly concerned about ensuring that China doesn't dominate the region. Yes, they're a US ally but they would probably be reluctant to project much further beyond the peninsula," he says. Medcalf says South Korea also has quite deep-seated political problems domestically, and its politics can be unpredictable. Medcalf says Australia's relationship with India has advanced significantly over the past decade — with each country's navy training together frequently and sharing information. Both countries' air forces jointly monitor the Indian Ocean. "[India] will probably be — within the next few decades — one of the three biggest powers in the world militarily, alongside the US and China." However, Medcalf says India is diplomatically very neutral and greatly values its autonomy. They're not going to be forming permanent alliance-like relationships with anyone. While India does not want to witness China dominate the Indian Ocean and would likely align with other countries in the region to balance against China, Medcalf says if it came to war, there would be only very limited circumstances under which it would get involved. "I guess they would certainly contribute to patrolling the Indian Ocean and potentially limiting China's ability to operate there, but I don't think India is going to be taking a lot of risk on behalf of others," he says. India may also expect other countries to come to its aid if there were a conflict with China on its border. "And that would be something that I think would be difficult for other countries to think about." The Philippines is one of the countries that claim parts of the South China Sea, which has led to clashes with China over issues such as fishing rights, islands and territories, Medcalf says. "The Philippines has traditionally been quite a weak military power but they're beginning to modernise their forces and their location is strategically very important — they're right at the heart of the sea lanes of Asia." While the Philippines is an American treaty ally, under former president Rodrigo Duterte, it became closer to China. Medcalf says it would make sense for Australia to have the Philippines as a partner, but caution is needed when considering the limits of its power and whether another change in government could alter dynamics. It's yet another example of how it's a nice idea to try and stitch all of these relationships together into something larger but without the Americans involved somewhere along the line, it still becomes quite flimsy. Like Australia, Canada is a middle-sized power but in some ways, it is militarily weaker. It's also a long way away. But Medcalf points out Canada is technically part of the broader Pacific region as its western coastline borders the Pacific Ocean. It's also surprisingly active in the region — supporting the UN efforts in East Asia to prevent illegal trade with North Korea and the smuggling of parts or precursors for weapons of mass destruction. "There's something to work with there but all of this stuff is only going to work if it's more than simply putting all your reliance on one country — they would be a small part of a much bigger puzzle."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store