Military Review

Will Australia stand against China?

According to media reports, the ministers of defense and foreign affairs of Japan and Australia are going to meet in November on Australian territory without specifying the city and time of the meeting. It is known that the main topics will be the situation in the Asia-Pacific region, the joint development of military equipment (in particular, the transfer of Japanese submarine construction technologies), and the interaction of the armed forces. It is clear that both countries can discuss joint defense issues, meaning first of all it is China, and not Russia or, say, Indonesia, although these countries will undoubtedly pay their attention.

Will Australia stand against China?

Australian UDC HMAS Adelaide and HMAS Canberra

Both Japan and Australia are longtime US allies in the Pacific region and, more recently, TTP members, which are rapidly turning from an economic union into a kind of military alliance. Given that any economy needs to expand, including through direct military seizure of markets and sources of raw materials, a hint for its neighbors is more than transparent. In addition, the two countries are united by the American military presence. But if Tokyo would like to get rid of a part of the American bases, then Canberra, on the contrary, wants to get them. Rumors that several thousand American marines may move from Okinawa to the Australian coast have been circulating for several years.

Australia has long made an unofficial turn from the concept of protecting its own coast to a new imperialism. This is noticeable not only in rhetoric and one-time actions like insignificant ISIS bombing, but above all in the scale of naval construction.

The most impressive novelty, of course, is the Canberra-class helicopter carriers, built according to the Spanish project of the UDC "Juan Carlos I" and which are the largest ships of the Australian fleet all his history. Each of the two new ships is able to take on board up to 1600 mans of troops and 110 cars. And the hangar can accommodate up to 18 helicopters.

The Australian sailors have so far refused the initial idea of ​​basing F-35B aircraft, as well as deck fighters and attack aircraft, but the fact that they left the springboard, which migrated directly from the Spanish project, suggests that this refusal is not final . The helicopter, as is known, doesn’t need a springboard.

In addition to helicopter carriers, the Royal Navy acquires other major ships. These are the landing ship dock HMAS "Choules", built in Britain and sold to Australia in 2011 year, and the auxiliary vessel ADV "Ocean Shield" and three destroyers of the class "Hobart", which are under construction right now.

Landing ship dock HMAS "Choules"

The latter are no less interesting than the new helicopter carriers. Declared as anti-aircraft, they also have serious anti-ship capabilities: 8 MK41 UVP cells will necessarily be filled with Harpoon missiles, which, if desired, can be replaced by Tomahawks. By and large, the Hobart will become a universal destroyer, although first of all it is an anti-aircraft / anti-missile ship, where the Aegis system and RIM-66 Standard 2 missiles offer ample opportunities. At the moment, except Japan, only Japan and South Korea have such ships. From whom is Australia going to fight off so specific weapons? Clearly not from Indonesia. Apparently, the United States is preparing allies for the possible creation of an anti-missile blockade of either China or the Russian Far East. How much such plans are realizable is another question, but measures in this direction will be taken.

Obviously, one thing - in two or three years, Australia will be able to deploy large own forces almost anywhere in the world. And certainly not for the purposes of defense of some remote possessions. Today, Australia has seven overseas territories: three of them are uninhabited, and one - the Antarctic - is not recognized by the international community. For their defense helicopter carriers are not needed, and not defensive this weapon. It would not hurt to recall that Australia gained considerable benefits in the wake of both world wars, both direct in the form of territories and wealth, and indirect in the form of immigration to the green continent of European citizens. In the XXI century it will not be possible to sit on the sidelines, dragging chestnuts out of the fire by someone else’s hands. Whose legacy is Canberra going to share this time?

Свежие news only confirm the above conclusions. Literally just (October 27), Australia fervently supported the American initiative to send a destroyer to the South China Sea, where it would eloquently violate the 12-mile zone around the Chinese part of the Spratly Islands as a sign of non-recognition of Beijing’s claims to these waters. As Australian Defense Minister Maris Payne noted, “almost 60% of total Australian exports go to other countries via the South China Sea.” If the Chinese do not swallow an insult, and decide to conflict, the hottest times for the green continent may begin much earlier than many people think. Allied debt has not been canceled.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Rurikovich
    Rurikovich 28 October 2015 07: 11 New
    As America became the haven of all rabble from Europe that spilled over into the FSA, so Australia was a British prison that spilled over into almost the most devoted FSA vassal ... request
    Everything is logical yes
    1. Talgat
      Talgat 28 October 2015 13: 27 New
      It's not about rabble, etc.

      1) Australia in England and the United States - this is for example Kazakhstan in Russia (or Austria in Germany) - a geopolitical ally - tightly sewn by historical cultural ties and the fact that the same people live there

      Australia was among the first to land in Vietnam, bombed Iraq by the Yugoslavs and so on and so forth

      2) China - as the whole world has already understood, the upcoming geopolitical adversary of the USA and the West, the USA are gaining allies to South Korea, Japan

      China, on the other hand, is strengthening its continental rear - Russia with the entire CSTO and Kazakhstan - so as not to depend on maritime energy supplies - which will be blocked by the West in an instant.

      And it will take at least 5 years to block Russia and Kazakhstan from the west (the experience of the last attack of the European Union in 1941-1945)

      In general, the 21st century is the confrontation between China and the USA

      3) In addition, China clearly relies on direct assistance from the CSTO and Russia in case of direct aggression of the West - so far there are no direct agreements - but in the future this will be the case.
      1. Major_Vortex
        Major_Vortex 28 October 2015 13: 46 New
        Quote: Talgat
        And it will take at least 5 years to block Russia and Kazakhstan from the west (the experience of the last attack of the European Union in 1941-1945)

        Russia and Kazakhstan will not be able to block the West this time, because they won’t live even a year after such a "block". And in order not to press economically and need a strong union of neighboring states. Wars must be waged on the territory of the enemy, and not wait when he will hide with his troops and bombs in your house.
      2. Kyrgyz
        Kyrgyz 28 October 2015 21: 26 New
        Quote: Talgat
        And it will take at least 5 years to block Russia and Kazakhstan from the west (the experience of the last attack of the European Union in 1941-1945)

        I correctly understood what to cut off in this case is to cut off from China? Militarily, I do not agree, it’s more likely not the fact that Russia and Kazakhstan in general will have a sense of somehow actively integrating into this action, I’ll rather see it and then decide how much and what will be profitable for us there. In their right mind nobody will trample on China in the near future, a victory may be probable, but its price will be unrealistic
  2. parusnik
    parusnik 28 October 2015 07: 25 New
    Will Australia stand against China?... But not today and not tomorrow .. and not in 2-3 years .. In the event that the United States gets involved in a fight .. as with ISIS
  3. inkass_98
    inkass_98 28 October 2015 07: 28 New
    Australia has long made an unspoken U-turn from the concept of protecting its own shores to a new imperialism

    If the population and resources are enough. A new Yamato empire will not work out of them, and a stingy poke somewhere under the cover of the staff hem and besides Australia there are many who wish. They have not yet committed a single act on their own. The population there sharply increased after the war due to immigrants who fled away from unpredictable Europe, then ours pulled themselves into the 90's. I doubt that there are a lot of people who want to put their well-built carcasses over the ghostly overseas territories, when the continent itself has not really been mastered, and the bulk of the population lives in coastal (read - easily vulnerable from the sea) areas. In the event of a retaliatory strike, there will be nowhere to run. And often no one.
  4. Armored optimist
    Armored optimist 28 October 2015 07: 40 New
    Sooner or later, nuclear flares will sparkle. Although it sounds cynical, it is better to let it be in that region than ours.
    And if a major war arises there, the FSA will not be long before us.
  5. PlotnikoffDD
    PlotnikoffDD 28 October 2015 07: 56 New
    Let Liechtenstein be declared a war!
  6. Arno
    Arno 28 October 2015 08: 12 New
    It looks like China is being surrounded from all sides!

    I think China needs to seriously consider relocating its compatriots to Australia.
    Some 100 million! :)
    1. vasilkovao
      vasilkovao 28 October 2015 09: 52 New
      If China supported us more clearly on the Syrian issue, if this support were effective, then I’m sure that Russia would show a “stand” ... And it will be difficult for the Chinese, and there is a danger of applying extreme measures !!! Moreover, the Chinese attack in small units - 2 to 3 million each .. fellow
      1. Kyrgyz
        Kyrgyz 28 October 2015 21: 30 New
        Quote: vasilkovao
        If China supported us more clearly on the Syrian issue, if this support were effective

        Syria is not quite our game, we ourselves are more likely in a cooperative than the founders, but Ukraine is more likely to be our game, but playing it thinly is not an option to plow from the air, so I won’t even guess what we need military support for China now, and think so prematurely
  7. Leonid1976
    Leonid1976 28 October 2015 08: 14 New
    "Obviously not from Indonesia." Why is the author so sure of this? Indonesia has more than 10 times the population. A lot of problems. The growth of Islamic fundamentalism cannot be ruled out. There were disagreements about the islands in the past. Illegal emigration, again, as an additional annoying factor. A fleet is needed so that the potential adversary is not tempted to use the islands as a floating aircraft carrier near the Australian coast. Aviation, fleet and ground forces of the country are kept at a level sufficient for anyone! the enemy repel the desire to carry out landing operations on or near the Australian coast. And yet, yes, except the United States, no one at this stage can do it. And the United States provides a nuclear umbrella. But Australia is trading with Asia. And China has first place here. A year ago in Brisbane, Putin was important only to Russians and Ukrainians. Shook, did not shake hands ... For Australia, a trade agreement with China was much more important. A difficult decision that paved the way for Chinese investment in strategic industries. And further. Look at the scale of China. In relation to him, any actions of neighbors in our century are defense and are caused by fear. Only someone leases territory (not fighting on two fronts), but someone builds destroyers and helicopter carriers.
  8. Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat 28 October 2015 08: 26 New
    In Australia, the real "Sinophobia." I don’t know for what reason anymore, but they were really scared that China was occupying Australia, moreover, in the near future. There are constantly going on various types of television broadcasts on television, where the townsfolk are encouraged to think that China is only doing what it is "wandering" off the coast of Australia and waiting for a convenient moment to capture it. Are you crazy there, Austroloids at all, come on from idleness? Or, just so raise their "significance"?
    1. Kyrgyz
      Kyrgyz 28 October 2015 21: 33 New
      Quote: Monster_Fat
      I don’t know for what reason anymore, but there they were really scared

      The British there are newcomers and the piece is very sweet, the resources are like in Siberia and the climate has something to worry about, but so far the USA is behind them and the USA is strong enough to worry about nothing, it’s just that the latest U.S. adventures may make them and Japan safe, they will suddenly weaken.
  9. the most important
    the most important 28 October 2015 08: 40 New
    The era of peace and prosperity is relegated relentlessly. And our two main allies - the army and navy - need special attention.
  10. Army soldier2
    Army soldier2 28 October 2015 08: 53 New
    Still, the author’s conclusions are not substantiated. Australia is a sea power. It would be strange if the Australians did not develop the naval component, especially under the direct control of the godfather from Washington.
    In my opinion, the main purpose of universal landing ships is to participate in expeditionary type operations (in the terminology of the NATO strategic command in Norfolk). Actually, the forms of use of the armed forces of Australia can be either an expeditionary operation or the defense of its own coast.
    In the foreseeable future, hardly anyone will attack Australia. And for expeditionary operations in Oceania, which is nearby, there is room.
    1. Leonid1976
      Leonid1976 28 October 2015 09: 21 New
      Australia has already taken part in several peacekeeping operations in Oceania. And the helicopter carriers for this very thing.
      1. Lelek
        Lelek 28 October 2015 10: 37 New
        Quote: Leonid1976
        And the helicopter carriers for this very thing.

        Very convenient targets. bully
  11. cniza
    cniza 28 October 2015 09: 09 New
    Quote: the most important
    The era of peace and prosperity is relegated relentlessly. And our two main allies - the army and navy - need special attention.

    Truth and God forbid us to forget about it.
  12. vladimirvn
    vladimirvn 28 October 2015 10: 26 New
    Propaganda of the states hysteria. Keeps an ally in good shape.
    Quote: Monster_Fat
    There are constantly going on various types of television broadcasts on television, where the townsfolk are encouraged to think that China is only doing what it is "wandering" off the coast of Australia and waiting for a convenient moment to capture it.
  13. Dan Slav
    Dan Slav 28 October 2015 10: 43 New
    Australia and Japan are just the US backups. Without the decision of the Americans, these countries will not do anything on their own. The rattles are beautiful, but with real US fleets it’s just a little bucket. In addition, without combat experience and constant operation.
    1. Kyrgyz
      Kyrgyz 28 October 2015 21: 43 New
      Quote: Dan Slav
      Australia and Japan are just the US backups. Without the decision of the Americans, these countries will not do anything on their own. The rattles are beautiful, but with real US fleets it’s just a little bucket. In addition, without combat experience and constant operation.

      Japan was not always like that, but only a small part of its history, we also once brought in a share of the Khan, the Japanese can have their own plans and have them, perhaps they assume that they are already gone and there will soon be, there are prerequisites for this, they are technologically and economically strong demography also requires expansion; this requires an army.
  14. Belousov
    Belousov 28 October 2015 10: 49 New
    The problem is that the Chinese will tolerate this. This means that staff members by other hands (as in other things and always) will shake the situation. But if China responded once as it should, then it would be easier for them themselves in the future, they would not be pressed like that. And Australopithecus noble warriors, already conquered whole Aborigines.
  15. sinoptic
    sinoptic 28 October 2015 15: 33 New
    8 Mk41 UVP cells will be sure to be filled with Harpoon missiles

    The MK41 does not carry Harpoon missiles, and therefore does not have a trough of anti-ship functions ... yet.
  16. T-73
    T-73 28 October 2015 17: 13 New
    Sverbit at the Japanese, oh sverbit. And the states for any squeeze, except for the hunger strike, will pull them up to ANZUS.
    Quote: Belousov
    This means that staff members by other hands (as in other things and always) will shake the situation.

    Not even a question.
    Quote: sinoptic
    And Australopithecus noble warriors, already conquered whole natives

    And the kangaroo.
  17. Megatron
    Megatron 28 October 2015 17: 15 New
    The problem is that with all due respect and friendliness to China, for the time being he is not a great power. Now I will explain why. Of course, China admits a lot of angry rhetoric, but even it is "let down" mainly through newspapers, well, at most there are sometimes not big pogroms provoked by "patriotic comrades."
    Comrade C, only thoughtfully squints and is silent. For many years, this was perceived as a "hidden threat", or deliberate action, but the action is just not there. And not military, not even economic.

    And now about the “greatness” - in the story of the Senkakku Islands, how many there were, as a result, China was disdained by the United States and even Japan, how much it did not forbid to fly and enter “their” territorial waters - the Japs swam there as much as they wanted, the Americans flew , and in fact zilch. China wiped off. Now everyone has already forgotten about it. Everything will be the same here. Australia will swim, America will fly, the rest of the smaller hyenas just make faces and laugh, tease. Moreover, China does not respond with military force, it’s good, it’s not yet ready, but it doesn’t even crush its main weapon - the economy, does not twist the eggs of the states, does not deprive them of its huge market, does not discard their debentures, but both bought and bought them further and sits on them like a chicken on rotten eggs. Paradox?

    And now about our country. When our fighters, and even the Bears there, fly around the NATO borders, I won’t say that they all shit in their pants, but it’s for sure that they are very nervous (I think everyone heard about Donald Cook) and not only a riffraff such as the Baltic states and the Scandinavians (to whom any log in the Baltic Sea seems to be a Russian submarine) even the Angles at their bases, near the North Sea. And now more specifically. I think that everyone is aware that during the operation to transfer the Crimea to the Russian Federation, there were NATO ships in the Black Sea, and the alliance planned various developments, up to their military intervention and landing in the Crimea and Sevastopol. But they thought better of it in time. Why? Because they understood what they were faced with, nuclear weapons would not have been used against them by essno, but the ships would be sunk, and the landing would be thrown into the sea and destroyed, that’s the whole mess that would end, NATO would be crap all over the world, and most likely after such a slap in the face, it would dissolve itself. None of the adversaries can boast that they plowed our territorial waters or heaven with impunity, because they know that the hand on the trigger of the Russian fighter is strong, on the remote control of our air defense systems, and most importantly, the hand is on the main telephone of the country, according to which a short order will come - "destroy!".

    That is why everyone is kept away from our planes, even in the sky of Syria - both arrogant and Americans, and even vaunted Tzahalat.
  18. andrew42
    andrew42 28 October 2015 19: 04 New
    Australia is essentially "under-state." Always someone's appendage. Either the British crown, then the North American Haganate. Population. They, the Australians, on the contrary, would stay away for as long as possible, as always. It is stupid that an Australian traveled to Europe to the front of the 1st World War. But there it is clear, the Metropolis called without a chance to evade. Greyhound is fraught with China. Firstly, economic ties are big, breaking them is to cut the same Australian bough. Secondly, as the state of Australia never acted as an independent military force, the first small shock will drive them back to the island, under the bench.
    1. Sergej1972
      Sergej1972 2 November 2015 13: 19 New
      The fact of the matter is that the metropolis did not call them. She was right no longer in those days. Dominion authorities declared a call. Many rode voluntarily. Many Astralians, both then and now, have an affection for Britain, remember the relationship with the British, Scots. Like New Zealanders, by the way. By mentality, Australians and New Zealand are closer to the British than the Americans of the United States.
  19. cergey51046
    cergey51046 28 October 2015 21: 07 New
    Sorry for Australia. Looks like they don’t know how, they lost the instinct of self-preservation. I remember in my childhood the song was about how a shark (America) wanted to eat a whale (China), but for this she has a small throat. What can I say about Australia.
  20. Sargaras
    Sargaras 29 October 2015 11: 16 New
    Anecdote almost to this topic.
    The Chukchi gathered to attack China. The Chinese learned about this, came to Chukotka and asked: "You are seriously planning to attack us." Chukchi answer: Of course we are going to. "The Chinese:" But we are one and a half billion. "Chukchi:" And it is true, where are we going to bury you all. "