{"id":8279,"date":"2022-04-28T17:26:25","date_gmt":"2022-04-28T14:26:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/?p=8279"},"modified":"2022-04-28T17:26:29","modified_gmt":"2022-04-28T14:26:29","slug":"the-solomon-islands-are-the-new-ukraine-between-china-and-australia-west","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/?p=8279","title":{"rendered":"The Solomon Islands are the “new Ukraine”, between China and Australia (West)"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Australia, through its Secretary of Defense Peter Dutton, has said that China can not be allowed to set up naval bases on the Solomon Islands, “on the doorstep” of Australia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Earlier, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison described the use of the agreement as a “red line” to extend the Chinese military footprint in the region, saying that it included the United States in addition to New Zealand, as well as governments in small island countries such as Pakistan. New Guinea and the Fiji Islands.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Australian Deputy Prime Minister Joyce Barnaby has gone one step further, saying the Solomon Islands are “putting their sovereignty at risk” with the deal. A statement that leaves open the possibility that this threat comes from the Chinese, but without ruling out the Australians\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Australian opposition is already sharply critical of the Morrison government, accusing it of failing to stem the tide. As a result, the entire political world views the Chinese agreement with the Solomon Islands negatively, and a question of intelligence failure arises.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

What caused the mobilization of the Australians?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Already, the Australian opposition is pointing out the mistake of “reducing funding for the environment” with all that that may imply. This Australian failure is automatically a testament to the Chinese ‘s ability to conduct their affairs in complete secrecy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to information, last March, the head of the Solomon Islands Police, Anthony Wicky, signed an agreement with the Ministry of Public Order of China, to ensure order on the islands and protect the lives of their citizens!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Chinese know-how in the field alone would be “funny” from a western perspective. But a provision in the agreement rang the alarm bell at the strategic level. With the consent of the Solomon Islands government, Chinese ships will be able to charter in their ports. And since the wording is general, these ships could belong to the Chinese Navy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Typically, the agreement does not mention the creation of a military base. Nor does it rule it out, and it is not known whether or not there is a secret section in it. The Chinese intentions are considered suspicious in Australia by definition. Hence the mobilization.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In May 2021, the Chinese signed an agreement with the Pacific island nation of Kiribati to upgrade a two-kilometer runway to the isolated island of Canton (a coral atoll between Asia and the Americas) 3,000 miles southwest of upgrading infrastructure in the fields of transport and tourism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The geopolitical dimension<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Getting Chinese warships to be able to dock 7,731 kilometers from mainland China and just 3,280 miles from Australia is automatically a serious national security issue for Australians. They have every reason to view the development as a prelude to the creation of a Chinese naval base and to react before the case takes on irreversible momentum.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Chinese, moreover, were always looking for advanced naval bases that would allow them to maintain warships that would protect trade routes, while at the same time being outside a strategically unfavorable geographical position (Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, Philippines) which limits China’s access to the high seas and, at least in theory, makes it vulnerable to a possible naval blockade.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

An example is the Guadar base in Pakistan, next to the entrance to the Gulf, on the street promoting Chinese products in Western markets. In addition, they have secured their presence in East Africa, with a significant base in Djibouti, the strait that separates the Gulf of Aden from the Red Sea, which controls access to the Suez Canal and from there to Europe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A potential security issue also arises for Papua New Guinea, where last February the American energy giant ExxonMobil signed an agreement for the development of the P\u2019nyang field (there are other similar ones) with an estimated content of 12+ trillion cubic meters of natural energy. It should be recalled that until October 2021, Australia had an agreement with Papua New Guinea, on the territory of which an immigration detention center had been set up, with the aim of settling in Australia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

The Australian argument<\/strong> and the new hot spot on the planet<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

What connects the candidate to a new “hot spot” on a planet that is already in serious turmoil is the Australians’ argument about whether or not the Chinese have the right to set up a naval base “on the doorstep” of Australia. This is similar to the formulation of a doctrine similar to the “Monroe Doctrine” of the USA (1823), which forbade the access (creation of colonies) and strategic exploitation of the Western Hemisphere by anyone other than the Americans and Europeans!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And because the geography of the Pacific region is specific, it is considered extremely unlikely that Japan will not “understand” the Australian position. The signing of the Anglo-Saxon agreement AUKUS, de facto involves the USA and Britain in the case. So the reports of Australian government officials are at least plausible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But if the – strategically understood – argument of the Australians is accepted, a clear question arises for the American-NATO argument in the issue of Ukraine! Having inherently rich destabilizing potential, it is a candidate hot spot that needs systematic monitoring.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It would be interesting to see the position of those who supported “Ukraine’s right to join NATO if it so wishes”. Do not the Solomon Islands have a similar right? As the signatory has argued, the more this right must be understood, the more understandable is the right of countries that feel threatened by a development to take measures of self-protection. The distances of course are different in the Pacific from Europe. Also in the case of the Solomon Islands, the one who expresses security concerns through the involvement of a third party is a Western nation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

The benefit of China<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The question that arises is whether in Beijing’s reasoning there is indeed the parameter Ukraine. In other words, if this is a move that aims to help Moscow diplomatically, although it clearly tries to put on the table issues related to Chinese national security. That is, it is more likely that China will take advantage of the current situation and the Western communication narrative.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The complexity of today’s world exposes the unpredictability of those who do not understand it in depth and choose to identify indiscriminately with one side or the other of a conflict, without first calculating cynically and distancing issues that arise in the national interests of their own country.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The case of the Solomon Islands is also proof that a small country can be found in the eye of the storm. In the case of Pacific archipelagos, endemic corruption facilitates access to strategically motivated countries. Not that this parameter is missing from the European area, zero of Ukraine excluded. If it does not concern her more than other countries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, in both cases, in the “back” of small countries, scenarios will be played regarding the global geostrategic competition of the powerful. Scenarios that can destroy them. The case of Ukraine gives an idea of \u200b\u200bwhat their fate may be.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Australia, through its Secretary of Defense Peter Dutton, has said that China can not be allowed to set up naval bases on the Solomon…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[833,3],"tags":[404,161,1490,2954,3452,3451],"class_list":["post-8279","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-australia-geopolitical-issues","category-geopolitical","tag-australia","tag-china","tag-geopolitics","tag-new-caledonia","tag-polynesia","tag-salomon-islands"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8279","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=8279"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8279\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8283,"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8279\/revisions\/8283"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=8279"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=8279"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=8279"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}