Australia’s close security relationship with the US is indeed logical

And given that we actually write for the present, I wonder whether the brief respite that Afghan women have recently experienced would have been possible without Western intervention? 

As events leading up to recent Western intervention in Afghanistan indicate, it is impossible to prescribe fool-proof foreign policies that always prevent conflict. In this era of economic globalisation, many nations (and cultures) have resented US influence, although the US itself was not immune from its own social problems given the decline of its manufacturing sector. History has now documented the rise of radical Islamic groups and considerable anti-US sentiment, including in Latin America.

However, I argue that the US played a positive role for good in overall terms. In a world where the concept of freer trade did prove instrumental in producing greater well-being for both rich and poor nations, albeit fuelled by debt and accompanied by substantial environmental degradation, it has been the US which has played the most important economic and security role.

Support for an important US security remains evident, especially in response to Russia and  authoritarian China.

Just as most European nations openly support the US because of security concerns towards Russia, including once neutral Sweden, most Asian nations will support US leadership because of the ambition of authoritarian China. While many Australian academics have bagged the US, few sensible scholars will openly support China’s attempt to match US prowess in terms of advanced weaponry, its attacks on foreign computer systems, or its ongoing desire to control its population.

China, with around 22 per cent of the world’s population and limited natural resources may have important national objectives, but many nations have reason to see that its ambition is checked.

As Australia is demonstrating with its support of greater US presence in northern Australia, thankfully not all nations accept the inevitable rise and fall of certain nations as if it is a given and nothing can be done. Proud nations have important normative reasons that can prevail over pure economic considerations.

Truth is that imperfect actions by the US (and Australia) will not stop struggling nations or segments of their populations looking to Western leadership to resolve their plights. As past Pew Research Center work demonstrates, even Muslim majorities respect Western leadership in terms of culture (attractiveness to others), values (demonstrated consistency), and policies (perceived inclusiveness and legitimacy).

So with the US facing its own budgetary constraints, it is reasonable to assume that close allies (including Australia) may have to play a greater security role as new problems emerge in this ultra-competitive world.

May our proud ANZAC tradition continue, and critics of our involvement with the US lift their game to describe a better alternative rather than merely bag brave liberal-minded nations acting for a better world, despite our own policy imperfections.