Posts
AUSTRALIA RECALLS ALL AMBASSADORS (TEMPORARILY)
Mr.
R.A., a regular reader here, share this story, and it's significant
enough I need to talk about it. Australia's Foreign Minister, Ms. Julie
Bishop, has recalled all Australian Ambassadors to that country -
temporarily it is to be stressed - for a conference in Australia of all
senior Australian diplomats for a foreign policy "reset", or, at least,
that's what were being told according to this article by Amy Remeikis in
The Sydney Morning Herald:
There's
the usual "all is well" explanation, including, of course, the
obligatory remarks about how all this is being brought about by the
Trump Administration and Mr. Trump's prior remarks about NATO, redoing
security and trade deals like TPP, and the growing China problem in the
South China Sea. One hundred and thirteen high diplomatic officials will
meet with Prime Minister Turnbull in Canberra:
In an Australian-first step, 113 heads of mission - which includes the nation's ambassadors, high commissioners and consuls-general - will return for three days next month, as the government looks to reset how Australia navigates its foreign, trade and development policies on the global stage.Every head of mission, with the exception of a few whose terms are about to expire, will meet in Canberra for a two-day meeting with Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, Ms Bishop and Trade Minister Steven Ciobo, as well as a representative from Labor, to contribute to the long-awaited Foreign Policy White Paper, due to be delivered later this year.
Doubtless, all this is true: Australia will
need to craft a security and trade strategy for the near-to-mid-term
future. But then there's this little bit of additional "explanation":
While other G20 nations, including the United States, Britain, China and Germany have established annual meetings of their diplomatic corps, Australia has traditionally held international meetings, flying Canberra-based staff to designated regional meeting points.That approach has drawn criticism, most recently over a trip 23 DFAT staff made to Paris in September last year for a conference on saving money that subsequently cost taxpayers $215,000.Meetings usually held overseas have now been cancelled, saving about $400,000, which has been reallocated to the heads of mission meeting.
In other words, we have a "nothing to see here, move along" explanation; it's all being done to save taxpayer money.
However,
I cannot help but agree with the thoughts Mr. R.A. expressed in his
email to me, and indulge and expand upon them in the high octane
speculation of the day, for the implications of such a
behind-closed-doors meeting of all Australian senior diplomats,
face-to-face, means also that one is not subject to electronic
communications, and to the prospects of penetration via hacking or other
means of electronic eavesdropping. If one wants to communicate serious
information in as secure a manner as possible, and formulate some sort
of response to it, this would be the means of doing so.
Mr.
R.A. speculates, and I agree with him, that during their meeting, Vice
President Pence may have told Foreign Minister Bishop something truly
significant, and highly secret (or, we may also speculate, vice versa),
and that a large adjustment to Australian foreign policy is therefore
necessary. And that means it has to be of significant magnitude. The
question is, what is that significant?
Here
I suspect there are two possibilities, and they may indeed overlap. The
first, and more mundane matter, is the recent decision and discussion
within the United Kingdom about revivifying the British Commonwealth, of
which Australia is easily the most important Pacific member. Those
discussions, you'll recall, also involve the idea of making the United
States an associate member. If such were to occur, it would be a
restructuring of the Anglo-sphere, "the Anglo-American Establishment",
documented by American history and geopolitics professor Carroll Quigley
in his book by the same name, in fulfillment of the dreams of Cecil
Rhodes. In this respect, Australian foreign policy would need a
significant reset, especially in the wake of the BREXIT vote. These
realignments will also dramatically impact the "China problem" and how
the U.K., Australia, the wider Commonwealth, and the USA, deal with it.
The
second possibility for such a meeting, and the necessity of
communicating in complete security, would be the strange goings-on in
Antarctica, and the clear indication that something of major
significance is either occurring in the polar continent, or that
something of major significance has been discovered there, perhaps
impinging upon human history, perhaps involving ancient high
technologies and civilizations, perhaps involving "ET," perhaps
involving major climate data, or perhaps even some combination of all of
them.
Time of course will tell, but
for Australia to "break" with its standard foreign policy operating
procedure and summon such a meeting means that something truly
significant is afoot, and one may be certain that while the forthcoming
"White Paper" may not completely disclose whatever it is, it is bound to
give some hint.
