Australia's Defence Policy Explained | Utopia
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 ноя 2023
- SUBSCRIBE: bit.ly/3RnrsXU
With a major defence white paper about to be launched Jim & Rhonda ask Tony for help.
Season 3 Episode 7: On The Defence
Watch Seasons 1-4 of Utopia on
Stan: bit.ly/UtopiaStan
Netflix: bit.ly/UtopiaNetflix
Buy Seasons 1-4 of Utopia
JB Hi-Fi: bit.ly/3LJ5njV
iTunes: apple.co/3VG9dPD
Google Play: bit.ly/3pinZ2O
Follow Working Dog on Social
Facebook: / workingdogprod
Instagram: / workingdogprod
Twitter: / workingdogprod
Working Dog Website: workingdog.com
Set inside the offices of the “Nation Building Authority”, a federal government organisation responsible for overseeing major infrastructure projects, Utopia explores that moment when bureaucracy and grand dreams collide.
Starring Rob Sitch, Celia Pacquola, Dave Lawson, Kitty Flanagan, Anthony 'Lehmo' Lehmann, Luke McGregor, Dilruk Jayasinha, Nina Oyama.
#Utopia #WorkingDogProductions 
Приколы
Watch Seasons 1-5 of Utopia on ABC iview: bit.ly/44G38Gl
Watch Seasons 1-4 of Utopia:
Stan: bit.ly/UtopiaStan
Netflix: bit.ly/UtopiaNetflix
And for those of us in the usa?? Netflix called it dreamland and says it is unavailable
Classic. 😅😂🤣
Hmm, it's not as if some other country, like one in Eastern Europe, is currently being invaded by it's largest trading partner.
There’s a reason Netflix doesn’t want Americans to watch it…
@@causeneffect8563Nothing to do with that, all films and TV shows on Netflix are location restricted. It costs Netflix extra money to show things worldwide.
"Shall we use the nod system?"😂
Funny as. Where can i watch ?
Yeah... reality is, China would've conquered Australia if it had been allowed to.
It's a brotherhood of sorts.
Peace through power!
Ah politics where the left hand doesn't know what the right hands doing
$30 billion is a lot of boomerangs.
mate, they're pretty nice boomerangs.
About 150,000,000 good quality boomerangs
Hey! Not just boomerangs, they also export kangaroo steaks
Some of that goes towards training Kangaroos to swim as well 🦘 🪃
@@drex5160 and wombat sappers
"The Americans are doing a trillion... That's a thousand billion... We're saving a lot of money"
Lmfao facts
The Aussies are also MUCH closer. If they had an ocean between them and China that is so large, that from a certain point of view in space, the Earth looks like a water world that does not have dry land. I'm sure they'd have to spend a trillion too!
luckys🤬
Absolutely, we’re very lucky indeed. United States is currently 34 trillion in debt and Australia is worth 18 trillion.
Protecting trade ❌️
Power projection ✅️
I have to watch more Australian comedy 😂, this is hilarious.🤣
Exceptional 😅
Its funny cos it is true. It is also scarey because it is true
I don't know this show, but I was a fan of Kath & Kim.
Famous for lacronic wit. Not sure what lacronic actually means but it seems that it's something like that.
Try Mr Inbetween
I've just discovered this show on YT shorts but it's giving me "Australian Yes (Prime) Minister" vibes 😂
Utopia and The Hollow Men 👌
Right!!? 🤣
That is the nature of bureaucracy.
Yes minister had better timing
It's more like Twenty Twelve or W1A in the way it is shot and delivered but yeah it's about the inner workings of bureaucracies so similar to Yes, Minister or The Thick of It. Very different vibes to the latter 2 though. But I'd recommend them all!
"I think someone should diversify their trade partners."
"Nod when this sounds good"
Do you know where Australia is? 😂😂😂😂
@@Cnupoc Jeah, it's convenient but i'm a German and we had a similar problem with russian Gas.
@@Harrington2323 and yet you still buy it through Turkey, Hungary and shady companies in Eastern Europe.
There’s hella countries in Asia besides China. Plenty of options to diversify with.
@@Harrington2323 more like you destroyed your access to cheap gas because america wanted too.
Im reading every single comment here with an australian accent, and it's an amazing experience
Yeah, nah, "maite"... 😂
Fair dinkum! 😂
I love the nod system, that cracked me up. “I’ll just name one and you nod.”
even tho is this hilarious:
International relations is defined by: Friends today, possible enemies tomorrow
So in the eventuality that they become your enemies, you want to protect the trade routes you have with… your enemies?
if its beneficial then yes.
@@TsunamiNR No with allies you reach through the very same trade routes.
Vice-versa, for that matter.
@@TsunamiNR
They also trade with
Taiwan
Indonesia
The Philippines
It's everyone and if China has a stronger hold of Asia they have more leverage, more leverage means less favorable trades
Even the Chinese protect themselves from themselves. I worked for an electronics firm with factories in China who made sure all their important servers were located in Hong Kong simply so they'd be slightly out of the grasp of the party.
Correction: the Chinese people need to protect themselves from the CCP. Yes, from other Chinese people too, but to a lesser, more normal degree. What's not normal there is their government.
Damn I think it didn't work
That worked out well for them now, I'll bet.
Oh i´m sorry buddy child labor is horrible
owned
Protecting themselves from their biggest trade partner becoming their only trade partner or at least getting to dictate all their trade with others is a pretty important interest.
The joke was about censorship
You totally misunderstood the joke but what do you expect from Chinese bots
Yep
Chinese bot? He defended military budget AGAINST china.@@drscopeify
@@user-ph6tg6ol1v I guess a longer clip might give more context, but I just watched _this_ clip and the joke was not about censorship.
Keep your friends close , but keep your enemies closer.
And sometimes protect your enemies so you can be close to them.
Of course America still have benefits from that protection
US:"We gotta ditch these subs quickly, the Aussies are onto us"
UK:"Precisely"
Australia:"I'm standing right here"
Haha well they have also never had nuclear subs. So ya know either way its a nice trade off😅
@@tiredanddepressedno it is not lol. Such a waste for the aussies
😂
@@jaesjmes5498how is it a waste for the Aussies? The U.S. and UK are teaching Australia how to build and maintain their own nuclear powered submarines, creating a multi billion dollar per year industry in Australia that simply didn’t exist before. Australia will get a fleet of submarines with truly global reach that are light years ahead of anything in the PLA Navy, and the U.S. is even taking all of the nuclear waste that will be generated by Australias submarines (spent fuel rods). Sounds like a win win for Australia.
@@willymac5036 that's more government spending... Where's that money going to come from?
Well, looking at the trading going on before WWII in Europe and you get a picture of why your trading partner might not be your friend.
Even using a more modern example, Ukraine's economy was previously heavily dependent on trade with Russia.
Obviously but he isn’t saying China is our friend, he is saying why are we protecting our trade with them from them.
I think the answer would be “protecting your capabilities for war and / or to change trade partners” but that wouldn’t be a funny joke I guess 😅
Germans were taken to R&D by the British military and shown the newest British tanks before the war. Yeah maybe the US keeping everything secret these days makes more sense.
you never know when they might decide that one of your northern islands suddenly lies within their "territorial waters".
When a country is YOUR major trading partner but not the other way around, you might want to watch your back...
@@tukankibar4917 It does make sense though, and is not even that funny if you know what they are talking about. China way of doing things is to slowly take over/colonize company/territory. Its a slow advancing machine taking everything, but a useful machine for oothers nonetheless. The real question wouldnt be "why are they spending so much on seemingly useless defense" but more "why are they relying on an enemy" and the answer is money. Like always. Its like saying "if we trade with China, why dont we let them own every trading boats we have". Cause we dont want to let them have this kind of power.
Makes perfect sense. You strike a barging with the devil, not looking over your shoulder is the last thing you want
Hardly. If China wanted to stop the trade with Australia, they wouldn't send an army, they'd simply stop trading.
china is the devil?? lmao
What's a 'barging'?
@@gepmrkauto corrected bargain
@@gepmrkbargain
Not just trade routes, but if they get aggressive, you have to defend yourself.
And in 1938 the United Kingdom's largest trading partner was Germany.
Source?
Weird comparison because Australia is not trying to maintain dominion over Asia like the UK was trying to maintain dominion over Europe (and the world).
@@phillipp5538yeah you tell em! Those bastards dominating the world has a lot to do with 1938 trade with Germany right before ww2. You clever chap.
Exactly 😂.
@@phillipp5538it's even wielder that you seem to have an issue with yhe UK doing that 100 years ago, but not with China doing it today, Mr Ten Cent.
All fun and games until the guy buying milk decides he wants the whole cow for free
That's a very succinct way of putting it
Especially when the milk buyer has been saying for decades that he is the supreme leader of humanity, Earth and his people and that all other races are inferior to his kind and that he would like to see all of the other races enslaved and serving his kind.
Yet we still eat out of his hand metaphorically speaking and smile while doing it. This country (Australia) makes me sick with its hypocracy.
We sell China most of their Uranium, Coal, Copper and Iron, they literally do not mine Iron anymore because they mined all theirs up and their industry is too unsafe to be successful.
Yet we won't process the materials here in Australia or build nuclear reactors to utilise our natural resources (Uranium)
As a now ex dairy farmer, they already own the industry here :s
Yeah all fun until the guy selling the milk start raising the price to make more profit and gets in cahoots with the other owners of the milk so everyone raises the prices
@@hugomendoza7292 milk aint free
As everybody has said trade partner does not equal friend. Those trade routes can easily be weaponized and that trade partner could cut off the other 70% of trade if it took over the routes.
Precisely
Yeah exactly, just look at what the U.S does.
Too bad Australia is America's bitch.
Free Julian Assange
“Shall we use the nod system?” goes hard 💀😂😂😂
It's odd that it isn't more.
freedom to trade with China.... or if needed swap them with someone else. Top trading partner could mean 50%, others 10%,20%30% partners you bypass china.
@@SnipGExactly. This short is funny but the crucial point here is that you can trade with anyone and anything until your trade routes are controlled by China and then you can trade with anyone and anything that China let's you.
you guys are dumber than the generals, just listen to youselves@@keshavagarwal6244
@@keshavagarwal6244 or China decides charge you more now that they control your trade
@keshavagarwal6244 no you cant trade with anyone because no one else produces nearly as much or china or produces jalf of what china does. Also china is the biggest buyer of raw materials so your comment is just plain wrong
Making sure your trade partner doesn't take advantage of your perceived weakness is a worthwhile expense.
Its a rediculously stupid expense. You do understand that trade profits go both ways right?
Yeah lol, honestly we as australians are prentending to be a north american nation when we are square in asia. Time to accept that fact and get closer ties with indonesia, vietnam, malayasia etc instead of just blindly following the americans and British that would abandon us the second shit gets real here like the uk did in ww2 @inoshikachokonoyarobakayar2493
Making sure the ants are busy with routine.
@@jern30829q man, you edited this?
@jern30829q sure bro left and abandoned. Lol learn history
not trade routes,
the hegemony of "rules based, dollar printing military order"
The Indo-Pacific theatre provides many excellent examples of the term ‘frenemy’. This is just one.
Here's the thing. You're not trading because of altruism. It is a selfish agreement. The larger your economy relies on another country, the greater the influence that country has over you.
To be clear, that's how China sees things. China thinks that trading with other countries is just another way of preying on those countries.
The west thinks trade is a way of making friends.
Who is correct? I don't know, but you'd be foolish to trust someone when trade is, to them, another way of waging war.
The conversation here is that it's mutually profitable to trade with China, so why do you need to defend your trade from China when they also benefit from that trade. And even then, china doesn't need to fight to prevent Chinese trade with Australia, they just need to stop trading making the entire idea moot.
@@christophernoneya4635 I understand the point discussed in the video. I also know the source material is meant to be satirical and humorous in nature. I'm just stating that when you are trading with an unfriendly partner, the reason you'd want to project strength is to avoid a situation where you loose the control you have. by trading with china, you've given china influence over you. the only way to stop that is to stop trading as you suggest. the issue with that is that your economy relies on that trade to some extent and if the only card you have to play is to stop trading, then you only have the option to loose the economic boost if you need to respond. as long as the cost of the navy is bellow the economic potential boost of the trade, then it's not a bad way to spend the money. there's also the fact that the other trade routes australia has could be threatened by australia's inability to control it's own waters.
Now, I have no idea if the amounts discussed in this video are relevant or if like so many other things from these guys, its completely ridiculous. I just think the making fun of defensive spending to protect your trade route from your trading partner misses the reality of international diplomacy.
All countries rely on other countries this is a beyond stupid take 😂😂
@alexengel6240 .... no one said anything about countries not relying on other countries. Clarify why you think my comment is beyond stupid.
The protection isn't for the trade with china, it's for you being able to trade with anyone else as well.
It's also for the safety of literally any ship in those waters, China discriminates against erbody
Also to protect the terms of trade in our own interests the more one party controls of the trade the worse terms the other gets.
No it's to prop up the US military complex. Australia could abolish its military and be just fine.
@@abebuckingham8198 yeah because china isn't known for trying to pressure countries with smaller naval capacities into accepting ridiculous and illegal demands.....
@@abebuckingham8198BOT😂😂
Germany and Britain were the number one trading partners with each other in 1914.
The FUCKING nod system! Beautiful 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
It's funny how inaccurate yet accurate this is
I mean same could be said about China
The Chinese largest trading partner is... The USA
@warbrain1053 no its not. Mexico is #1. Canada is # 2. Then China
@@Matt-mt2vi i am talking about china. China is trying to protect their trade with the USA, south Korea, Japan, Taiwan (their 4 largest trading partners in order) from USA, south korea, japan and taiwan
@@Matt-mt2vi also you are just wrong china IS IN FACT our biggest trade partner. The info is public, why would you say something so wrong with such confidence
@noemad5391 Maybe you ask yourself the same question. The reply was directed at the China/US comment. It was not about AUS. Neither China nor the US have each other as #1. ASEAN for China and Mexico for the US.
It may definitely seem odd, but it's 100% the case. Weaponised economics is no joke.
It kind of is a total joke, which is why this is such a great bit. The reason this is happening is because Australia is helping US to keep China on their toes.
@@AmirGTR China tries to colonize everyone including australia by making them dependent on their trade, and expanding their influence into territories of other indopacific countries.
@@AmirGTRYou do understand that if the person you are trading with controls your trade routes... They pretty much own your economy...
They can either decide to stop trading with you to shut down your economy or they can decide you can't trade with anyone but them to force prices... Among other options...
@@AmirGTR 1841 the British occupied Hong Kong and flooded China with opium to make them more compliant and force them to trade with British empire.
Commadore Perry showed up in Tokyo bay in 1853, flopped his big cannon out and said "Japan is open for trade"
Europe's colonization of the planet stemmed directly from the conquering of Constantinople and the embargo on spices the Muslim world put on Christian Europe. Literally the food was so bland in Europe they went on a world wide conquering spree to acquire spices.
Like, fuck religion. All the crusades were about opening up the trade routes into Asia.
Alexander the great conquered the trade routes from Macedonia all the way past the Indus river where he died of malaria.
So yeah, you want to defend your trade routes from the people who will shoot you for saying you don't want to trade with them.
This isn't in theory either, China already drive down Australian prices on the regular, putting a lot of pressure on exporters.
I love the Ozzies they're as dry as we are in the old country😂❤
For 30B they should have a pretty large emu army. Considering their human soldiers were never a match…
Replace the emus with cassowaries and now we're talking
"Have major trading partners ever gone to war, despite their high trade volume, when there's been a perceived power imbalance? Yes? Oh, carry on then."
You're completely missing the point. Not once did he argue against being prepared, but if you're so concerned about war with China then being so overprotective of those trade routes doesn't make sense. I doubt we'll be doing much trade once the missles start launching. In reality, the real value of these 'trade' routes is the advantage they offer when it comes to staging an invasion.
You're missing the point. The attempted conclusion of the clip is that the defense spending is wasted given this scenario, and it isn't.
@@Alex-fy7dfmore like America has a problem with china and pulls england and australia with them. Aus needs a navy because they expect amer to pick a fight
@@Alex-fy7dfwhy would we ever go to war with china. The US hasn't won a war against anyone since WW2, why would Australia do any better
Australia will never get invaded so it's a huge waste to protect trade routes. Australia does not need defenders, they need invasion capabilities and a strong Air Force.
He just doesn't know how war actually works🎉
They also spent 20 years to replace the tali with the ban
This is like Stalin explaining the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact.
I bet that pact was the beginning of a strong and healthy friendship that lasted decades and ensured that the parties would not ever ever go to war with each other.
Why is everyone always acting like the other side is literally Hitler?
Most of the time, the other side isn't literally Hitler.
@@lightworker2956 I don't get your point: I named Stalin, Molotov and Ribbentrop; _literally_ the only person naming Hitler is you. Care to explain your point?
I love how shows make very complicated issues look incredibly simple.
Complicated? Australia sells coal, uranium and lithium in big quantities to china and India. What's complicated about that?
@@losfogo7149 securing trade routes is, in itself, complicated. factor in the pirates operating in asian waters, and international politics and its even more complicated. logistics is not easy.
that's why I appreciate how they can simplify complex issues to get a laugh.
@@bobrice5159 lol what? Australia made statements saying they need to secure trade routes from Chinese interest in the SCS to...deliver goods to china?
Actually, like a lot of satire, it's funny because it's true
@@losfogo7149 secure trade routes to trade with China. Yeah that takes logistics which is complicated.
This should get shared among all Australians. 👍
It's a cute skit, but it ignores (or probably, the writers are not knowledgeable enough to realize) what would happen if China was to actually gain full control of all the territories and waters it is trying to take control of.
@@johnmohanmusic The intention here is displaying "the irony"? - What 'you're on about' is beyond your ability to DO anything about.
But seeing as you brought it up:- Whats really going on here is logistics; China's looking for a new mediaton distributor, thats more adaptable to multi-layered economics than the US can even entertain being anymore - and the yanks are pissed because they know what its like to be at this crossroad.
The yanks are angry at themselves; and Australia's problem is the Parliment isn't sure it can do it, to take that step. Yet have India, Indonesia, Japan and the Philippines, rushing to bolster that readiness. The only reason why China isn't cutting those ironclad deals is likely because its not willing to put its long term partner (Australia) in a bad situation.
no it shouldnt because the clip is retarded. Think if you are going to meet a drug dealer to buy some coke. The dealer(who is an untrustworthy criminal) could just take your money and not give you the promised product. Wouldnt you want to carry some self protection? That’s the exact scenario here.
They don't want their voices on record.😂😂😂
Glad to see that the comments here show a better understanding of defense policy than the creators of this video.
Indeed. I feel a lot better after reading a few of the comments.
It’s almost like it’s a comedy
@@adamatch9624indeed, but with the poor state of comedy nowadays, you can tell a lot about what the creators really think based on what they want you to laugh at.
It is comedy that criticizes Australia's defend policy, it doesn't satirize this idiot NBa staff guy. A comedy that failed basically. @@adamatch9624
@@adamatch9624 The purpose of this video is to ridicule. If you don't see its political agenda I'm afraid I can't help you.
Australians talking about spending too much on their military while barely having a functioning one is hilarious
Seriously lol
No more hilarious than the US deciding it needs to spend more when it already spends more than the next 10 countries combined (most of which are allies)🙄
@@methos-ey9nflol where the reason other countries don’t have to spend as much on their own military. If America pulled out of Europe they would immediately have to bump up their own military budgets😂
@@methos-ey9nfChina is aggressively building up its military and they’re not doing it for nothing
They seek to challenge us as the world leader economically and military and we shouldn’t be taking their challenge as joke
Which is what this show literally takes it as
tbf the Australian military hasn’t done any good since WW2, you can say the same of pretty much every other western country
This is brilliant! They should do America's Military budget next
This never gets old. Such genius writing/satire.
It's not satire. It's a documentary. And not a mockumentary or spoof either.
Except it's not. The point is insanely stupid. If your biggest trading partner can control all seas around you, they literally have you by the balls. You have no leverage. They dictate all terms.
Your trading partner is the number 1 threat because they want your stuff already
Also the more powerful their position the lower the selling price of those resources they buy.
Yeah and guess what? They fucking BUY IT! Why on Earth would you invade a country for its resources instead of just buying it at the market rate?
Honestly, people like you are the worst because you're so convinced in your obviously wrong ideas. I bet you're the same kind of person who thinks the US invades countries for their oil.
except australias sole output is sheep and china doesn’t really need sheep
@@drdeesnutts48 And if they're powerful and bold enough your selling price goes to 0 once you get annexed.
@@Chicky_Lumps so be a slave to usa ?.
Russia was also no 1 energy supplier for EU
And the EU cut off that supply and are suffering because of it.
@rvllctt871 the worst part of it is that they didn't even cut off Russian oil now they are just buying Russian oil from India at a higher price
Russia was only #1 for a few countries, most of Southern and western Europe had totally different providers such as France using Nuclear and UK using their own north sea oil/gas and low countries and Scandinavia using Norway gas and Southern Europe like Spain, Italy using gas from Africa and SE Europe using gas from Turkmenistan.
Keep your friends close and your enemies closer!
Keep your friends close and your enemies closer
While I am mostly a pacifist when it comes to global politics, it isn't unusual at all. As long as the military cost of seizing the assets is higher than the cost of simply purchasing them then peace is maintained. If it becomes more economically feasible to simply seize the assets then that will become a real consideration.
Yeah, no. If China just captured Australian cargo, then Australia would obviously stop trading with them, along with all of their allies. Almost every country is dependent on import, and a global embargo would never be worth the benefit of capturing the cargo once. Unless China is planning on pulling another Pacific Theatre, they're going to keep trading.
No it wouldn't, since literally half the world would stop trading with China which would send their whole economy into the gutter...because China mostly exports to bring money in
@@HarshPatel-zw7yz in 1841 the british empire occupied Hong Kong, and did so for nearly a century and a half.
Why?
Because they wanted to monopolize and control the silk and spice trade coming out of China. Who was already their trading partner.
China sure as shit hasn't forgotten that. Both the injustice.... and its value.
Riches are bought cheaply from the unarmed.
Capturing the cargo? How small you think, my friend. @@HarshPatel-zw7yz
@@HarshPatel-zw7yz that is a part of the "cost" when the consideration is made. Is it worth burning the relationship of our trade partner to get this instance of cargo for free?
My social credit score is up by 13% after clicking the like button on this video
😂
We have the same social credit scores in the west dude … it’s called credit ratings … and now “cancellations” 😅
@@Rill-sn8nz how to increase this "credit ratings" ?
@@Rill-sn8nz
Wow, I didn't know western financial credit ratings took note of your political allegiance and party loyalty!
@@fds7476I didn’t know the Chinese one did, I thought it was mostly about visiting parents and not being drunk in public
Never heard of this series, but I'm sold
Robbie!
Being out of the country for twenty-five years, I haven't seen much of Sitch
You know who also used this method? Gangsters! It's called extortion
This politician needs to read up on the collapse of the Dutch colonial empire.
TLDR; They got comfortable with status quo and did not develop a military to protect their ludicrously profitable merchant fleet. Their ally and biggest trade partner were the British, who had a gigantic navy. The Brits decided that dutch trade profits looked nice and took it. All of it.
The Dutch should have seen that coming. They'd already lost New Amsterdam to the British.
Source? I kind of feel like you're making that up.
Also, what time period are you referring to exactly? The Dutch lost the first Dutch-Anglo war, but were only forced to make minor concessions. That war really can't be described as "the British took all the Dutch trade profits."
Then the Dutch won the second and third Anglo-Dutch wars.
Sure, the British decisively won the fourth war against the Dutch, but that was the fourth war. At that point the Dutch were well aware of the concept of "make military ships", having fought three previous wars against the British (not to mention fighting wars against other countries).
Britain just had much better fundamentals than The Netherlands, and I'm saying that as a Dutch person. You can't just explain away every loss as "those idiots forgot to build a military" -- sometimes the enemy just has more territory and more resources and more population than you.
Similarly, sure Australia can spend a ton of money on a navy, but in a China vs Australia war without the US, Australia still loses. Whereas in a China vs Australia + US war, Australia + US still win, even if Australia would cut its military budget in half.
The american revolutionary war for starters. The only reason america won its independence was the british were too preoccupied looting dutch colonies. There is no need to cite sources that are readily available in any encyclopedia, its common knowledge.
Ay man shit is funny, but the great power pissing contest between the two great powers and their allies is also serious bidness
3 words, military-industrial complex
Only odd if you ignore exactly how China operates.. but whatever.
Without the trade with China, Australia would be worth 0
poisoning usa with fentanyl by controlling the mexican cartels and usa keepin open borders - freaking brilliant
China is opposing America's interests. Australia sides with America, and Australia protects US strategic interests. So, China and Australia are butting heads
i think the reason people say it’s odd or whatever is because China is also our biggest trade partner and we are pretty reliant on them importing our raw materials (which to me is an even bigger reason to consider China our biggest threat and plan accordingly).
Without China buying our minerals there never would have been a mining boom
To answer his question: When it comes to geopolitics, there are no forever-allies only temporarily aligned interests. Never assume a potential threat will play by the same moral rules you follow. What maintains peace is the projection that the consequences of war will be too costly.
The CCP is constantly pushing to see how far it can get away with things: Friendly face asking investment, Wolf Warrior toward any criticism.
You can use that logic with America too. Yes, we align right now but we don't actually share the same strategic values. The best course of action is the be independent.
@@corneliusmaze-eye2459 I'd say the US treats Australia far worse. How many wars of aggression has China roped Australia into just to have your kids sent back in body bags?
Funny... when was the last time China invaded a country? Here's a hint 1979... we would have more to fear from America. If they wanted to they would invade us cos they have invaded 68 countries but did not declare war on all of them.
@@corneliusmaze-eye2459nah,USA far better than china
Genocidal western countries like USA, and all others whose big industries are mainly weapons see that China is becoming better than them in everything, people are happier and life are becoming better there.
Western media and brainwashed people are pushing more and more for making China a threat so they can start a war against them sadly.
China want peace but west always want war because they love money so much
General MacArthur said the greatest source of conflict is unprotected wealth.
Nice to see Ross from Friends still getting work. 😂 Epic nodding.
So the solution this show proposes is “Don’t worry about China’s aggressive military build up. I’m sure they’re just doing it for fun.”
That’s literally what British and France did in the 1930’s and that didn’t work out too well for them
Japan was Australia’s second largest trading partner prior to WWII…
Strength is the ultimate deterrent.
I miss this show.
This guy can’t be this un-nuanced? There was a huge huge issue a few years back about China attempting to coerce Australia to secure its imports of raw materials. Trading partners, yes: China relies on Australia for raw materials. Meanwhile: public sentiment against the important ion of Chinese goods which is undercutting Australian goods is an issue. China did not like it when Australia tried to impoliment high tariffs on imports to give its local economy some breathing room (something European nations do routinely! Every decade milk producers in France cut off cheap imports for a certain time to secure the domestic market). Meanwhile: Australia was attempting to begin selling their raw materials elsewhere: opening up their export market because of demand. It did not go over well with China. Besides them bullying weaker nations in the region, and the strategic importance of Australia as a large nation in the region… Yes: China is their biggest trading partner. More because of their location and scale of their economies than of choice: but China is also far from being malignant in the region. It’s also true that shipping lane security is not entirely a question of nation v. Nation. If you don’t want the U.S. on your front port (pun intended); then you have to secure your shipping lanes yourself: because seriously that’s what the majority of the United States Navy is doing these days: securing marine trade for the majority of the world.
This guy is of course a character in a fictional comedy so you could certainly interpret his lack of nuance as a joke however I don't think that's what was intended in this scene.
I think the joke is itself quite nuanced; we (Australians) realise the necessity for protecting our interests from China but due to diplomacy and politics we were -(particularly at the time this was made about 9 years ago)- causing us to walk this bizarre line of pretending as though we weren't protecting our interests from China.
The government was delivering a lot of double speak, on the one hand promising huge wealth to the country through trade with China (wonder where all that went...) and on the other spending money like crazy on new military hardware to protect us from "our enemies in the region".
Most people were smart enough to realise what was meant by those coded phrases and we're seeing right through them. The reality being that the double speak was almost entirely for China's benefit and not the Australian people's.
China knew exactly what we were spending and why, but due to cultural reasons which are poorly understood by us, require this weird pretense of not admitting that there's a military threat looming.
Alternatively we're both reading too much in to it and it was a silly throw away joke based on the surface level observation. The show was produced by the ABC which means that they're usually pretty aware of what message they're communicating regarding the government but they're not immune to censorship or propaganda. I think it's more likely that it's a bad take by one of the writers than an attempt to sway the public on the issue since it's not at all convincing as a persuasive argument.
The US is the main reason the UN didn't have more teeth. Only fools expect them to be congratulated for providing a piecemeal unilateral service that they're responsible for making necessary.
It's political satire.
It's not supposed to be nuanced.
It's written by someone who read "Baby's Guide to International Politics"
The US is not securing marine routes for the world but its own interests. That is the largest bullying activity in the world. Sea routes are a joke.
Most bureaucratic meeting ever occured :D
While this clip was just a comedy, this couldn't have captured the basic principles of diplomacy and defense policies any better.
The fact they mock it shows they understand the heck about it.
The US needs a president to have this discussion...
This is so funny, sarcastic, deep and meaningful all at the same time.
This is misleading. Even though China is the leading trade partner, it doesn't mean that it is the sole partner. Australia also uses those naval routes to trade with other countries, especially importing oil from middle east.
And somehow China wants to attack Australia’s trade with others?
Good point for sure.
I love the Aussie humour, effing brilliant..
This isn't aussie humour.
This is Government funded political propaganda
I was laughing my ass off 🤣 😂😂 so hilarious
Can't get enough of this show, hard to get in my region 😎🤘🍻
Australia also trades a lot with Japan, Taiwan, and Vietnam. The India trade routes would also be affected as China believes it basic has rights to the entire Pacific for...reasons. Furthermore, they also help keep those trade routes open in conjunction with the US for all other nations who also trade with those nations.
Source: MSM?
Does "they" refer to Australia or China. This makes a big difference to your statement.
I believe China is trying to make what is called a Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere but with them in charge instead of Japan.
@@GarrisonFall pretty sure "they help keep those trade routes open" refers to the Aussies.
@aeronothis5420 Thank you. That makes sense.
It's not just China; it's Japan, South Korean, Taiwan, the Philippines. It might even be Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, Indonesia, and Papa New Guinea. All benefit from the same trade routes.
But none of those has infiltrated in western countries even half the depth China has. Nor they show a fraction of the hostility and hate fir the west that China shows.
Goal here is not to "protect", but control. A significant difference. Politicians can reduce everything to absurdity. The only question is why.
Protecting yourself from your biggest trade partner, becoming your *only* trade partner, is just common sense.
😂 That’s the government for ya 😂
One of the best documentaries I've ever watched
Some “deals” forged over time have a direct correlation between those who have resources and those who need certain resources I.e. cheap labor.
The United States was a huge trading partner with Japan before they bombed Pearl Harbor. Germany was a huge trading partner with the Soviets before their invasion in 1941.
This whole “stop, let’s think about this for a second” bit is hilarious… people should do more of it!
By this logic, Australia spent $14.1 billion in the 2020-2021 year on policing, effectively protecting itself from itself. Countries aren't monoliths, across populations or time. Businesses pay security, to protect their interactions with their customers. There is a bit of humour here, but mostly it's just dead serious.
Our coppers are nothing to be proud of, most of the time... 🥴
In 1936 Germany’s largest trading partner was France, followed by the USSR, and the Balkan nations.
This could be the best comedy series since Seinfeld.
The Germans attacked their main supplier of oil, just because you are trading well doesn’t mean that you will stay frienda
not an apples to apples comparison, why did they attack their main supplier of oil? you need a self conflicting reason to be comparable to the clip here.
@@hzhang1228 i dunno man sees pretty much apples to apples to me... they atacked because their overlords across the ocean wanted to weaken the rival. You know... like a proxy war. And it pretty much destroyed german economy.
Exactly, these guys think the entire world is black and white and comparing Chinese policy to Nazi Germany is a laughable stretch. Nazi's did not attack their main oil supplier because they wanted to take over the oil. They had an ideological justification. China has nothing to gain from attacking Australia apart from halting half their exports and industry to all NATO nations. What a stupid comparison.@@hzhang1228
Actually that was the US who attacked Germany. Germany had zero intention of destroying that pipeline cause they know at some point in time they can trade again. The US wanted to prevent that so they attacked one of their own allies. Also, it wasn't just germany....other countries also had a share in that.
you talking about that russian pipeline that fell out of that hotel window? complete accident. stop talking about it if you know what's good for you comrade.
This is such a beautifully written show. A modern day Yes Minister.
I can’t find it on iTunes to buy
this scene is brilliant
Uncle Sam says jump and Aus says how high😅
"oh hey Australia, actually we decided we like trading with you so much that WE'RE going to protect your ships for you. And make sure they get where they're meant to go. And only where they're meant to go."
Because the men in khaki at that table know China does not have your country's best interests at heart.
I'm sure Britain and France traded with Germany till Sept 1939
Keep your friends close,
But enemies closer.
B.S. you’re not just protecting trade routes. You’re protecting strategic perimeters to preserve your sovereignty. There have been many countries sold to enemies for money and they all perished.
Yeah, agreed.
If Australia spent $15 billion instead of $30 billion on defense, then China wouldn't suddenly start blockading Australia. China doesn't have the interest or even close to the capability to establish naval dominance over the US, who guarantees freedom of navigation.
And if we're looking at the incredibly unlikely scenario where the US collapses and China decides that its primary priority should be building a huge fleet and blockading Australia... well then that $30 billion isn't going to save Australia from the Chinese.
This aged like milk.
Aged better than usa relations
Hmmm u were saying
List of Countries the US has Bombed Since the End c
WWII
(may be incomplete)
Korea and China 1950-53 (Korean War)
Guatemala 1954, 1960
Indonesia 1958
Cuba 1959-61
Vietnam 1961-73
Laos 1964-73
Belgian Congo 1964
Dominican Republic 1965--66
Peru 1965
Guatemala 1967-1969
Cambodia 1969-1970
Nicaragua 198OS
El Salvador 1980s
Lebanon 1982-84
Grenada 1983
Lebanon 1983, J 1984 (Lebanese, Syrian targets)
Iran 1987
Panama 1989
Iraq 1991 (First Gulf War); 1991- 2003 (US/UK "NO
Fly Zone")
Kuwait 1991
Somalia 1992--94; 2007
Bosnia 1994-1995
Iran 1997
Sudan 1998
Afghanistan 1998
Yugoslavia 1999
Afghanistan 2001--ongoing
Iraq 2003 (Second War--more recently predator
drones)
Yemen 2002, 2009
Libya 1986, 2011
It’s called CORRUPTION
This seems fun. Gotta watch.
Of course it's odd that you have to protect your trade routes from your trading partner, but it's the cost of doing business with crazy people!
cost of doing business with the US
Why would China disrupt the trade route? If they prevent the exports from leaving Australia, China loses the stuff they bought. If China prevents the Chinese imports from entering Australia, the Chinese economy suffers.
Australia is not defending Australia's interests. Australia is defending the US. And that's funny.
@@nivvy19we maintain the trade routes free of charge, so you can shove it, vassal state.
@@nivvy19
Go away china bot.
The US for all its faults enforces global free trade for everyone except the most egregious rogue states.
@@nivvy19 us-Australia trade relations are pretty good and very laxed. Its specifically China as they try to claim other sea and even those very same trade routes.
Well, no because our jobs depend on you not figuring that out
So of course no one else finds that odd.
This is dangerously close to British humor and I'm here for it 😂😂😂