US voices concern over Chinese money in Australian politics

[webfact]

US voices concern over Chinese money in Australian politics 
ROD McGUIRK, Associated Press

 

CANBERRA, Australia (AP) — The American ambassador to Australia has voiced U.S. concerns over China's impact on Australian politics, saying the United States wants the system reformed to remove the influence of Chinese political donations.

 

Ambassador John Berry said in an interview with The Australian newspaper that the United States is "surprised" by the amount of Chinese money and influence in Australian politics and wants Australia to resolve the foreign donation issue. The embassy confirmed in a statement that Berry had been accurately quoted in the interview, published Wednesday.

 

Last week, the opposition Labor Party called for foreign political donations to be banned after Labor Sen. Sam Dastyari stepped down from a senior role for asking a Chinese company to pay a 1,670 Australian dollar ($1,250) travel bill. While Dastyari broke no law, he acknowledged that having the Sydney-based company Top Education Institute pay a personal bill was wrong.

 

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull pointed to a Chinese language news report that quoted Dastyari as saying, "The South China Sea is China's own affair."

 

Turnbull said that statement contradicted both the government and the opposition's foreign policy position that China should respect international law in territorial disputes. The prime minister accused Dastyari, who has been dubbed Shanghai Sam, of saying what Chinese donors paid him to say.

 

Dastyari said he might have misspoken during the Chinese interview, but said he supported his party's policy.

 

The issue is broader than Dastyari, with Top Education Institute donating more than AU$230,000 to both Labor and the ruling conservative Liberal Party.

 

Unlike the United States, which bans foreign donations, Australian law has never distinguished between donors from Australia and overseas.

 

Berry said the United States hopes that Australia will protect its "core responsibilities against undue influence from governments that don't share our values."

 

He said the U.S. objects to Beijing being able to fund political candidates in an Australian election campaign to advance Chinese interests.

 

"That, to us, is of concern," Berry said in the newspaper interview. "We cannot conceive of a case where a foreign donation from any government, friend or foe, would be considered legitimate in terms of that democracy."

 

"We have been surprised, quite frankly, at the extent of the involvement of the Chinese government in Australian politics," he added.

 

A Labor government introduced a bill to ban foreign donations to Parliament in 2010, but it never became law. The minor Greens party has proposed a similar bill in the current Parliament, but conservative government ministers have said there is no need for reform.

 

Australian Broadcasting Corp. reported last month that businesses with Chinese connections gave Australia's major political parties more than AU$5.5 million from 2013 to 2015, making them easily the largest source of foreign-linked donations.

 

Australia struggles to balance its relationships with the United States, its most important strategic partner, and China, its most important trade partner.

 

Top Education Institute declined to comment on Wednesday and the Chinese Embassy in Australia did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

 

-- © Associated Press 2016-09-14

[trogers]

And they are not concerned about money from Wall St. and big businesses in buying their Presidency? 

[Aussie69]

Ironic coming from a country whose entire political system operates under the influence of corporate funding & 'special interest' groups.

[halloween]

OTOH the US sees no reason why it shouldn't interfere with the politics of any country it chooses, up to and including invasion to effect leadership change.

[trogers]

The Title of this post is misleading. There is no Chinese money. It's actual US dollars given to China by the Americans... ?

[shirtless]

I dont think the USA should speak to loudly about buying political influence ,American politicians are for sale at every level , local domestic, and international.

[craigt3365]

37 minutes ago, shirtless said:

I dont think the USA should speak to loudly about buying political influence ,American politicians are for sale at every level , local domestic, and international.

Luckily, many know this and are fighting against it.  You can't paint the US with such a broad brush.

[Publicus]

US law prohibits political campaign donations by foreign persons or entities. This is the issue and the thread topic. (Wall Street has nothing to do with Australia hustling bucks in an ongoing sale of national assets to CCP in Beijing.)

 

We see the negative effect of allowing it in the example of Australia. PM Malcom Turnbull is the weakest foreign policy and national security PM since Ho Chi Minh's best buddy Geoff Whitlam (1975).

 

Kevin Rudd is another CCP fan and he got dumped as PM for reasons particular to he himself inside his own political party (Labour). It is unmistakable that this time around Labour is more upright about Australian values than the Liberal-Conservative dialing for dollars coalition. 

 

Coalition former PM John Howard spent all of his foreign and security policy kissing up to GW Bush and to the CCP, each in its own particular interests. Australia came in third in his book, after USA and CCP Dictators in Beijing who are busily buying up Australia.

 

It's only recent pressures that have caused Turnbull to start to slow down CCP buying up the Lucky Country. The pressures are only just beginning for Turnbull and the Liberal-Conservative coalition of CCP money hunters and gatherers.

[borisloosebrain]

1 hour ago, Publicus said:

US law prohibits political campaign donations by foreign persons or entities. This is the issue and the thread topic. (Wall Street has nothing to do with Australia hustling bucks in an ongoing sale of national assets to CCP in Beijing.)

 

We see the negative effect of allowing it in the example of Australia. PM Malcom Turnbull is the weakest foreign policy and national security PM since Ho Chi Minh's best buddy Geoff Whitlam (1975).

 

Kevin Rudd is another CCP fan and he got dumped as PM for reasons particular to he himself inside his own political party (Labour). It is unmistakable that this time around Labour is more upright about Australian values than the Liberal-Conservative dialing for dollars coalition. 

 

Coalition former PM John Howard spent all of his foreign and security policy kissing up to GW Bush and to the CCP, each in its own particular interests. Australia came in third in his book, after USA and CCP Dictators in Beijing who are busily buying up Australia.

 

It's only recent pressures that have caused Turnbull to start to slow down CCP buying up the Lucky Country. The pressures are only just beginning for Turnbull and the Liberal-Conservative coalition of CCP money hunters and gatherers.

Who is Geoff Whitlam ?

If you want to try and sound like you know what you're talking about with your cut and paste style observations at least know who it is you're talking about. ...Geoff eh Hmmm. Lol

[MisterTee]

Quick... somebody tell him it's Gough.

[tifino]

 

Doesn't the US want Mexico to donate the funds to the US, for a political barrier fence,

between their two countries?

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies removed.   The topic is about Australia.  

[PTC]

2 hours ago, Publicus said:

US law prohibits political campaign donations by foreign persons or entities. This is the issue and the thread topic. (Wall Street has nothing to do with Australia hustling bucks in an ongoing sale of national assets to CCP in Beijing.)

 

We see the negative effect of allowing it in the example of Australia. PM Malcom Turnbull is the weakest foreign policy and national security PM since Ho Chi Minh's best buddy Geoff Whitlam (1975).

 

Kevin Rudd is another CCP fan and he got dumped as PM for reasons particular to he himself inside his own political party (Labour). It is unmistakable that this time around Labour is more upright about Australian values than the Liberal-Conservative dialing for dollars coalition. 

 

Coalition former PM John Howard spent all of his foreign and security policy kissing up to GW Bush and to the CCP, each in its own particular interests. Australia came in third in his book, after USA and CCP Dictators in Beijing who are busily buying up Australia.

 

It's only recent pressures that have caused Turnbull to start to slow down CCP buying up the Lucky Country. The pressures are only just beginning for Turnbull and the Liberal-Conservative coalition of CCP money hunters and gatherers.

 

The Whitlam Government laid the foundation for the Australia that exists today. These policies were reinforced by subsequent Labour Governments, most notably that of Paul Keating who is probably Gough's most logical successor.

 

Apart from the massive influence on the social and cultural development of Australia, particularly in terms of the rights and dignity of indigenous Australians, multiculturalism and respect for diversity, the Whitlam Government represented a significant break from previous foreign policy. During WWII, Australia switched its security 'dependency' from Britain to the US. As a consequence Australia was a willing partner in the various arrangements implemented by the US to fight the Cold War, most notably the South East Asia Treaty Organization SEATO https://history.state.gov/milestones/1953-1960/seato

 

This dependency on the US led directly to Australia's decision to enter the Vietnam War in 1962. It still influences much of Australia's thinking regarding military and security posture to this day particularly among those on the Right.

 

Gough completed the withdrawal of Australian soldiers from Vietnam very quickly on coming to office https://www.whitlam.org/gough_whitlam/achievements/foreignaffairsandimmigration but more importantly, the Whitlam Government's foreign policies reoriented Australia to acknowledge its position as part of Asia and to engage other countries with more confidence as a multicultural country that respects diversity and can follow its own policies.

 

Ho Chi Minh died well before Whitlam came to office and there is no real evidence of any kind of relationship between the two.

 

Australia has a complicated relationship with China and Indonesia. You have pointed to some of the aspects of the relationship with China. For the purposes of this thread, however, I do not really see the relevance in picking apart the different ways that various Governments have tried to deal with China since the issue is about the potential impact of China influencing Australia's political process through donations.

 

A law against foreign involvement in Australia's political process, as with America, would fix this and should be enacted as soon as possible. The time has clearly come when the 'blissful ignorance' approach is no longer appropriate. That is because China's economic development and clearly geo-political ambitions have changed considerable since the late 1980's.

 

Please don't try and take down Gough. He went to China. So did Nixon around the same time. It was the right decision even though dealing with the consequences has and will prove difficult.

[Publicus]

6 minutes ago, PTC said:

 

The Whitlam Government laid the foundation for the Australia that exists today. These policies were reinforced by subsequent Labour Governments, most notably that of Paul Keating who is probably Gough's most logical successor.

 

Apart from the massive influence on the social and cultural development of Australia, particularly in terms of the rights and dignity of indigenous Australians, multiculturalism and respect for diversity, the Whitlam Government represented a significant break from previous foreign policy. During WWII, Australia switched its security 'dependency' from Britain to the US. As a consequence Australia was a willing partner in the various arrangements implemented by the US to fight the Cold War, most notably the South East Asia Treaty Organization SEATO https://history.state.gov/milestones/1953-1960/seato

 

This dependency on the US led directly to Australia's decision to enter the Vietnam War in 1962. It still influences much of Australia's thinking regarding military and security posture to this day particularly among those on the Right.

 

Gough completed the withdrawal of Australian soldiers from Vietnam very quickly on coming to office https://www.whitlam.org/gough_whitlam/achievements/foreignaffairsandimmigration but more importantly, the Whitlam Government's foreign policies reoriented Australia to acknowledge its position as part of Asia and to engage other countries with more confidence as a multicultural country that respects diversity and can follow its own policies.

 

Ho Chi Minh died well before Whitlam came to office and there is no real evidence of any kind of relationship between the two.

 

Australia has a complicated relationship with China and Indonesia. You have pointed to some of the aspects of the relationship with China. For the purposes of this thread, however, I do not really see the relevance in picking apart the different ways that various Governments have tried to deal with China since the issue is about the potential impact of China influencing Australia's political process through donations.

 

A law against foreign involvement in Australia's political process, as with America, would fix this and should be enacted as soon as possible. The time has clearly come when the 'blissful ignorance' approach is no longer appropriate. That is because China's economic development and clearly geo-political ambitions have changed considerable since the late 1980's.

 

Please don't try and take down Gough. He went to China. So did Nixon around the same time. It was the right decision even though dealing with the consequences has and will prove difficult.

 

My post made a passing reference to the late Oz PM Edward Gough Whitlam of the early-mid 1970s who recently passed away aged 98 and who changed Oz radically forever and for the better.

 

I said the current PM Malcom Turnbull is the weakest PM on foreign policy and national security since Whitlam, which is what many people in intelligence agencies and national security have now begun to say openly in Oz and in regional capitals all the way to Tokyo and to Washington. 

 

While Kevin Rudd as PM then as FM overdid relations with CCP China, he apparently didn't completely ignore the Oz intelligence services concerns over CCP financial and political influence in Oz. Turnbull has more than raised eyebrows over his consistent indifference to the Oz intelligence services reports and analysis of it.

 

PM Turnbull went last week to the G-20 in the CCP China to make unprecedented and loud noises about the South China Sea and the PCA ruling in The Hague, but many allies and other concerned governments of Asean and the region see this as Turnbull suddenly recognising he has to start covering his posterior lest his very shaky government and its fragile hold on power get the rug pulled out from under 'em. As occurred to Whitlam who was letting draft resisters out of prison during the Vietnam war while being well received in Beijing as self-appointed master of the West in the East.

 

Whitlam was of course Labour while Turnbull is Liberal-Conservative. It are the ALP who are standing up to CCP buying up Australia and who want to join the US in FON exercises in the South China Sea, not Turnbull and his conservative money hunters and gatherers coalition. 

 

So maybe we might begin to see a sea change occurring in this respect in Canberra. Surely Australians know CCP has no regard or respect of such a meaningless little place as Australia -- CCP have said exactly that and more to those who are paying attention. Turnbull seems to have missed it too...or he doesn't care in the least. Australian intelligence services, as in the United States, take it all with a great seriousness. 

[Dustdevil]

15 hours ago, shirtless said:

I dont think the USA should speak to loudly about buying political influence ,American politicians are for sale at every level , local domestic, and international.

And you're the expert. US campaign laws prohibit foreign donations. The subject at hand is Australian elections, not American. But then, the Commonwealth TV members are always ready to engage in America-bashing.

Edited September 15, 2016 by Dustdevil

[halloween]

14 hours ago, Publicus said:

US law prohibits political campaign donations by foreign persons or entities. This is the issue and the thread topic. (Wall Street has nothing to do with Australia hustling bucks in an ongoing sale of national assets to CCP in Beijing.)

 

We see the negative effect of allowing it in the example of Australia. PM Malcom Turnbull is the weakest foreign policy and national security PM since Ho Chi Minh's best buddy Geoff Whitlam (1975).

 

Kevin Rudd is another CCP fan and he got dumped as PM for reasons particular to he himself inside his own political party (Labour). It is unmistakable that this time around Labour is more upright about Australian values than the Liberal-Conservative dialing for dollars coalition. 

 

Coalition former PM John Howard spent all of his foreign and security policy kissing up to GW Bush and to the CCP, each in its own particular interests. Australia came in third in his book, after USA and CCP Dictators in Beijing who are busily buying up Australia.

 

It's only recent pressures that have caused Turnbull to start to slow down CCP buying up the Lucky Country. The pressures are only just beginning for Turnbull and the Liberal-Conservative coalition of CCP money hunters and gatherers.

News for you sport, what the US does in its political model is of limited interest to Australians. Most of us regard US 2-party money politics, and allowing party politics into the justice system, as something to stay well away from.

But we refrain from telling you how to run YOUR country.

[yardrunner]

13 hours ago, tifino said:

 

Doesn't the US want Mexico to donate the funds to the US, for a political barrier fence,

between their two countries?

Not the US government but Donald Trump and with a bit of luck Trump will be locked up in the asylum where he belongs

[JingerBen]

The US and Australia have been joined-at-the-hip militarily since WWII.

Chinese money and influence are a direct threat to that relationship.

Expect the US to do everything in its power to counter that incursion.

[bark]

14 hours ago, borisloosebrain said:

Who is Geoff Whitlam ?

If you want to try and sound like you know what you're talking about with your cut and paste style observations at least know who it is you're talking about. ...Geoff eh Hmmm. Lol

And Geoff should be spelt as Jeff ! Whoever he is ?

[rijb]

49 minutes ago, halloween said:

News for you sport, what the US does in its political model is of limited interest to Australians. Most of us regard US 2-party money politics, and allowing party politics into the justice system, as something to stay well away from.

But we refrain from telling you how to run YOUR country.

 

"But we refrain from telling you how to run YOUR country."  

[Rancid]

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. So the Clinton Foundation is not heavily funded by foreign countries and persons seeking influence with the US government. Er, Saudis and Bush family. Give me a break.

 

This is purely about containing China, a decision the US has taken and is now trying to strong arm anyone in the region they can get to join in their anti-China crusade.

 

Thing is China are still Australia's biggest trading partner, and that is a trade surplus, not just the trade imports we get from the US that give us a trade deficit. It is profitable trade, we would have to be be complete economic idiots to sacrifice that.

 

We got out of Vietnam and it was the right thing to do. Whitlam was ousted just prior wanting to remove the CIA bases in Australia at Pine Gap and NW Cape, every government since then has been unsurprisingly pro-US. They learned that lesson well.

 

Australia is happily a US ally, but is widely regarded worldwide as a US lacky, just like Canada and the UK. Odd the ambassador has decided to make obvious, to any that care to see, what usually goes on behind closed doors.

[craigt3365]

3 hours ago, halloween said:

News for you sport, what the US does in its political model is of limited interest to Australians. Most of us regard US 2-party money politics, and allowing party politics into the justice system, as something to stay well away from.

But we refrain from telling you how to run YOUR country.

I don't see where in this article the US is telling Australia what to do.  Just voicing concerns.  The same ones Australia has:

Quote

Last week, the opposition Labor Party called for foreign political donations to be banned after Labor Sen. Sam Dastyari stepped down from a senior role for asking a Chinese company to pay a 1,670 Australian dollar ($1,250) travel bill. While Dastyari broke no law, he acknowledged that having the Sydney-based company Top Education Institute pay a personal bill was wrong.

 

[Publicus]

8 hours ago, Rancid said:

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. So the Clinton Foundation is not heavily funded by foreign countries and persons seeking influence with the US government. Er, Saudis and Bush family. Give me a break.

 

This is purely about containing China, a decision the US has taken and is now trying to strong arm anyone in the region they can get to join in their anti-China crusade.

 

Thing is China are still Australia's biggest trading partner, and that is a trade surplus, not just the trade imports we get from the US that give us a trade deficit. It is profitable trade, we would have to be be complete economic idiots to sacrifice that.

 

We got out of Vietnam and it was the right thing to do. Whitlam was ousted just prior wanting to remove the CIA bases in Australia at Pine Gap and NW Cape, every government since then has been unsurprisingly pro-US. They learned that lesson well.

 

Australia is happily a US ally, but is widely regarded worldwide as a US lacky, just like Canada and the UK. Odd the ambassador has decided to make obvious, to any that care to see, what usually goes on behind closed doors.

 

Thing is China are still Australia's biggest trading partner, and that is a trade surplus, not just the trade imports we get from the US that give us a trade deficit. It is profitable trade, we would have to be be complete economic idiots to sacrifice that.

 

 

The topic is CCP Dictators in Beijing buying up Australian strategic assets of infrastructure from electricity power grids to agribusinesses and mining properties and the like.

 

No one is talking about trade between Oz and the Dictators in Beijing. (Except you.) All the same, yes, go for it with all the trade that benefits you and Oz, as well you should.

 

We should also recognise however that USA is by far the biggest investor in Australia, with USA investors having $570 billion of operating and performing assets in Oz. That's of a GDP of US$ 1.3 Trillion. Oz investors have their own impressive total of interests in the USA which total US$ 430 bn.

 

It is the proverbial two-way street, in that USA investments in Oz provide high quality employment, education, quality of life, contribute to the advanced standard of living Aussies have created for themselves and the like. Likewise for the USA when Aussies invest there. It is mutual. And there's much more about this here: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/australia/gdp

 

People talk a lot about trade but overlook or ignore, or just don't know, the economic and financial interrelationship USA and Australia have. CCP foreign investments in Oz total $21 bn by meek comparison. Aussie investment in CCP China barely show on a chart even under a magnifying glass. 

 

The issue presented in the thread is that many if not most of the CCP investments in Oz are going in to critical national security infrastructure to include the economy.

 

All the USA is saying is for Oz to shape up about this. We're mutual defense treaty allies and USA has a lot of money and a great stake in a free and democratic Australia unfettered by the Dictators in Beijing. 

 

PM Turnbull needs more than anyone else in Canberra to set the example of how to straighten himself up and get the important matters clarified to both Beijing and to Washington and its allies, strategic partners, friends.

 

So trade till you drop but get a serious handle on those buy-ups by the Dictators in Beijing.

[Credo]

I am not going to get too upset until the Chinese start funding Pauline Hanson.   

[tifino]

 

Did all this really begin - back when we had a mandarin-speaking PM?

[halloween]

17 hours ago, Publicus said:

 

Thing is China are still Australia's biggest trading partner, and that is a trade surplus, not just the trade imports we get from the US that give us a trade deficit. It is profitable trade, we would have to be be complete economic idiots to sacrifice that.

 

 

The topic is CCP Dictators in Beijing buying up Australian strategic assets of infrastructure from electricity power grids to agribusinesses and mining properties and the like.

 

No one is talking about trade between Oz and the Dictators in Beijing. (Except you.) All the same, yes, go for it with all the trade that benefits you and Oz, as well you should.

 

We should also recognise however that USA is by far the biggest investor in Australia, with USA investors having $570 billion of operating and performing assets in Oz. That's of a GDP of US$ 1.3 Trillion. Oz investors have their own impressive total of interests in the USA which total US$ 430 bn.

 

It is the proverbial two-way street, in that USA investments in Oz provide high quality employment, education, quality of life, contribute to the advanced standard of living Aussies have created for themselves and the like. Likewise for the USA when Aussies invest there. It is mutual. And there's much more about this here: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/australia/gdp

 

People talk a lot about trade but overlook or ignore, or just don't know, the economic and financial interrelationship USA and Australia have. CCP foreign investments in Oz total $21 bn by meek comparison. Aussie investment in CCP China barely show on a chart even under a magnifying glass. 

 

The issue presented in the thread is that many if not most of the CCP investments in Oz are going in to critical national security infrastructure to include the economy.

 

All the USA is saying is for Oz to shape up about this. We're mutual defense treaty allies and USA has a lot of money and a great stake in a free and democratic Australia unfettered by the Dictators in Beijing. 

 

PM Turnbull needs more than anyone else in Canberra to set the example of how to straighten himself up and get the important matters clarified to both Beijing and to Washington and its allies, strategic partners, friends.

 

So trade till you drop but get a serious handle on those buy-ups by the Dictators in Beijing.

 

The topic is CCP Dictators in Beijing making political donations to Australian political parties.

 

No one is talking about Beijing buying up Australian strategic assets of infrastructure from electricity power grids to agribusinesses and mining properties and the like. (Except you.)

[LawrenceChee]

If they have concerns....perhaps they can copy the Chinese for once ?

Money corruption is the lesser of two evils when it comes to interference compared to the bombs favoured by USA right now


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Publicus]

7 hours ago, LawrenceChee said:

If they have concerns....perhaps they can copy the Chinese for once ?

Money corruption is the lesser of two evils when it comes to interference compared to the bombs favoured by USA right now


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

 

As noted in the thread, USA has $570 billion in performing assets in Oz. CCP Dynasty of Dictators in Beijing have $21 billion, most of it in dirt holes.

 

Oz (and the USA) are among the least corrupt countries of the world.

 

CCP is notorious for its thousands of years of bribes, gratuities to some mandarin simply for doing his job, what have come to be called 'kickbacks' in public works projects, not to mention the overbearing might of the CCP one party state corrupting people's minds by restricting what they can discuss or consider openly and freely. The Dictators' contempt of democracy is absolute and eternal.

 

It's also the US Navy and USAF that are keeping the wolf from Australia's door. The thread topic is the announcement to CCP Dynasty of Dictators in Beijing that they're about to begin to lose without a shot being fired.

[Publicus]

On 9/16/2016 at 2:05 PM, halloween said:

 

The topic is CCP Dictators in Beijing making political donations to Australian political parties.

 

No one is talking about Beijing buying up Australian strategic assets of infrastructure from electricity power grids to agribusinesses and mining properties and the like. (Except you.)

 

So let's get more specific then...

 

Rory Medcalf, director of the Australian National University’s National Security College, recently said in an opinion article that it is difficult to regard China’s donations to political parties as “a gesture of admiration” of Australia’s political system.

Medcalf thinks that Beijing tries to neutralize Canberra opposition regarding strategic actions made by China in Asia and weaken the security alliance between Australia and the United States, and even affect moral support that may be provided to other Asian nations, whose interests clash with China’s.

 

http://www.laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=2421200&CategoryId=12395

 

 

Here's the short statement of it by the US Ambassador...

 

This attitude has already sounded the alarm in the United States, as its outgoing ambassador to Australia John Berry said the foreign donations are illegal in his country, stating that Washington is “surprised” by the extent of involvement of the Chinese government in Australian politics.

“That, to us, is of concern. We cannot conceive of a case where a foreign donation from any government, friend or foe, would be considered legitimate in terms of that democracy,” Berry said in an interview this week with The Australian.

 

http://www.afr.com/news/politics/julie-bishop-meets-us-presidential-teams-bill-shorten-dumps-on-donald-trump-20160916-grigf3

 

 

The CCP one party state is the current dynasty that over thousands of years in China believes in the absolute rule by the dominant elite -- of, by and for the dominant elite. CCP have only an inherited cultural and eternal contempt of democracy.

 

Let's hope Australia can soon escape what has been called its (imposed) tyranny of geography. Initially, Oz was a great distance from Europe and the UK. Now it is too close to the CCP Dynasty of Dictators in Beijing for its own good. Time to come back over to the Force and away from the Dark Side.

 

Oz national security intelligence services are speaking openly that PM Malcom Turnbull is the weakest national security and foreign policy leader of the country since Gough Whitlam in the 1970s (whose government was dissolved by a sudden declaration of the governor general).

[halloween]

1 hour ago, Publicus said:

 

So let's get more specific then...

 

Rory Medcalf, director of the Australian National University’s National Security College, recently said in an opinion article that it is difficult to regard China’s donations to political parties as “a gesture of admiration” of Australia’s political system.

Medcalf thinks that Beijing tries to neutralize Canberra opposition regarding strategic actions made by China in Asia and weaken the security alliance between Australia and the United States, and even affect moral support that may be provided to other Asian nations, whose interests clash with China’s.

 

http://www.laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=2421200&CategoryId=12395

 

 

Here's the short statement of it by the US Ambassador...

 

This attitude has already sounded the alarm in the United States, as its outgoing ambassador to Australia John Berry said the foreign donations are illegal in his country, stating that Washington is “surprised” by the extent of involvement of the Chinese government in Australian politics.

“That, to us, is of concern. We cannot conceive of a case where a foreign donation from any government, friend or foe, would be considered legitimate in terms of that democracy,” Berry said in an interview this week with The Australian.

 

http://www.afr.com/news/politics/julie-bishop-meets-us-presidential-teams-bill-shorten-dumps-on-donald-trump-20160916-grigf3

 

 

The CCP one party state is the current dynasty that over thousands of years in China believes in the absolute rule by the dominant elite -- of, by and for the dominant elite. CCP have only an inherited cultural and eternal contempt of democracy.

 

Let's hope Australia can soon escape what has been called its (imposed) tyranny of geography. Initially, Oz was a great distance from Europe and the UK. Now it is too close to the CCP Dynasty of Dictators in Beijing for its own good. Time to come back over to the Force and away from the Dark Side.

 

Oz national security intelligence services are speaking openly that PM Malcom Turnbull is the weakest national security and foreign policy leader of the country since Gough Whitlam in the 1970s (whose government was dissolved by a sudden declaration of the governor general).

 

You just don't get it, do you? It's none of America's bloody business how Australia runs its democracy or who it accepts money from. Why don't you take a long hard look at your own version, and try fixing some of the problems there - the 40% of eligible voters who just don't bother, and the intrusion of party politics into your justice system might be a place to start.

 

We are well aware of China's history and world view, and of the value of our trade with them. But at least they don't expect us to follow them, mostly to add a touch of respectability, as they invade yet another Asian country.

 

BTW your disparagement of the Whitlam government is far at odds with the view of most Australians. The GG you mention was an alcoholic and one of the most despised men in Australian history.