Not keen on nuclear: Renewable Energy Zone residents

RE-Alliance Media Release Just 5% of people living in renewable energy zones would…

Political Futures: Strategic Interpretations with a Populist Frame

By Denis Bright In the wake of the current ascendancy of MAGA politics,…

If something doesn’t look right …

If something doesn’t look right … that’s because it isn’t. Many of you…

LGBTIQA+ Action Plan important to close health gaps,…

Public Health Association of Australia Media Release Australia’s peak body for public health,…

Sustainable Productivity: Australians’ Role in Change

By Denis Hay Description: Learn how sustainable productivity can shape Australia’s future by driving…

Health groups call for dying patients to receive…

Palliative Care Australia Media Release Key health organisations have released an 11 point…

UniSA shark scientist lands a super catch for…

University of South Australia (UniSA) Media Release University of South Australia environmental psychology…

Ding Dong, Australia’s Misinformation-Disinformation Bill is Dead

Regulating speech at law is much like regulating breath. At what point…

«
»
Facebook

Tag Archives: #BRICS

Australia’s Sovereignty: Navigating a Geopolitical Dilemma

By Denis Hay

Description

Australia’s sovereignty, how can it be regained and shifted toward compassionate politics using monetary sovereignty?

Introduction

Australia faces a defining moment in its history. Torn between a decades-old alliance with the United States and the rising influence of Asia and BRICS+ nations, the country’s sovereignty and future prosperity are at stake. While the U.S. champions a “rules-based international order,” its actions frequently contradict democratic values and international law.

Australia’s alignment with these policies risks its moral standing and ability to act independently. This article examines the dangers of this alignment, explores opportunities with BRICS+ and regional neighbours, and outlines a strategic path to reclaim Australia’s sovereignty and ensure prosperity.

1. Historical Context: A Shifting Power Balance

Australia’s Strategic Vision in 1971

In 1971, Australian policymakers emphasized the need for independent foreign policies reflecting national and regional interests. They recognized that the U.S. alliance, while beneficial in some respects, would diminish in importance as global power balances shifted.

Today’s Reality

Despite these early warnings, Australia has doubled down on its alliance with the U.S., relying on agreements like ANZUS and AUKUS. Instead of fostering independence, these arrangements have entrenched Australia as a junior partner in U.S. geopolitical strategies.

Critical Insight: Australia’s growing dependence on the U.S. contradicts its original vision of Australia’s sovereignty and self-determination.

2. The Force Posture Agreement and Sovereignty Concerns

What is the Force Posture Agreement?

The 2014 Force Posture Agreement grants the U.S. “unimpeded access” to Australian military bases and exclusive control over its operations. This arrangement subordinates critical defence infrastructure to U.S. interests.

Implications for Australia’s Sovereignty

  1. Loss of Military Autonomy: Australia has limited influence over how, when, and against whom U.S. forces stationed in its territory are deployed.

  2. Increased Risk of Retaliation: Hosting U.S. assets makes Australia a prime target for adversaries, including China and Russia.

A Real-World Example

Australia’s support for U.S. sanctions against Russia has placed it on a list of countries deemed “dangerous” by Moscow, increasing the risk of retaliatory actions.

3. Economic Dependencies and Contradictions

Australia’s Trade Reliance on China

China is Australia’s largest trading partner, accounting for a significant share of exports like iron ore, coal, and agricultural products. This economic relationship underpins Australia’s financial stability.

Contradictory Military Alignment

Despite this reliance, Australia’s military alignment with the U.S. positions China as a strategic adversary. This inconsistency undermines trust and could destabilize the economic partnership if tensions escalate.

Key Risks

  1. Economic Retaliation: China has previously imposed trade restrictions in response to perceived provocations.

  2. Strategic Isolation: Alienating China risks pushing Australia into greater dependency on the U.S., further compromising its Sovereignty.

Australia’s economic relationship with China is critical to its prosperity. China is not only Australia’s largest trading partner but also a key player in the global economy. Alienating China through adversarial policies risks isolating Australia from its regional neighbours, further entrenching its reliance on the United States. This deepened dependency compromises Australia’s sovereignty and limits its ability to pursue independent policies.

Economic Impacts of Alienating China

1. Trade Retaliation Risks:

China has shown a willingness to impose trade restrictions on countries perceived as antagonistic. Australia has already experienced this with tariffs and bans on exports such as barley, wine, coal, and lobster.

The cumulative effect of these measures has disrupted Australian industries, resulting in billions of dollars in losses for exporters.

2. Loss of Market Access:

China’s market, with over 1.4 billion consumers, offers unparalleled opportunities for Australian goods and services. Alienation risks losing this vital access, forcing Australia to look for smaller, less lucrative markets.

Competing nations, such as Brazil and Canada, are eager to fill the gap left by Australia in China’s import market.

Geopolitical Consequences

1. Regional Isolation:

Australia’s adversarial stance toward China creates friction with other Asia-Pacific nations that support positive economic ties with China.

Nations like Indonesia, Malaysia, and Vietnam are increasingly aligned with China through initiatives such as the Regional Comprehensive Economic

Partnership (RCEP). Australia risks being excluded from these growing networks of regional cooperation.

2. Strategic Dependence on the U.S.:

Alienating China pushes Australia closer to the U.S., making it more reliant on American economic and military support.

This dependency reduces Australia’s bargaining power and increases the likelihood of being drawn into U.S.-led conflicts that may not align with its national interests.

Sovereignty at Stake

1. Policy Constraints:

Greater reliance on the U.S. limits Australia’s ability to adopt foreign and domestic policies that prioritize its national interests.

For example, U.S. influence over Australian defence policies, as seen in the AUKUS agreement, shifts focus away from regional diplomacy toward military confrontation.

2. Economic Vulnerability:

Dependency on the U.S. economy makes Australia vulnerable to American financial instability and political decisions. For instance, changes in U.S. trade policy or economic sanctions on third countries could negatively affect Australia.

Opportunities for Redirection

1. Strengthening Regional Ties:

Collaborate with neighbours such as Indonesia, India, and ASEAN nations to build a regional coalition focused on mutual economic and security interests.

Leverage regional trade agreements to diversify Australia’s economic relationships and reduce overreliance on any single partner.

2. Balanced Foreign Policy:

Maintain economic partnerships with China while pursuing diplomatic solutions to conflicts. A balanced approach minimizes risks of alienation without compromising Australia’s values.

Promote multilateralism through forums such as the UN and ASEAN to resolve disputes and strengthen cooperative ties.

Alienating China risks not only economic losses but also strategic isolation, pushing Australia further into dependency on the United States. This dependency undermines Australia’s sovereignty and reduces its ability to act independently in global affairs. By fostering regional cooperation and adopting a balanced foreign policy, Australia can protect its economic interests, enhance its geopolitical standing, and safeguard its sovereignty.

4. U.S. Influence on Australian Policy

Proxy Conflicts and Australia’s Role

The U.S. often avoids direct conflict with nuclear powers by using allies as proxies, as seen in Ukraine. Australia’s growing military integration makes it a potential proxy in future conflicts with China, putting its security at grave risk.

Undermining Democratic Values

The U.S. promotes a “rules-based international order,” but its actions often flout international law. Key examples include:

  1. Illegal Invasions: The Iraq War and Libya bombings violated the UN Charter.

  2. Economic Coercion: Unilateral sanctions on countries like Venezuela bypass international consensus, violating principles of Sovereignty.

  3. Withdrawal from Treaties: The U.S. has exited agreements like the Paris Climate Accord and arms control treaties, prioritizing domestic agendas over global cooperation.

Australia’s participation in these actions erodes its credibility as a defender of democracy and international law. Aligning with U.S. policies also compromises Australia’s ability to act independently in its foreign policy decisions.

5. The Rise of BRICS+ and Opportunities for Australia

The Emerging Influence of BRICS+

BRICS+ nations now account for a larger share of global GDP than the G7, representing a significant shift in economic power. The bloc’s initiatives, including the New Development Bank and Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), empower developing nations by offering alternatives to Western-dominated financial systems.

Key Opportunities for Australia

  1. Economic Diversification: Partnering with BRICS+ can reduce reliance on the U.S. and China.

  2. Infrastructure Development: The BRI offers avenues for Australia to modernize its infrastructure and integrate with Asia-Pacific economies.

Real-World Success

The BRICS+ trade framework bypasses the U.S. dollar and provides a template for sustainable, multilateral economic cooperation. Australia could leverage these initiatives to secure a more balanced financial position.

6. International Law and Australia’s Role

Australia’s Track Record

Australia’s involvement in U.S.-led conflicts, such as Iraq and Afghanistan, has been criticized for violating international law. These actions diminish Australia’s moral standing and weaken its ability to advocate for a rules-based order.

The Way Forward

  1. Commit to multilateral diplomacy through the UN.

  2. Align foreign policies with international legal standards, even when they conflict with U.S. interests.

By adhering to international law, Australia can rebuild its credibility and strengthen its position in global diplomacy.

7. A Path Forward: Reclaiming Australia’s Sovereignty

1. Diversify Economic Partnerships

Australia’s economic reliance on a few key partners, particularly China and the U.S., leaves the nation vulnerable to trade disputes and political pressures. Diversification involves expanding trade relations with a broader range of countries, particularly in the Asia-Pacific and BRICS+ regions.

Actionable Steps:

Strengthen ties with regional economies like India, Indonesia, Vietnam, and Malaysia, focusing on trade agreements that promote shared prosperity and fair trade, not free trade.

Increase investment in emerging markets across Africa and Latin America to open new avenues for Australian exports.

Foster economic diplomacy through multilateral forums like ASEAN and BRICS+ to ensure balanced trade relationships.

Benefits:

Greater resilience against economic retaliation by major trading partners.

Reduced dependency on volatile geopolitical alliances.

Enhanced opportunities for Australian industries to thrive in diverse markets.

2. Strengthen Regional Relations

Australia’s security and prosperity are intrinsically linked to its immediate neighbours in the Asia-Pacific. By fostering collaboration with countries in the region, Australia can build a network of allies focused on mutual growth and stability.

Actionable Steps:

Invest in cultural exchange programs and educational initiatives to deepen people-to-people connections with neighbours.

Develop regional trade agreements that emphasize fair practices and shared benefits.

Collaborate on regional security initiatives, such as maritime safety and counter-terrorism efforts, which prioritize collective interests over external influence.

Benefits:

Enhanced trust and cooperation with neighbouring countries.

Greater regional stability, reducing the need for foreign military alliances.

Opportunities to co-develop infrastructure and technology that help the region.

3. Pursue Independent Foreign Policy

Australia’s foreign policy has been shaped by its alliance with the U.S., often at the expense of its national interests. An independent foreign policy would prioritize Australia’s sovereignty while aligning with principles of neutrality, diplomacy, and peacebuilding.

Actionable Steps:

Reevaluate defence agreements, such as the Force Posture Agreement, to ensure they align with Australia’s national security priorities.

Avoid entanglement in conflicts driven by external powers, focusing instead on diplomacy and conflict resolution.

Commit to a balanced approach in international relations, fostering fair partnerships with both Western and Eastern powers.

Benefits:

A stronger position as a neutral mediator in global conflicts.

Reduced risk of becoming a target in geopolitical disputes.

Increased respect from global and regional partners for Australia’s independent stance.

4. Enhance Domestic Capabilities

Building domestic strength is essential to reducing reliance on foreign powers. This includes investing in infrastructure, technology, and industries that foster economic self-reliance and resilience.

Actionable Steps:

Invest in renewable energy projects to reduce dependence on imported fossil fuels and align with global sustainability goals.

Develop advanced manufacturing capabilities, particularly in defence, technology, and green industries.

Expand funding for education and research institutions to nurture innovation and create high-skilled jobs.

Benefits:

A self-sufficient economy less vulnerable to external disruptions.

Increased national pride and capability in producing world-class technologies and goods.

Opportunities for long-term economic growth and employment.

5. Create a Publicly Owned Bank

While Australia already issues its own currency, a publicly owned bank can serve a different purpose: supporting economic stability, managing infrastructure investments, and promoting fair access to credit within the private sector.

The government does not need this bank to fund its own spending, but it can use it to ensure financial services work in the public interest.

Actionable Steps:

Use a publicly owned bank to provide affordable credit to small and medium enterprises (SMEs), which are often overlooked by private banks.

Direct the bank to focus on regional development, offering loans for projects that enhance local economies.

Address systemic inequality in financial services by offering low-interest housing loans, particularly to first-home buyers and low-income Australians.

Benefits:

Reduces dependence on private banks that prioritize shareholder profits over community needs.

Ensures fair distribution of credit to sectors and regions that drive inclusive economic growth.

Acts as a stabilizing force in the financial system, mitigating the risks of private banking failures.

Under MMT, the government does not need a bank to “finance” its spending on public services or infrastructure—it can directly create and spend money as needed. However, a publicly owned bank serves broader public policy goals by redistributing credit, supporting underserved sectors, and creating stability in the financial system.

It becomes a tool for improving the economic framework in which government spending works, complementing the government’s fiscal policies rather than serving as a funding mechanism.

Conclusion

By taking these steps, Australia can regain control over its destiny, moving away from a reliance on external powers and toward a future that prioritizes national interests and regional harmony.

Diversifying partnerships, fostering local capabilities, and implementing sovereign financial systems are practical and achievable strategies to rebuild Australia’s sovereignty.

Question for Readers

How can Australia balance its economic ties with China and its alliance with the U.S. while maintaining Sovereignty and regional security?

Call to Action

If you found this article insightful, explore political reform and Australia’s monetary sovereignty on Social Justice Australia.

Click on our “Reader Feedback” menu. Let us know how our content has inspired you. Submit your testimonial and help shape the conversation today!

Additionally, leave a comment about this article below.

This article was originally published on Social Justice Australia.

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Australia’s Role in Military Alliances: Risks to Sovereignty

By Denis Hay

Description

Australia’s role in military alliances poses risks to sovereignty. Discover how AUKUS and BRICS impact Australia’s independence and security.

Australia’s Role in Military and Financial Alliances: Navigating Risks and Sovereignty

Australias role in military alliances and position in global military and financial systems has sparked intense debate. With deeper ties to U.S.-led military alliances, Australia’s sovereignty, economic stability, and security face growing questions. This article explores how Australia’s military alliance through AUKUS and its financial alignment with Western powers affect its autonomy, and considers how aligning with emerging economies in BRICS could provide a more balanced and sovereign path forward.

Military and Economic Dependence Risks for Australia

The ‘Brisbane Line’ Redux: Australia’s Military Role in AUKUS

Australia’s military alignment with the United States and United Kingdom, through the AUKUS pact, has seen Australia take on significant strategic responsibilities. AUKUS strengthens Australia’s military capacity, but it also intensifies its role as a potential staging ground for future conflicts in the Indo-Pacific region.

This positioning is reminiscent of the historical ‘Brisbane Line’ in WWII, where parts of Northern Australia were seen as disposable in defence plans. Today, the U.S. divides Australia into three zones for strategic purposes:

  1. Zone 1: Northern Australia for U.S. force projection.
    2. Zone 2: Central Australia as a logistics hub.
  2. Zone 3: Southern Australia for industrial and munitions production.
Financial Commitments Under AUKUS and the “No-Refund Policy”

Australia has committed an estimated AUD $368 billion for submarines under AUKUS. However, a “no-refund” policy means that even if the U.S. fails to deliver submarines, Australia would still be financially responsible. This financial burden raises concerns about Australia’s economic autonomy and public spending priorities.

Economic and Security Concerns

This financial dependency extends beyond hardware, with Australia agreeing to resource and industry allocations that make it a ‘resource base’ for U.S. and UK strategic interests. The Pentagon’s plans for Australia risk positioning the country as a proxy in global conflicts, making Australia a likely target rather than a protected ally.

Former Ambassador John Lander recently warned that Australia’s close alignment with U.S. military strategy puts the nation at greater risk of becoming a target, especially with Australia’s defence capabilities primarily serving U.S. interests.

Heightened Dependency and Lack of Sovereignty

The Strategic Bullseye on Australia’s Back

Australia’s role within AUKUS places it at the frontline in any Indo-Pacific conflicts, particularly with China. U.S. forces in Northern Australia, including B52 bombers, along with expansion plans for nuclear submarines and airbases, indicate that Australia could be a primary target in regional conflicts. This heightened military presence is often viewed as an increase in security; however, without a formal U.S. commitment to defend Australia, it primarily serves U.S. strategic interests rather than Australian security.

Financial Control and Dependency on Western Systems

Australia’s financial dependency on Western institutions also impacts its sovereignty. The dominance of the U.S. dollar in global trade creates risks of financial sanctions, restrictions, and compliance pressures. If Australia were to engage with BRICS or pursue independent financial structures, it would need to challenge entrenched dependencies on the U.S. financial system.

The BRICS bloc’s development of a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) as a peer-to-peer settlement system offers a glimpse of potential independence from Western financial dominance, an area where Australia could consider involvement.

National Integrity at Stake

Australia’s alignment with AUKUS and its reliance on Western financial systems significantly impact its ability to act as a truly independent nation. By aligning its military strategy so closely with U.S. and UK interests, Australia risks becoming a subordinate player in global politics rather than an equal partner. This alignment has practical, cultural, and strategic repercussions that affect Australia’s sovereignty and national integrity in several ways:

1. Erosion of Independent Foreign Policy

Australia’s close military alignment with AUKUS has led to policies that prioritize U.S. and UK security interests over our own. For instance, by hosting U.S. military bases and committing to support Western-led missions, Australia effectively cedes a portion of its decision-making power. This dependency creates situations where Australia could be drawn into conflicts in which it has no direct stake, simply due to its obligations within AUKUS.

The lack of an independent foreign policy restricts Australia’s ability to act autonomously on the world stage, diminishing its ability to cultivate neutral or strategic alliances, particularly with Asia-Pacific neighbours.

2. Economic Control Through Military Spending

The heavy investment in AUKUS-related defence projects also diverts public money from domestic needs, such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure, toward costly military equipment and foreign defence contracts. This commitment to defence spending on U.S. and UK equipment and technologies, under a “no-refund” policy, means that funds are not only spent abroad but also locked into foreign priorities.

The significant budget allocation to defence spending risks increasing public debt and reliance on international finance, reducing Australia’s ability to prioritize national economic growth and resilience in critical areas like public services and renewable energy.

3. Public Discontent and Regional Divisions

The perception that Australia is becoming a “51st state” of the U.S. has stirred public discontent, particularly in regions like the Northern Territory. Communities in these areas are becoming increasingly vocal about their concerns, as U.S. military presence expands and local industries shift to meet the needs of AUKUS.

This growing divide could lead to regional resistance and political division, with parts of the population questioning whether national interests are being sacrificed for foreign agendas. The Northern Territory’s proximity to U.S. military bases makes it more vulnerable, fueling concerns about Australia’s security, safety, and true autonomy.

4. Risks to National Security

Aligning with U.S.-led military strategies also increases Australia’s visibility as a target in global conflicts. The deployment of U.S. bombers, submarines, and other assets on Australian soil sends a clear message to other global powers, particularly in the Indo-Pacific region, that Australia is an integral part of the U.S. strategic network.

This positioning heightens security risks, as adversaries may view Australia as a proxy or extension of U.S. military might. Without strong guarantees that the U.S. will defend Australia in times of crisis, this arrangement leaves Australia exposed, potentially compromising its safety and national integrity.

5. Limited Diplomatic Flexibility

Australia’s involvement in AUKUS places constraints on its diplomatic options with non-Western nations. While Australia shares strong historical ties with the U.S. and UK, its geographic location in the Asia-Pacific region means that cultivating balanced relationships with its neighbours is critical for long-term security and trade.

However, heavy alignment with U.S. policies can limit Australia’s ability to negotiate and act independently with other countries, especially those in Asia. This restricted diplomatic flexibility could result in missed economic opportunities and a reduced role in regional affairs, affecting Australia’s standing as an independent and respected voice in the Indo-Pacific.

6. Cultural Influence and National Identity

With the U.S. influence embedded in military, economic, and even political spheres, Australia’s cultural and political identity risks becoming increasingly intertwined with that of its Western allies. This close association may dilute Australia’s own distinct identity and values, which are rooted in its unique multicultural society and Pacific heritage.

For Australia to maintain its integrity as a sovereign nation, it must carefully balance its global alliances with policies that reflect its unique cultural identity and support the well-being of its diverse population.

Reclaiming Sovereignty and National Integrity

To preserve its national integrity, Australia must reassess its commitments within AUKUS and consider alternative pathways that reinforce its autonomy and reflect the needs and values of its citizens. By fostering balanced international relationships and investing in self-sufficient economic and defense policies, Australia can retain its sovereignty, ensuring its security and prosperity remain guided by national, not foreign, interests.

Paths Towards Sovereign Independence and Economic Stability


Re-Evaluating Australia’s Role in AUKUS

Australia can begin by reassessing its commitments within AUKUS. While Australias role in military alliances can strengthen defence capabilities, policies that prioritize Australia’s security over U.S. interests would better serve the nation.Steps Australia could take to limit overreliance on the AUKUS alliance include:

Developing Independent Defence Strategies: Establish an independent defence policy focusing on protecting Australian territory, not projecting power in alignment with U.S. objectives.
Maintaining Balanced International Relations: Australia should balance relationships across the Asia-Pacific, rather than relying solely on Western alliances.
Increasing Transparency and Public Dialogue: Encouraging a national debate about Australia’s involvement in AUKUS can foster a more democratic approach to defence policies.

Exploring Financial Independence through BRICS Collaboration

BRICS offers an alternative framework for economic collaboration that does not rely on the U.S. dollar, reducing dependency on Western financial structures. By observing or participating as an affiliate, Australia could gain insights and potentially benefit from:

Developing a BRICS-aligned CBDC system: Participation in an international digital currency exchange could reduce the impact of dollar-dominated sanctions.
– Strengthening Regional Economic Ties: Engaging with BRICS countries could open Australia to alternative markets and investment sources, especially in sectors like minerals and energy.
Expanding Trade Networks: New trade agreements with BRICS nations could enhance exports and reduce dependency on traditional Western markets.

Pursuing an Independent Foreign Policy for Australia

An independent foreign policy would require Australia to reconsider its role in the U.S.-China rivalry and seek a position that maintains peaceful relationships within the Indo-Pacific region. Australia could pursue neutrality in the region’s power dynamics, positioning itself as a mediator or neutral trade partner rather than an adversary.

Fostering Diplomatic Relations with BRICS Nations: Building stronger ties with BRICS countries could provide economic alternatives and support political neutrality.
Supporting Multilateral Peace Initiatives: Australia could initiate or support multilateral dialogues aimed at reducing regional tensions.
Implementing a “National Interest First” Policy: By putting Australia’s national interests at the forefront, policies would focus on security and economic resilience over global influence.

Domestic Economic Policies for Increased Self-Reliance

Australia’s over-reliance on international trade and imported technology makes it vulnerable. Initiatives that promote domestic manufacturing and innovation can enhance resilience and economic independence. Key measures include:

Investing in Local Industries: Government support for industries critical to national security, such as telecommunications, agriculture, and mineral processing, would reduce external dependency.
Prioritizing Public Infrastructure: Investment in infrastructure that serves Australian citizens, rather than foreign military interests, could strengthen economic stability and job growth.
Establishing a National Bank: Reintroducing a publicly owned bank to fund infrastructure and local industry can counterbalance private banking influences and offer affordable financial services to Australians.

Summary: Securing a Sovereign Future for Australia

Australia’s position as a key ally in AUKUS and a participant in U.S.-led financial systems has significant implications for its sovereignty. While these alliances provide certain benefits, they also pose risks to Australia’s autonomy and security. By reassessing Australias role in military alliances, exploring financial partnerships with BRICS, and developing a national interest-centred foreign policy, Australia can work towards greater sovereignty and stability.

Thought-Provoking Question

Do you think Australia’s strategic alliances serve its best interests, or do they put the nation at greater risk?

Call to Action

If you found this article insightful, explore more about political reform and Australia’s monetary sovereignty on Social Justice in Australia: https://socialjusticeaustralia.com/. Share this article with your community to help drive the conversation toward a more just and equal society.

Click on our “Reader Feedback” menu. Let us know how our content has inspired you. Submit your testimonial and help shape the conversation today!

Additionally, leave a comment about this article below.

Reference:

The map that Canberra doesn’t want you to see: https://www.afr.com/policy/foreign-affairs/three-key-zones-how-the-pentagon-sees-australia-20241022-p5kk5w

Assange Father Blasts US Policy on Afghanistan, Defends Australian Military Whistleblower: https://youtu.be/05Vm9rWmGIo?si=636Xyv6M1QC4L_ZV

 

This article was originally published on Social Justice Australia.

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button