Search

The analysis in the 2013 White Paper of international defence engagement highlights the important co-operative activities that Australian Defence Force personnel and Defence officials conduct in, and with, other countries. These activities can create vital synergies for Australia, but their benefits should be neither assumed nor overstated. In particular, they need to be assessed in the broader context of the White Paper's narrative, which is focused primarily on a rationalisation of the gap between the ends and means of defence policy. In that context, the role of Australia's international defence engagement risks being portrayed disproportionately. In the most critical dimension of such engagement, the alliance relationship with the United States, Australia's capacity for burden-sharing and value-adding is diminishing, not expanding. In other forms of international defence engagement, the White Paper's emphases seem designed to compensate for budgetary shortfalls and other deficiencies elsewhere in the policy narrative. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Working from recently declassified Australian and British government files, this paper examines the archival evidence on policy thinking in London and Canberra towards the Five Power Defence Arrangements (FPDA) during the period 1970-75. The article argues that one of the main reasons for the Heath government's decision to deploy a token military force in Southeast Asia as part of a multilateral defence arrangement with Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia and Singapore was the desire to uphold these Commonwealth connections. By contrast, Canberra was beginning to question the value of such arrangements in a rapidly changing Southeast Asian strategic environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]