91������̳

Defence minister Richard Marles has  for instructing one of its fighter jets to release flares at a Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft in the South China Sea on February 11.

Defence states that it was “unsafe” and “unprofessional”.

But they failed to mention where the incident took place.

The Chinese ministry said it was near the Paracel Islands in the South China Sea — a disputed archipelago under Chinese administration since 1974, to which Vietnam and Taiwan also claim sovereignty.

�ճ����Paracel Islands include about 130 small coral islands and reefs, 220 nautical miles (350 kilometres) south-east of  and about the same distance from Vietnam.

Under international law,  (EEZ) grant exclusive rights to marine resources up to 200 nautical miles from a country’s coastline. EEZs do not prohibit vehicle transit. 

According to  Douglas Guilfoyle “this is not a zone in which there is any express right to protect national security or prohibit foreign military exercises”.

Beijing claims that Australian military patrols of the South China Sea have been “violating Chinese sovereignty and endangering Chinese national security”. The exact location of the RAAF aircraft is unknown, but it was in the South China Sea.

The Australian Defence Force’s (ADF) “Operation Gateway” has, for decades, sent warships and planes to the South China Sea to undertake “surveillance”.

Since the incident, the corporate media have sounded the alarm at  travelling through Southeast Asia to Australia’s north-east on February 13.

By February 20, the frigates were reported sailing 150 nautical miles (240 kilometres) from the coast of Sydney — within Australia’s EEZ but still in international waters.

On February 22–23, China conducted live fire exercises in international waters outside Australia’s EEZ.

�³󾱱����� these exercise were “in accordance with international law”, he is hypocritically whipping up fears about the Chinese ships’ presence in the region. Shadow defence minister Andrew Hastie called the exercises “provocative”.

In the lead-up to a federal election, in which the AUKUS military alliance will be under scrutiny, Marles believes he has everything to gain from beating the drums of war.

“AUKUS is fundamentally a good deal for the United States, as of course it is for Australia,” he said on February 20.

“AUKUS is a really important arrangement between Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom,” he gushed to the media. “When I had the opportunity to meet with Secretary Hegseth a week or so ago, it was incredibly warm but supportive about what we’re trying to achieve, what both our countries are trying to achieve with AUKUS.”

But with Donald Trump back in charge of United States foreign policy, Marles may have overreached.

�ճ���� affirmed last year that nearly  have misgivings about the Australia-US alliance drawing it into a war in Asia “that would not be in Australia’s interests”.

Some 57% rate the potential of a military conflict in the South China Sea as a “critical threat” and are concerned it could  against China.

���� found that almost half of those polled last November said AUKUS must be reviewed.

Asked if Australia should “review its commitment to the AUKUS defence agreement, including the purchase of nuclear-powered submarines”, 21% said they “strongly agreed” and another 27% said they “somewhat agreed”.

Meanwhile, anti-war activists joined an international day of protest against military bases on February 23, called by .

The Sydney Anti-AUKUS Coalition went to Garden Island on February 22, next to HMAS Kuttabul, to protest the AUKUS military pact and demand Labor distance itself from the US.

Activists spoke about the danger of becoming a military target, the waste of money when so many societal essentials are underfunded and the environmental destruction inherent in building bases — for which the only purpose is more war.

This makes it even more important to rip up AUKUS and work on being a good neighbour in the Asia-Pacific.

[Pip Hinman is an activist with the .]