Richard Marles humiliated by US patrons, AUKUS silence deepens

“Deputy Prime Minister and Defense Minister Richard Marles will go to the US this week. At Washington DC, Deputy Prime Minister will meet with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and other senior administrative officials.”

This is a claim media declaration On Sunday, “Deputy Prime Minister” (as he insisted on being called) was published by Marles. It was wrong: Although there was Marles, there was no meeting with Hegseth Efforts to believe that there is one by sending a photo. Pentagon He told the Australian Media “There was no meeting. This was a encounter.”

Marles’s temporary trip to the United States was subjected to mystery and speculation with Marles’ media team background journalists. There would be some confusion at Hegseth. However, while rejecting the meeting, the Trump administration irritated the largest and hottest advocate for the US’s interests in the Australian government. Marles can represent a voter in Geelong, but the US military-industry is the man of the parliament. Maybe that’s why the Americans laugh a few hours after laughing the idea that it was a meeting, rowing and yesActually, after all, there there There was a meeting.

It’s too late, dude.

Except for Brownnosing, what exactly was Marles doing in Washington for two days? What did he discuss, presented and committed? The government informed the media that critical minerals, AUKUS, “US Force-Treaty initiatives” and the defense industry connections.

What Marles and the Albanians have been doing since they came to power are to lock Australia more tightly to the embrace of the US military machine, as Aukus showed, to the point where it seriously affects our defense skills and options.

And doubt is that the labor right wings are willing to provide unprecedented access to the critical mineral stocks of Australia to develop loyalty with Trump and save Aukus. Don Farrell pioneered previous efforts; Now Marles is trying to offer them. To sell a potentially a large -profitable resource existence in order to appease a Mafioso -like US regime, it can cause great economic damage to Australia and have been carried out with minimum transparency so far.

However, transparency is anathema for this government and especially for Marles. If you have followed the desk for submarine construction to the US and the United Kingdom to the United States and the United Kingdom, you will be aware that the government constantly rejects any information about them. Even the fact that payments are made to the USA Should be rewarded from the government.

CriraseTogether with some other media organizations, he tried to use the Freedom of Information Freedom to obtain the details of payments, but the Shambolic, who was in charge of implementing AUKUS, was stoned by the Australian submarine agency (ASA), the new organ of the Shambolic. ASA insists on documents that payments are not available. refuses to release There are few ridiculous relevant documents. The Ministry of Defense itself transmits all requests to ASA. In a repetitive model with AUKUS, we actually find much more than US officials, especially in their pre -appearance before the Congress, how the project went and what milestones are more than the government or defense bureaucrats.

This has been the government’s method of addressing AUKUS since its election: there is no minimum transparency and accountability. To this day, neither Marles nor the government has given the case for why Australia needed nuclear submarines and for what purposes. Again, we had to rely on the Americans – with their sensitive demands for making a commitment to use them in a war with China – for this.

A Pro-AUKUS brochure This week, a US Security Thinking Authority warns that it is in danger of questioning the delivery of the project and the lack of real results. “Report” became a surprising champion AustraliaIt is a bit difficult to take seriously because it contains an absolute uluyan: while justifying the Trump administration’s examination of AUKUS, the authors claims that the writers are the only Aukus member who has not done his own review since his establishment ”.

This is patented: Scott Morrison announced a review or even a parliamentary investigation to Aukus since he was in line in a few minutes in Labor 2021. The authors confused Aukus by a review of Defense Senior Dennis Richardson, a review of ASA’s disaster.

And Aukus rejected concerns about the impact of Australian sovereignty as “overly inflated ,, while the Trump administration’s emphasis on clarifying Australia’s commitment to support the US in a possible defense [sic] Taiwan is therefore a particularly difficult issue for Canberra. ”Their solution will be more concrete assurance that the planning, which will have a process of strategy and organizing military operations in order to achieve certain goals of military strategists from the United States and Australia, will provide us more concrete assurance that submarines sold to Australia will not be lost when necessary and necessary.”

In other words, Australia and the US should plan a war with China and Australian submarines. Is there a better way to show Australia, a sovereign nation, and is there a better way to show that we are not committing any commitments about the use of our ships?

But to return to the key point: at least the Americans are talking about what Aukus wants for. On the other hand, Richard Marles seems to be the last person to tell us something about Aukus. US bosses badly humiliated him.