I

ndonesia will determine its relationship with China based on its interests. It is also clear which military bloc is engaged in aggressive militarism (as is evident by successive and expanding wars/military operations). It is not China.

Despite current US and Australian '€œpublic relations'€ initiatives and the employment of (disingenuous) rhetoric (as similarly used with China), the ongoing and significant US-Australian military buildup clearly indicates preparations for potential military conflict with both China and Indonesia.

When actions betray rhetoric, it is clear deceit is being employed. This is to be expected as deceit is a tool of war. Despite the official language that the US and Australia are '€œpartners'€ of Indonesia, the US-Australian military buildup is creating a different reality. Those who suggest that the US-Australian military buildup does not have security implications for both China and Indonesia are either naive or dishonest.

The implications of this military buildup are self-evident. Similarly, those who engage in spin have little credibility as honest brokers. It is respectfully advisable that Indonesian officials respond with caution to current Australian '€œpublic relations'€ initiatives. Such initiatives are often associated with efforts to better facilitate military enhancements while minimizing the reaction from Indonesia.

In addition to the economic situation, the militarism of a different military bloc (US/NATO/Israel) is globally expanding. This militarism is unlikely to cease. The eventual outcome is therefore both logical and largely predictable.

This militarism also involves the buildup of military assets around China and Indonesia and preparations for potential war through the development of the Air-Sea Battle concept plan (the Australian military being increasingly integrated into these operational plans).

Indeed, Australia is being employed as a strategic platform for military and surveillance operations and its '€œdefense'€ procurements indicate preparations for potential involvement in military conflict with China and/or Indonesia. Australia is also hosting an increasing number of US forces/military assets (including nuclear-capable assets currently on a rotational basis) as part of these preparations.

The military buildup of US-Australian military forces/assets, the hosting of forces/nuclear capable assets, the enhancement of interoperable military projection/long-range operation/strike capabilities (conducted under claims of '€œdefense'€, '€œantiterrorism'€ or '€œhumanitarian'€ operations) are part of the strategic Asia pivot.

US military expansionism is occurring alongside NATO expansion. The US Asia pivot involves Australia and New Zealand, the Asia-Pacific component of a NATO partnership.

NATO also intends to enhance its strategic military relationship with Australia and New Zealand. Unfortunately, man'€™s capacity for mass destruction has developed in advance of his behavior. Only fools would employ an aggressive, globally expanding militarism in a nuclear era. In time they will understand.

Deii Udi C
Jakarta