Reporting for The Financial Times, correspondent Anna Fifield assessed the "Land Down Under" in terms of the current situation in Asia. She began by noting that Australian soldiers were recently dispatched to the Solomon Islands as a peacekeeping force to restore order and stability to the island archipelago troubled by five long years of conflict.
"Alarmed by the rise of instability and Islamic fundamentalism among the near neighbours," Fifield stated, "Canberra is adopting an increasingly interventionist stance that aligns it closely with Washington in the war on terror."
Another recent bombing in Indonesia seems to support the necessity of the current policy. After all, the first bombing in Bali last year killed 89 Australian tourists. And despite protestations to the contrary, ties to predominantly Muslim Jakarta have been troubling.
Increasingly the new economic and financial infrastructure emerging in Asia apparently excludes full Australian participation. The Land Down Under is increasingly viewed as "a white outpost more attuned to the interests of America and the United Kingdom" (ibid.). One professor of Asian studies at Adelaide University noted that "Australia is now increasingly perceived in Asian capitals as a self-appointed deputy to the U.S."
According to Fifield, "The unresolved question is whether—and at what cost—Australia can align itself with Anglo-Saxon partners on the other side of the world without jeopardising its position among its neighbours in Asia."
This raises an even more fundamental long-term question. Why did Australia willingly send its soldiers halfway around the world to fight in two world wars alongside Britain and the United States? Why is it supporting American policy now? The underlying answer is found in our full-color booklet The United States and Britain in Bible Prophecy.
(Source: The Financial Times [London].)