EOS builds its own military-industrial complex

Written by: Nick G. on 2 June 2026

 

Australian company EOS has just announced the appointment of Air Vice-Marshal (Ret’d) Catherine Roberts AO, CSC and Major General (Ret’d) Kathryn Toohey AM, CSC as Non-Executive Directors, effective 1 June 2026.

Roberts was Australia’s inaugural Commander of Defence Space Command, led the establishment and operational delivery of Australia’s military space capability and has worked extensively with allied defence and government organisations across North America, Europe and the Indo-Pacific.

Toohey has worked in sovereign defence capability, infrastructure, digital systems and national security environments. She is on the board of right-wing opinion maker Australian Strategic Policy Institute Ltd.

The following excerpt from our recent publication “Fight the Militarisation of Space” may help to understand the significance of this merging of industrial and military interests and their application to the military domain of Space:

On November 30, 2023, the Australian Defence Magazine hosted a Space Summit in Canberra. If the various imperialist blocs actually honoured the UN Outer Space Treaty there would never have been such a Summit. 

This was made clear by the contribution to the Summit of Australian company Electro Optic Systems (EOS). The company began operating more than 40 years ago in the civilian arena, but has increasingly focussed on the following: 

• space domain intelligence and control services 
• laser, remote weapon system and counter-drone technologies 
• high-performance naval satellite communications products 

2022 was a disastrous year for the company financially, and it lost many staff. Its Chairman and CEO told shareholders in the 2022 annual report that they were cutting back so “we are focused on core business areas where we have genuine technological advantages over competitors. Current examples include our family of remote weapon systems (RWS); our long-established expertise in space domain awareness and other space services”. The presentation it made at the Summit was basically to sell its services to US imperialism in its contention with Chinese social-imperialism over the seeking of military superiority in Space. 

It claimed that Australia is one of just two countries with the capabilities to neutralise large numbers of satellites passing over its territory. EOS spokesperson Dr Ben Greene said Australian Space Domain Awareness (SDA) covered around one sixth of the sky, delivered by, among others, EOS with its laser tracking facility in Canberra, the RAAF’s space telescope in WA and the new US-owned LeoLabs Australia space radar, also in WA. 

“We could intercept and interdict the satellite operations of any country on earth, if we chose to. That’s a really powerful platform for us,” he said. “It’s quite feasible now to talk about taking out hundreds of satellites a day if that was necessary.”

The US imperialist drive for control of Space, aided and abetted by the likes of EOS, was revealed on May 29 by the US SPACECOM’s Chief Scientist who said that “Developing capabilities for operations in cislunar space, including offensive space control, is among the top new science and technology (S&T) priorities for US Space Command (SPACECOM)”. This was reported in the US online journal Breaking Defense (see: SPACECOM exploring tech for future offensive cislunar ops: Chief Scientist - Breaking Defense ).

He added, “…we want to exploit that space from an offensive sort of space control perspective.” 

Both SPACECOM and the Space Force have been expressing increased interest in future operations in the vast volumes of space between Earth’s outer orbit and that of the moon as an outgrowth of President Donald Trump’s December Executive Order on space superiority.

A SPACECOM spokesperson said the aim was that the US, “working alongside its allies and partners, has the freedom of action to operate in space and the ability to project power when and where required.”

EOS’s appointments of senior retired military personnel to its board indicates that it will seek to profit from the US militarisation of Space.

We must stop Australia’s involvement in the US military’s colonisation of Space.

'Dispersed operations': Pentagon upgrades the Indo-Pacific Strategy

Written by: (Contributed) on 2 June 2026

 

(Source: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0)

Official announcements from the Pentagon that the Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS) is being upgraded into a “new defense architecture taking shape across the Indo-Pacific” have revealed far more about the changing balance of forces taking place across the wider region than the US is usually prepared to divulge. A down-scaling of the importance of Guam for hosting sensitive defence and security facilities has taken place due to China's increased capacity to hit the Micronesian islands with missiles; they have been assessed by the Pentagon as vulnerable.

Alternative sitings for the Guam facilities have, therefore, been identified; other geo-strategic military facilities, including those in Australia, have also been subject to quick relocation procedures. The moves carry all the hallmarks of serious preparations by the US for 'real-war scenarios' in the Indo-Pacific region.

The Pentagon has acknowledged a changing balance of forces is taking place across the vast Indo-Pacific region; China has moved from being a competitor to traditional US hegemonic positions toward establishing primacy in some areas.

Regional US defence and security provision has, historically, included the role of sensitive intelligence facilities based at Pine Gap in Central Australia, being linked to a hub on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, and their counterpart based on Guam in Micronesia. The two hubs swing on an arc from Pine Gap and have been upgraded for military operations, linked to Darwin Harbour as a support centre for deployments.

Revelations, therefore, that Guam has been assessed by the Pentagon as well within the range of later designed Chinese missiles, has caused the US military to re-organise part of their regional defence and security provision; Guam, itself, is regarded as a target. (1) Recognition of the problem, by the Pentagon, also acknowledges China's range and sophistication of military satellites for intelligence-gathering and planning of operations.

The fact that Guam rests upon the Second Island Chain, used by the US to block China's access and egress into Oceania and Australia's geo-strategic regional area, has caused a serious setback to traditional US hegemonic positions.

War Secretary Hegseth, for example, recently addressed a regional defence and security summit with the announcement that 'stronger alliances, greater burden-sharing and a shift away from dependence on the US', were to become the order of the day. (2) The US, however, continue to take the line that peace is established through military strength. (3)

The moves follow already established acknowledgement that the US is no longer the dominant power in the Pacific. In fact, a US Congressional committee revealed those findings nearly a decade ago; it also included reference to the Pentagon making greater use of both Australia and Japan as regional hubs for 'US interests'. (4)

It should, therefore, come as no great surprise to find moves by the Pentagon to draw Australia into the position of a 'central node' alongside the US; it marks a shift away from the traditional 'hubs and spokes' type defence and security provision toward a 'multi-node web' with the US in position at the centre. (5)

And recent high-level diplomatic meetings between Australia and Japan appear to follow the new US regional upgrades to existing defence and security provision. A diplomatic statement issued by the Japanese Ambassador to Canberra, Kazuhiro Suzuki, noted that the recent visit to Australia by PM Sanae Takaichi, aimed to 'forge an unprecedented level of solidarity and strategic co-operation'. (6)

Indonesia and Australia involved

Indonesia also has an upgraded role, alongside Australia and the US. A report in Breaking Denece (see note 1) talks of “the emerging amphibious partnership among the US, Australia, and Indonesia”. 

“The Australia-Indonesia Defence Cooperation Agreement and the expansion of Exercise Keris Woomera are formally a bilateral story. But that framing leaves out the unspoken third leg of the triangle.

“The United States Marine Corps is woven through nearly every aspect of what Australia brings to the littoral. Marine Rotational Force–Darwin has made northern Australia a sustained laboratory for US and Australian experimentation in Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations, stand-in forces, land-based anti-ship fires, and the logistics of dispersing small lethal units across austere island locations. The November 2024 amphibious landing at Banongan Beach in East Java, the largest and most complex joint drill Australia and Indonesia had ever conducted, carried that intellectual and operational DNA directly into a bilateral framework where no American flag appeared on the beach.”

Camel train

As an example of the projected dispersal of forces, Breaking Defense cites the Australian “camel train project” which uses drones to carry out supply chain tasks in northern Australia.  

“The problem is operationally straightforward: Australia has only a handful of permanently manned air bases, all of which would be priority targets in a high-intensity conflict. Camel Train addresses this by turning general aviation itself into a defense asset,”

No doubt influenced by the successful use of drones in the war to resist Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the article says that “Australia has approximately 30,000 licensed drone operators certified under CASA standards; in a mobilization phase, this represents a potential operational reserve that has never existed before in this form.”

New role for “lower-level partners”

Announcements about wider scale military inter-operability and the significance of the AUKUS agreements have to be viewed in that light. The US will maintain its control of existing military agreements although it will increasingly rely upon US allies to take front-line diplomatic and military positions, as directed by the Pentagon.

What the Pentagon appears to have also begun is a systematic upgrade to their IPS, by using former lower-level partners as hubs for future regional deployments and the siting of military facilities at short notice. While the main IPS, for example, uses the 'Quad' to contain and encircle China, lower-level partners, including the ROK, Taiwan, Singapore, Vietnam and others in the South Pacific, are now regarded as strategic attachments to the main military body. (7) They are now set for enhanced use, and operations, by the Pentagon.

A recent statement from Canberra about the defence and security of Australian military bases also contained fears that China may have the potential to use their advanced satellite imaging to threaten military facilities in the Northern Territories  'with a long-range strike'. (8) A recent military operation, for example, relocated important facilities 'to safer locations … it was … taken to rehearse counter-strike operations had this occurred due to conflict'. (9) It was noted in military communiques that 'within 24 hours we'd flushed the base, repositioned the assets', and then conducted a lengthy air-born operation involving flights of 2,400 nautical miles in a 'maritime strike mission'. (10) South China Seas?

In conclusion, the moves can only endanger individual countries across the Indo-Pacific region by drawing them closer to likely military hostilities between the US and China:

                                         We need an independent foreign policy!

1.     The new Indo-Pacific security architecture, Breaking Defence, 18 May 2026.
2.     Pentagon chief Hegseth, Gulf News, 30 May 2026; and, 'US not retreating, its remaking world,   Australian, 1 June 2026.
3.     Ibid.
4.     Study: US no longer the dominant power in the Pacific, Information Clearing House, 22 August 2019.
5.     Breaking Defence, op.cit., 18 May 2026.
6.     See: Takaichi's visit strategic more than ceremonial, Australian, 15 May 2026.
7.     See: The reasons behind Washington's push for GSOMIA., Hankyoreh, 12 November 2019.
8.     Making our bases harder nuts to crack, Indian Ocean Defence and Security Supplement, Australian, 26 May 2026.
9.     Ibid.
10.   Ibid.

Contradictions and conflicts in the race for Space

Written by: Nick G. on 27 May 2026

 

The contest for the domination of Space between China and the US is reflected in yesterday’s (May 26) announcement by NASA that it plans to inhabit the Moon. However, the hawks pushing for a militarised Space are demanding to be included in the action.

Since Trump’s appointment of Jared Isaacman as NASA Administrator last December, NASA has released various announcements about US objectives, particularly in relation to the Artemis II circumnavigation of the Moon. Isaacman in his private capacity has flown in Space aboard Elon Musk’s SpaceX Inspiration4. He is a billionaire whose wealth came from a credit card processing company he founded, and he has a private fleet of jet fighters to train the U.S. military for aerial combat.

Yesterday’s announcement packaged previous statements into a plan for a permanent lunar outpost, involving robotic landers, moon buggies and hopping drones before the expiry of Trump’s presidency. Placing astronauts on the Moon by this date will also give the US a jump on China, which currently has four astronauts (Taikonauts) on permanent rotation aboard its Tiangong space station. It has announced plans to land two astronauts on the Moon before 2030.

The threat of lunar colonisation 

The 1967 UN Outer Space Treaty (OST) defines the Moon and all outer space as the "province of all mankind". It says that outer space is “not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means”. 

Despite this, the US is commercialising its work in Space and speaks of the Moon as its property.

On 24 March, Isaacman said that “NASA is committed to achieving the near impossible once again, to return to the Moon before the end of President Trump’s term, build a Moon base, establish an enduring presence, and do the other things needed to ensure American leadership in space… This time, the goal is not flags and footprints. This time, the goal is to stay. America will never again give up the moon.” 

The White House’s official X account released a graphic with Isaacman’s pledge.

Military muscling in 

Belligerent and hawkish opinion makers in the military are demanding their cut of the action.

They point out that China’s space program is “completely military-led” whereas “the United State has long maintained separation between its military and civilian space enterprises.” 

This, claims Col. Kyle Pumroy (Ret.) writing in the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies’ paper “Military Human Spaceflight: A Key Component to US Space Superiority”, places the US at a disadvantage in the race with China for control of Space.

Sounding like something out of science fiction, Pumroy argues that “now is the time to begin placing Guardians in space to develop the skills, tools, and concepts to build a future capacity to defend core US interests…”

“Guardians”?  The term was adopted by the US Space Force in 2020 for its service members, analogous to “soldiers” in the Army or “sailors” in the Navy. So “Guardians in Space” means actual Space Force personnel physically operating in orbit, on space stations, or potentially on the Moon, rather than controlling satellites remotely from Earth.   

As a branch of the military, Pumroy argues, the Guardians need the legal protection of the US Congress’ Title 10 of the US Code which authorises all aspects of military organisation and operation. 

“While upholding the OST should be the United States’ desire and priority, pragmatically, it must prepare otherwise,” writes Pumroy. “Only Guardians can ensure human spaceflight dominance and maintain the strategic flexibility to conduct Title 10 operations in defence of US interests in space.”

In the Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels made the observation that “The need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the entire surface of the globe. It must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connexions everywhere.”

Now, with Isaacman, the logic of colonial exploitation reemerges with this commercial imperative: “The Artemis program will live on past any one launch vehicle, and at some point in the future, transition to commercial pathways with crewed missions as often as every six months to ensure we never give up the Moon again…. stimulates a lunar economy…(and) Ignite the orbital economy – launch frequent astronaut missions to the Space Station, prioritize high ‘commercial potential’ science, work to stimulate more private astronaut missions and support a transition to one or more commercial space stations.”

Stop the militarisation of Space!
No to the colonisation of the Moon!
End the US-China Space race!

Fight the militarisation of Space

A new Party publication focuses on Australian involvement in the militarisation of Space. Wars of the past were fought in three domains: land, sea and air. Two new domains have now been added, cyber and Space, the later in violation of the UN Outer Space Treaty. The booklet “Fight the Militarisation of Space” can be downloaded here: https://www.cpaml.org/web/uploads2/Stop+the+militarisation+of+space.pdf #auspol

SA nurses, midwives to resume industrial action

 Written by: Nick G. on 22 May 2026

 

Representing over 25,000 nurses, midwives and health care workers in SA, the SA Branch of the Australian Nursing and Midwives Federation announced that members would recommence industrial action in the public sector last Monday (18/5). 

Industrial action was suspended in February when the government made an offer of a 6% “interim administrative increase” in the lead up to the state election. Following the election, negotiations resumed over the ANMF’s full wage claim and demands for improved conditions. These negotiations have now stalled with no further offer forthcoming from SA Govt.

Negotiations had begun on April 30, 2025. More than a year has now passed, which is typical of how governments and other employers string out the process in the hope of weakening the resolve of their workers.

However, the determination of nurses and midwives for wages and conditions improvements is very strong. Earlier in the campaign, it featured some of the largest strike rallies seen in SA.

Health workers want respect

While wages and conditions are important, especially at a time of cost-of-living crisis, the ANMF says the campaign is about respect, saying that resumption of the industrial campaign is the only way to force the government to show members the respect they deserve.

This is important for public sector employees in daily contact with members of the public. 

They want to know that their service to the community is respected by their employer, the government, and that they are not resented as a burden on its finances.

At the same time as their conditions of employment give rise to the need for struggle, their campaign is constrained by the professional nature of their employment and their concern to not place patients at risk by withdrawing their services.

This week, ANMF members started wearing campaign t-shirts to work as well as only fulfilling roles strictly within their job requirements. Next week industrial action will escalate to bans on non-clinical duties. If a decent offer has not been made by June, nurses will move to strike action.

Malin-Auskas: respect for the big end of town

The respect demanded of the Malinauskas government by the ANMF is slow in coming, in contrast to his service to the big end of town and to the circuses he uses government funds to provide in the hope that workers will forget to worry about bread.

In February, Malinauskas announced that SA would host the Motorcycle Grand Prix and take it from Phillip Island in Victoria. He has not revealed how much SA would have to pay to host the event, but it will be considerable as the operators had just knocked back an offer of additional funding from the Victorian government to keep it in that State. 

He has also committed $45 million to redevelop the public North Adelaide golf course, firstly for the now-collapsed LIV Golf tournament, and now for a replacement arrangement with Golf Australia.

In August 2025, the state, federal and Tasmanian governments stepped in to pledge $135 million to a bail out of Port Pirie’s metal smelter and Nyrstar’s zinc refinery in Hobart. The state government invested $55 million with the Commonwealth spending $57.5 million and the Tasmanian government contributing the remaining $22.5 million. As of May 1, things are back to square one, with Nyrstar asking for a further government bail-out to continue its operations. (Nyrstar is owned by Trifigura, one of the three-largest commodities companies in the world. It had revenue of $244.3 billion in 2023 yet demands taxpayers fund its operations here.  In January 2026, it secured one of the first two special licenses issued by the United States, to negotiate sales and to export Venezuelan oil. It has been mired in controversies and scandals around the world.)

At Whyalla, the SA government has firmly committed around $650 million to the Whyalla rescue and transition package so far. A further $140 million in “contingency” funds has been allocated. 

The government has refused to take out equity in either of the Pt Pirie and Whyalla bail-outs, arguing that operations are best left with the private sector. His respect for them, and belief in them, is undisguised. 

At the National Energy Conference this week, Malinauskas displayed his loyalty to the mining and fossil fuel industries by announcing that the SA government would move to overturn a ten-year moratorium on fracking in the State’s South-East which had been sought by farmers and grape-growers. In the past, Malinauskas has had family connections with the Santos corporation, and is keen to see them supported – even respected – by his government.

Whilst the bulk of capital costs associated with the AUKUS arrangements are met by the federal government, Malinauskas has thrown in $5.4 million to establish the new “Office for AUKUS” inside the SA government to coordinate the state’s role in the nuclear submarine program. That project obviously has his respect and support.

There are many more Malinauskas government handouts to the corporate sector and the military industries, but he declines to respect the hardworking people who hold our community together.

We demand better pay and conditions for our public sector nurses and midwives who are more deserving of our respect than the clowns providing circuses for our distraction, and the militarists who are driving the competition for our destruction.

 

Australian data-centres to serve US Techint

 Written by: (Contributed) on 19 May 2026

 

(Source Wikimedia Commons)

NOTE: TECHINT is an umbrella term for the technical INTs: IMINT (Imagery Intelligence), SIGINT (Signals Intelligence) and MASINT (Measurement and Signature Intelligence). It is a section of US-led intelligence-gathering focussed upon scientific material concerned with spatial wave lengths, time dependence modulation and hydromagnetic data. It is data-mined through AI; it is, furthermore, central to Pentagon military planning and counter-insurgency and counter-intelligence provision.

In early May the NSW Liberal Party tabled a policy document which outlined making the state 'a safe haven for sensitive government information from Pacific nations and Five Eyes partners'. (1) The proposal is planned to make use of Australia as a dominant diplomatic player in the neighbouring region, and consolidate its role as a regional hub for 'US interests'.

Pine Gap, in Central Australia, together with other less well publicised military facilities, are already used extensively by the US for domestic, regional and global intelligence-gathering. The plan is now to systematically upgrade the facilities through routine on-line data-mining facilities and use of AI for profiling whole populations. (2) While Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act provides safeguards for US citizens, residents of other countries are not so fortunate; the US intelligence services are permitted to 'collect and analyse vast amounts of overseas communications without a warrant'. (3) And they do.

Declassified documents from the previous Cold War leave little to the imagination about US-led strategies in the present one with China. A preoccupation with US intelligence agencies recruiting criminals and their associates to assist with intelligence-gathering has been well recorded. They were, and remain, responsible for profiling whole populations onto black, grey or white lists, whereby adversary targets were identified and prioritised. (4)

The Liberal Party proposal has also planned 'digital embassies' which will operate under legal codes of 'diplomatic immunity'. (5) Namely, the data institutions will be above the law; there will be little, if any, accountability. The fact that the proposals also include Australia's Five Eyes four partners leaves little doubt the core of the initiative remains intelligence-gathering. Secrecy is both implicit and explicit.

The proposals, moreover, are not intended for localised usage; it noted the intention to make 'the data embassy concept a signal that NSW can be a leading location in the southern hemisphere for data'. (6)  

Two important considerations, therefore, arise:

Firstly, Australia, as a regional hub for 'US interests' in the southern half of the region is linked to Japan as the northern hub. Recent high-level diplomatic initiatives between the two countries and the noted 'deepening security ties' have to be evaluated in that light. (7)

The main focus remains the vast Indo-Pacific region, which is regarded by the US as a potential theatre of war; sensitive island chains are used by the Pentagon as demarcation lines to restrict China's access and egress.

Recent high-level diplomatic initiatives between New Zealand, one of Australia's Five Eyes partners, and the Cook Islands, might be regarded as irrelevant to a casual observer. To the contrary, the Cook Islands sits on sensitive island chains and is also 'sitting on one of the most significant critical mineral reserves in the world, including billions of tonnes of cobalt, nickel, manganese and copper, all essential to modern defence technology'. (8)

Recent moves by the Cook Islands government to forge closer links with China were assessed by the Five Eyes as a major defence and security problem linked to neo-colonial ambitions. A high-level diplomatic stand-off took place within the corridors of power.

The Solomon Islands, likewise, is regarded as extremely sensitive: a highly volatile ethnic-based problem causing long-time political instability and governance problems and relations between certain local figures and China has been assessed along lines as 'leadership changes in the strategically located archipelago are closely watched by western diplomats'. (9)

The techniques used by western diplomatic officials were not specified in the official communique although they remain likely to be based in the monitoring of all telecommunications. Vast troves of intelligence are systematically analysed by AI, and then used for profiling and stored in computer banks for future use, if, and when, required.

The surveillance techniques deployed by the US follow decisions taken over a decade ago by the Pentagon's Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) to upgrade already existing facilities for a further 1,600 'collectors in positions around the world … US embassies typically have a set number of slots for intelligence operatives posing as diplomats'. (10) Data-centres?

Secondly, as the US strives to extend its three island chains to fourth and fifth counterparts across the Indian Ocean, they are systematically strengthening already existing chains; it is not coincidental that NSW exists on a straight line from the Kuril Islands of the
Frontier of the Northern Sphere, and Antarctica, the Frontier of the Southern Sphere. (11)
The third island chain, likewise, beginning with the Aleutian Islands and covering the Pacific Rim and Oceania, also uses Australia as a strategic reference point.

And the role of the NSW Liberal Party and 'US interests'?

It is highly significant to note the incoming US head of their Canberra embassy, Dr. David Brat, is not an ambassador but a special envoy, with wider diplomatic responsibilities for the Indo-Pacific region. (12) The US diplomatic position has also followed previous policies outlined in the Partners in the Blue Pacific initiatives, where 'Washington is renewing efforts to remain influential in the Pacific region with an increased diplomatic, security and economic presence … the initiative drew heavily upon … the UK, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan, aiming to forge closer connections with pacific governments'. (13)

In conclusion, the Liberal Party policy proposal would appear in cahoots with US-led intelligence planning. 

The legacy of the previous Cold War remains and hangs like a shackle upon the present one:

                                          We need an independent foreign policy!

 

1.     Libs plan 'digital embassies' for Pacific nations, Five Eyes allies, Australian, 8 May 2026.
2.     Spy bill extended, Australian, 20 April 2026.
3.     Ibid.
4.     See: Secret army's war on the left, The Observer (London), 18 November 1990; and, Army's Project X had wider audience, The Washington Post, 6 March 1997; and, Lost History: Project X, The Consortium magazine, 31 March 1997.
5.     Australian, op.cit., 8 May 2026.
6.     Ibid.
7.     Deepening security ties with Japan matter at 'severe' time, Editorial, Australian, 5 May 2026.
8.     NZ resolves Cook Islands security 'family feud', The Weekend Australian, 11-12 April 2026.
9.     PM's ousting ripples across Pacific, Australian, 8 May 2026.
10.   Pentagon plays the spy game, The Guardian Weekly (U.K.), 7 December 2012.
11.   Peter Projection, World Map, Actual Size; and, US to build anti-China missile network along first island chain, Nikkei, 5 March 2021; and, US Indo-Pacific Command proposes new missile capabilities to deter China, RFA., 5 March 2021.
12.   Tea Party hero to be envoy Down Under, Australian, 29 April 2026.1
13.   Solomon Islands deals a blow by refusing to sign Pacific Declaration: Report, Sputnik News, 20220928, 10 February 2022.
 

The US War Budget and the Pacific (Pt. 1)

 Written by: (Contributed) on 12 May 2026

 

Hidden within recently announced US defence spending lies information about highly sensitive signals-intelligence (SIGINT) facilities focussed on the Pacific, using the military facilities of allies, including Australia and Japan. The information remains well hidden. The US remains preoccupied with the changing balance of forces already taking place across the Pacific. The vast region is regarded by the Pentagon as a potential theatre of war with China; the US, therefore, monitors Beijing's 'soft diplomacy' in the Pacific and their ability to consolidate an already formidable power-base.

In late April the US congress announced their approval for defence spending of over US$1 trillion; it is also set to increase to US$1.5 trillion next year. (1) Hidden in the small print of the government documents lies where some of the defence spending has been allocated. The Philippines, for example, now hosts nine US military facilities inside their own military bases. Some of the US facilities are regarded as off-bounds to Philippine citizens, revealing their sensitive nature and higher levels of security clearances used by the Pentagon. Other countries, likewise, have similar facilities.

The sensitive US military facilities include higher level access to their Pacific Deterrence Initiative designed to establish a network of precision-strike missiles along the first island chain, with similar facilities lodged along the second island chain; the radar systems are used for intelligence-gathering. (2) The whole system is expected to be fully operational next year. (3)

The main focus of US involvement in the Pacific has been China, which is regarded as a serious competitor to traditional US hegemonic positions. In fact, a US congressional commission nearly a decade ago concluded 'that the US is no longer clearly superior to the threats … it faces … and that it would struggle to win wars against China'. (4)

The balance of forces has already swung, and swings still further.

The commission, moreover, recommended the US 'further relying on traditional allies, including Australia and Japan'. (5) It was, therefore, no surprise to find examples of recent high-level diplomacy between the two countries. Last month, coinciding with the US announcement of their defence spending, Australia, for example, hosted the new Japanese prime minister, Sanae Takaichi in Canberra, for high-level diplomatic talks which included reference to 'growing security and defence co-operation'. (6) The US has had to increasingly rely upon Australia and Japan as two major regional hubs for 'US interests' after the Trump administration sidelined India as a strategic corner of the so-called 'Quad'.

The role of the US, furthermore, has not been ambiguous; their intelligence assessments that Australia 'is grossly unprepared for modern warfare', leaves little to the imagination. (7) The Pentagon is not planning for the maintenance of the status quo, but aggressive foreign policy initiatives to effectively challenge China, diplomatically and militarily.

The finalisation of a new defence and security agreement between Australia and Fiji, the Vuvale Union, has drawn a highly geo-strategic country in the Pacific, into Australia's military orbit. (8) The fact that Fiji swings on an arc from the Lavarack Barracks near Townsville, including the Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and Canberra, is not coincidental. The Queensland-based military facilities host Combat Signals and the Combat Services Support Battalion. (9) They also provide Australian-based military facilities with their US counterparts, operational since the Vietnam War over half a century ago. (10)  

Pentagon military intelligence assessments fear Vanuatu negotiating a pact with China, leading to the establishment of military facilities in what has, historically, been inside Australia's defence and security cordon for protection from incursions from northern sources. (11)

The Solomon Islands, likewise, remains diplomatically close to China. The tiny country of only 850,000 inhabitants, is only 2,000 kms from Australia, and regarded a geo-strategic for Australia's defence and security. The recent ousting of prime minister Jeremiah Manele in a no-confidence vote, has already heightened diplomatic tensions with Canberra. It has been noted that, 'leadership changes in the strategically located archipelago are closely watched by western diplomats'. (12) How they watch developments, remains the matter in question.   

And developments, elsewhere, have some bearing upon the matter.

Political discourse in the US congress and senate have finally approved a bill extending controversial surveillance programs which focus upon section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which is responsible for the US intelligence services collecting and analysing vast troves of foreign telecommunications without a warrant. (13)

The surveillance system used by the US intelligence services rests upon the Echelon facilities composed of vast computer banks programmed to collect all telecommunications, which have now been upgraded with AI for profiling. (14) The facilities are referred to as data-centres, in polite diplomatic discourse.

Amid the US-led diplomatic challenge to China, the Trump administration have announced their choice of a new diplomatic representative in Canberra. Aptly named, Dr. Brat, is set to soon arrive in Canberra. Conservative, and a noted right-winger, Brat resides in that shadowy area of Christian fundamentalism and has been noted as having attacked 'moral relativism'. (15) His appointment, as envoy denotes his role in the wider region, not merely Australia.  No doubt he will be kept very busy monitoring developments in the Pacific:
                                           
We need an independent foreign policy!

1.     Military spending surges to $4 trillion, Australian, 28 April 2026.
2.     US to build anti-China missile network along first island chain, Nikkei, 5 March 2021; and, US Indo-Pacific Command proposes new missile capabilities to deter China, RFA., 5 March 2021.
3.     Ibid.
4.     Study: US no longer dominant power in the Pacific, Information Clearing House, 22 August 2019.
5.     Ibid.
6.     Official Media Release: Prime Minister of Australia, Visit to Australia by the Prime Minister of Japan, 28 April 2026; and, Deepening security ties with Japan matter at 'severe time', Editorial, Australian, 5 May 2026.
7.     Australia 'not ready' for modern conflict, Australian, 25 February 2026.
8.     'Knife fight' heats up in Pacific, Australian, 6 May 2026.
9.     Wikipedia: Australian Military Bases.
10.   Ibid.
11.   Australian, op.cit., 6 May 2026.
12.   PM's ousting ripples across Pacific, Australian, 8 May 2026.
13.   Spy bill extended, Australian, 20 April 2026.
14.   See: Echelon, Espionage, Spies and Secrets, Richard M. Bennett, (London, 2002), PP. 89-93.
15.   Donald Trump names former Republican congressman as new US ambassador to  Australia, ABC news, 28 April 2026; and, Tea Party hero to be envoy down under,  Australian, 29 April 2026