US seeks to expand military presence in Asia

[Gerald]

US Defence Secretary Robert Gates has said the US wants a larger military presence in Asia

On his way to Australia for annual security talks, Mr Gates said closer ties with Australia would help the US expand its role in South East Asia.

The US would focus on fighting piracy, improving counter-terrorism, disaster aid and cyber-security, he said.

He said the US move was not to contain China, which is engaged in various territorial disputes in the region.

Mr Gates said Washington had no plans for more bases in the region.

But he expressed hopes for increased co-operation on issues such as missile defence and "space surveillance".

"We're looking at a number of different options," he said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11705355



Note:7 November 2010 Last updated at 09:17 GMT

[papa_smurf]

But Mr Gates said: "This isn't about China at all."
"It is more about our relationships with the rest of Asia than it is about China," he told reporters travelling with him.


I wonder, what with the Chinese navy building more submarines, and wanting to build aircraft carriers to expand their territorial influence, and then theres still the Taiwan question. Yes its current leader(Taiwan's) is pro Beijing but who knows what will happen in the near future.

[THE_MASK]

KEEP OUT

[Jimbuna]

KEEP OUT

Agreed....no good will come of it, especially if China see it as a response to their military expansion.

[Skybird]

It is a response to China, no matter what Gates claims in dementi.

It's also about the resource fields in the South Chinese Sea.

Meanwhile Obama expressed support for India's wish to become the 6th permanent memeber of the UN security council. A logical gesture. I see India as a key player in the region, with in the longterm maybe even brighter economic prospects than China. I wish Europeans would try harder to reach a better common lineup with India. But it seems Europeans are more busy with headlessly overstretching the EU with additional, far from vital memebers.

It is ironic. The EU wanted to win in political weight by becoming larger and larger. By following that "strategy", it in fact became lighter and more meaningless on the international stage, since the more people crowd the European kitchen, the worse the cooking must be.

[SteamWake]

China tees up G20 showdown with US

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/03567a28-e8a3-11df-a383-00144feab49a.html#axzz14iOS13Ys

[Ducimus]

China is well on it's way to becoming a superpower.

My personal thought is, they will rise to be the sole superpower. We, the US, are really in decline, while China is on the rise. Our interests seem to collide, and if an open conventional war should ever develop, i do not think it's a far stretch to say that their industry and manufucturing capability will enable them to do to us, what we were able to do to the axis in WW2 - to out produce us. All those manufuacturing jobs greedy CEO's outsourced to china will come back to haunt us, as we won't have enough industry here to compete.

[diver]

KEEP OUT
Very closed mind you have of things there.


Can't say I agree, I can see plenty of benefits.

[TarJak]

Well there are clear benefits for cosying up to China too but no-one seems over keen on that idea. This article gives an interesting view on the dichotomy our foreign policy is in right now: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/two-suitors-but-shared-values-have-made-our-choice-clear-20101108-17kh6.html

And we have a Prime Minister who is self confessed as being a complete noob and not really interested when it comes to foreign affairs.:nope: