Here's a coincidence for you. I first encountered this quote "the cemetery is full of indispensable men" with reference to Rookwood, the big cemetery in Sydney. Looking for the source yesterday, I found that the cemetery took its name from a 19th century novel by one William Ainsworth. Today, I started reading a library book, Fraud by Zadie Smith, centred around the famous case of the Tichborne claimant. But the central male character (so far) is none other than William Ainsworth. The universe is trying to tell me something, I imagine, but I have no idea what.
It's extraordinary how many people continue to pay attention to Trump's words. They are literally worth nothing. If Trump commits to do something, it means he'll either do it, fail to do it and blame some scapegoat, or forget about it and trust a compliant media* to do the same. For such a powerful country to be so utterly unreliable is an unfamiliar state of affairs. In the long run, it won't last as such a partner will certainly fade in global influence. I recently read that already alternative alliances are starting to form - a less powerful but trustworthy ally is worth more than a totally unpredictable one.
*I wonder if it's time to stop using the word "media". Maybe information system would be more appropriate.
It's precisely with someone like Trump that careful attention is paid to their (truth-free) statements, searching for some revealing nuance. There was a whole industry of Kremlinology bakc in the idea.
Australia’s politicians have never been capable of seeing us with an independent outlook, ever. I think in general they’d wet their pants at the idea. My guess is, we’ll pay through the nose for the AUKUS subs and take what we’re actually given, and pretend this was how it was meant to be. Australian politicians have always been toadies.
Trump, in stark contrast to Hitler, Franco, Stalin, and Putin, has no tactical prudence, and is closest to Mussolini in recklessness. Perhaps he thinks he hasn't got long. The unraveling of the American economy has already begun.
.
I have a niece in Washington who works for a Rockefeller foundation running projects for women's rigts in Ukraine and elsewhere in Eastern Europe. 500 out of the 700 staff, including her, have just been fired or furloughed, presumably a result of the Trump freeze on US aid. Given the subject-matter, the funding won't come back, nor will the soft power it bought.
Musk demanded access for DOGE operatives - who have no legal basis for anything - to the $1trn a year payments system run by the US Treasury. The career official responsible for this refused and resigned. I think of Ivan the Terrible's Oprichnina.
The core point of your article - that the world has fundamentally changed with Trump's second go - seems to be delusionally papered over by those seeking to profit. Imagine looking at the USA today and thinking "yeh, we SHOULD bind ourselves closer to that"
"Australia is not just spending big on US defence equipment but is also hosting ever-increasing short and long-term deployments of US forces across northern Australia."
Has this guy ever heard of the frog in the pot analogy?
The treaties of Westphalia, concluded in 1648, are considered the foundation of the modern understanding of national sovereignty. They were made in response to the eighty years war.
It’s not just a reputation for (relatively) fair dealing under the rule of law that will be lost should Trump’s imperialism work. It’s also feasible that Trump’s actions will presage a return to a long period of rolling never ending wars as the idea of each nation for itself takes hold.
On a lighter note, if you ever get the opportunity to go to Osnabrück, the room in the town hall where the negotiations took place is more or less exactly as the treaty delegates left it, except that it includes a portrait of each delegate above the place they sat - on a hard wooden bench that followed the perimeter of the room. Truly a slice of time travel.
Kissinger stated the USA doesn't have allies and friends it has interests. Australia has geopolitical imperatives for the USA. Economically under Trump the USA has no regard for Australia because those geopolitical imperatives are unaffected by economic policies. We're not getting the subs, AUKUS was more about creating facilities for British and USA nuclear subs. By 2040 three nuclear subs will be a drop in the ocean.
Thank you for a brilliant essay that is easily the best thing I have read on the current situation.
I said on this site a couple weeks back that I hope Trump's second term is an absolute disaster, including an economic catastrophe for the US middle and working classes, as that may be the only thing that will kill Trumpism stone dead. I stand by that.
It looks like I'm going to get my wish, however as is to be expected, Trump's policies are going to cause a heck of a lot of collateral damage in other countries and possibly even a global recession. Accordingly I'm almost delighted when I here of crazy land stuff like US citizens having their tires slashed by over zealous ICE officials who suspect them of being illegals.
In terms of Australia, I'm wondering if we need a nuclear arsenal. We can't be certain that Trumpism won't lead to a more unstable world that boils over into war or that western allegiances won't be weakened for decades to come. Ukraine, the nation of my ancestors (father's side) would not have been attacked if it kept its nukes. The downside is nuclear proliferation but I think we have to live with that.
An economic catastrophe for the US middle and working classes wouldn't necessarily be bad news for Trump, any more than the Reichstag fire was bad news for Hitler. He'll blame any economic problems on some or all of his preferred scapegoats. A catastrophe might even help him, because it would let him clear out his enemies, and a lot of people love joining a mob.
Will people see through his scapegoating tactics? They would with a functioning media/information system, but may not with what we've got performing that role at present.
A certain kind of US is (woud be) indispensable for a certain kind of internatinal order. But the leadership of neither political party is much interested in that kind of order or in the US being that kind of nation.
It just seems like the GOP want civil unrest. How are allies going to behave if they start imprisoning their opponents in Guantanamo? Will we still have to maintain our chummy alliance? What is the line that they finally cross? Of course it could all unravel of itself, it’s that chaotic rn.
I think the central argument here is that the world order has indeed changed. The end of WW2 and the end of the cold war are the other 20th century reconfigurings of social and political assets. I think WW2 is a clearer historical articulation point given the material destruction of people and assets. The cold war wasn't as simple, there were decades of ideological maneuvering and then a relatively rapid economic and political collapse on the Soviet side followed by an ideological interregnum followed by autocracy.
What we are seeing in the US now is the long run outcome of those post cold war 'jerks' for want of a better term. Rather than snap reactions to the 20th century fractures, the US has glided towards the current Trumpian movementarian dictatorship which now feels confident enough to pick up the pace. Trumps sanguine posture towards Putin, Orban et al combined with the strong man posing via executive orders etc is the signal to the machinery of government that this time we mean business, that the project, what ever it is, is now the single reason for that machinery to exist. The comparisons with pre-war Germany are entirely valid.
Australia is not in a position to cosy up to the US at the expense of China. In 2023 Australia's exports to China were worth $120 billion versus $12 billion to the US. It only needs a small hiccup in the Aus-China relations for the Aus economy to take a giant nosedive. If China says "jump" to Australia, the Australians will have no option to say "how high".
So you might think, but China tried that a few years ago (responding to Morrison carrying water for Trump on Covid) and got nowhere. Lots of similar wolf warrior stuff at the time with other countries.
Interesting (in the manner of the spurious Chinese curse) to see if Trump can do better.
You seem to be suggesting that there is no effective course of action for Australia. I can't think of one, but I'm not a statesman or even a politician.
Albo could announce Australia will develop its own nuclear deterrent. In the current climate, that is the only way our sovereignty can be guaranteed. It would also blindside Dutton, who would feel obliged to support it while feeling emasculated by not having thought of it himself.
An excellent piece John. There is no question the Trump regime is an absolute disaster for the USA and its people. But where I’m uncertain is how much of a change it will be for Australia in the short term. I'm sure our diplomats would agree that the US is the most difficult country to negotiate with on international agreements, as they hold most of the cards. We are always negotiating to get the best deal possible knowing that the best deal possible is where we get screwed less severely than we otherwise would. So what will be different with Trump and his minions? Maybe not a huge amount for Australia.
And if we're smart with our negotiations there is a potential for us to do better. Maybe there is a chance for us to take advantage of the chaos in the Trump administration.
The response may be that the difference now is that Trump will break agreements if it suits him, so there is no benefit to us in getting a better written agreement. Indeed Trump will break agreements, but mostly it will be where he wants publicity, and I think there are few situations where he would get good publicity even with his base, if he breaks agreements with Australia. And most of the agreements with us will be made with his minions, and they will mostly comply with written agreements, as its too risky for them not to do so.
So if we keep our head down, and negotiate cleverly, we can come out of the next 4 years without too much damage, and perhaps even benefits relative to others. But that doesn’t tell us what we should do morally or what is in Australia’s medium and long term interest. If we don’t assist our friends like Canada and Denmark as they are picked off, then there will be no-one left to defend us when our turn comes. But how we should act morally and with regard to our medium and long term interest is the subject for another post. My argument in this post is that we are likely to be OK in the short term, and that actually gives us some manoeuvring room as we plan for the medium and long term.
Here's a coincidence for you. I first encountered this quote "the cemetery is full of indispensable men" with reference to Rookwood, the big cemetery in Sydney. Looking for the source yesterday, I found that the cemetery took its name from a 19th century novel by one William Ainsworth. Today, I started reading a library book, Fraud by Zadie Smith, centred around the famous case of the Tichborne claimant. But the central male character (so far) is none other than William Ainsworth. The universe is trying to tell me something, I imagine, but I have no idea what.
It's extraordinary how many people continue to pay attention to Trump's words. They are literally worth nothing. If Trump commits to do something, it means he'll either do it, fail to do it and blame some scapegoat, or forget about it and trust a compliant media* to do the same. For such a powerful country to be so utterly unreliable is an unfamiliar state of affairs. In the long run, it won't last as such a partner will certainly fade in global influence. I recently read that already alternative alliances are starting to form - a less powerful but trustworthy ally is worth more than a totally unpredictable one.
*I wonder if it's time to stop using the word "media". Maybe information system would be more appropriate.
It's precisely with someone like Trump that careful attention is paid to their (truth-free) statements, searching for some revealing nuance. There was a whole industry of Kremlinology bakc in the idea.
Scarcely even an information system either.
Australia’s politicians have never been capable of seeing us with an independent outlook, ever. I think in general they’d wet their pants at the idea. My guess is, we’ll pay through the nose for the AUKUS subs and take what we’re actually given, and pretend this was how it was meant to be. Australian politicians have always been toadies.
Btw, great article.
Trump, in stark contrast to Hitler, Franco, Stalin, and Putin, has no tactical prudence, and is closest to Mussolini in recklessness. Perhaps he thinks he hasn't got long. The unraveling of the American economy has already begun.
.
I have a niece in Washington who works for a Rockefeller foundation running projects for women's rigts in Ukraine and elsewhere in Eastern Europe. 500 out of the 700 staff, including her, have just been fired or furloughed, presumably a result of the Trump freeze on US aid. Given the subject-matter, the funding won't come back, nor will the soft power it bought.
Musk demanded access for DOGE operatives - who have no legal basis for anything - to the $1trn a year payments system run by the US Treasury. The career official responsible for this refused and resigned. I think of Ivan the Terrible's Oprichnina.
John, have you seen the Australian bizarre ostrich-esque foreign policy commentariat suggests "everything is ok, nothing's changed, let's do more of the before": https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/revitalising-australia-s-out-date-us-alliance
Wow! Tell him he's dreaming
The core point of your article - that the world has fundamentally changed with Trump's second go - seems to be delusionally papered over by those seeking to profit. Imagine looking at the USA today and thinking "yeh, we SHOULD bind ourselves closer to that"
The first sentence of his last paragraph: ‘in the new bipolar world’. That’s exactly what’s breaking apart.
"Australia is not just spending big on US defence equipment but is also hosting ever-increasing short and long-term deployments of US forces across northern Australia."
Has this guy ever heard of the frog in the pot analogy?
Possible plan for Australia: Bug out of AUKUS. It's a stupid idea in the first place.
The treaties of Westphalia, concluded in 1648, are considered the foundation of the modern understanding of national sovereignty. They were made in response to the eighty years war.
It’s not just a reputation for (relatively) fair dealing under the rule of law that will be lost should Trump’s imperialism work. It’s also feasible that Trump’s actions will presage a return to a long period of rolling never ending wars as the idea of each nation for itself takes hold.
On a lighter note, if you ever get the opportunity to go to Osnabrück, the room in the town hall where the negotiations took place is more or less exactly as the treaty delegates left it, except that it includes a portrait of each delegate above the place they sat - on a hard wooden bench that followed the perimeter of the room. Truly a slice of time travel.
Kissinger stated the USA doesn't have allies and friends it has interests. Australia has geopolitical imperatives for the USA. Economically under Trump the USA has no regard for Australia because those geopolitical imperatives are unaffected by economic policies. We're not getting the subs, AUKUS was more about creating facilities for British and USA nuclear subs. By 2040 three nuclear subs will be a drop in the ocean.
Thank you for a brilliant essay that is easily the best thing I have read on the current situation.
I said on this site a couple weeks back that I hope Trump's second term is an absolute disaster, including an economic catastrophe for the US middle and working classes, as that may be the only thing that will kill Trumpism stone dead. I stand by that.
It looks like I'm going to get my wish, however as is to be expected, Trump's policies are going to cause a heck of a lot of collateral damage in other countries and possibly even a global recession. Accordingly I'm almost delighted when I here of crazy land stuff like US citizens having their tires slashed by over zealous ICE officials who suspect them of being illegals.
In terms of Australia, I'm wondering if we need a nuclear arsenal. We can't be certain that Trumpism won't lead to a more unstable world that boils over into war or that western allegiances won't be weakened for decades to come. Ukraine, the nation of my ancestors (father's side) would not have been attacked if it kept its nukes. The downside is nuclear proliferation but I think we have to live with that.
An economic catastrophe for the US middle and working classes wouldn't necessarily be bad news for Trump, any more than the Reichstag fire was bad news for Hitler. He'll blame any economic problems on some or all of his preferred scapegoats. A catastrophe might even help him, because it would let him clear out his enemies, and a lot of people love joining a mob.
Will people see through his scapegoating tactics? They would with a functioning media/information system, but may not with what we've got performing that role at present.
A certain kind of US is (woud be) indispensable for a certain kind of internatinal order. But the leadership of neither political party is much interested in that kind of order or in the US being that kind of nation.
It just seems like the GOP want civil unrest. How are allies going to behave if they start imprisoning their opponents in Guantanamo? Will we still have to maintain our chummy alliance? What is the line that they finally cross? Of course it could all unravel of itself, it’s that chaotic rn.
I think the central argument here is that the world order has indeed changed. The end of WW2 and the end of the cold war are the other 20th century reconfigurings of social and political assets. I think WW2 is a clearer historical articulation point given the material destruction of people and assets. The cold war wasn't as simple, there were decades of ideological maneuvering and then a relatively rapid economic and political collapse on the Soviet side followed by an ideological interregnum followed by autocracy.
What we are seeing in the US now is the long run outcome of those post cold war 'jerks' for want of a better term. Rather than snap reactions to the 20th century fractures, the US has glided towards the current Trumpian movementarian dictatorship which now feels confident enough to pick up the pace. Trumps sanguine posture towards Putin, Orban et al combined with the strong man posing via executive orders etc is the signal to the machinery of government that this time we mean business, that the project, what ever it is, is now the single reason for that machinery to exist. The comparisons with pre-war Germany are entirely valid.
I have been thinking a lot about that exact same de Gaulle quote the last few months.
I had not however thought about the fact that Trump is probably going to abandon NATO but of course you are right, this does seem likely.
Often attributed to DeGaulle, but long predates him. Modern version, with a specific cemetery named traced back to an Irish parliamentarian in 1924.
Australia is not in a position to cosy up to the US at the expense of China. In 2023 Australia's exports to China were worth $120 billion versus $12 billion to the US. It only needs a small hiccup in the Aus-China relations for the Aus economy to take a giant nosedive. If China says "jump" to Australia, the Australians will have no option to say "how high".
So you might think, but China tried that a few years ago (responding to Morrison carrying water for Trump on Covid) and got nowhere. Lots of similar wolf warrior stuff at the time with other countries.
Interesting (in the manner of the spurious Chinese curse) to see if Trump can do better.
You seem to be suggesting that there is no effective course of action for Australia. I can't think of one, but I'm not a statesman or even a politician.
What is the effective and ethical path to take?
I'm planning another post, but not promising any answers
Albo could announce Australia will develop its own nuclear deterrent. In the current climate, that is the only way our sovereignty can be guaranteed. It would also blindside Dutton, who would feel obliged to support it while feeling emasculated by not having thought of it himself.
Kick the US out of Pine Gap, stop AUKUS, stop everything we can
An excellent piece John. There is no question the Trump regime is an absolute disaster for the USA and its people. But where I’m uncertain is how much of a change it will be for Australia in the short term. I'm sure our diplomats would agree that the US is the most difficult country to negotiate with on international agreements, as they hold most of the cards. We are always negotiating to get the best deal possible knowing that the best deal possible is where we get screwed less severely than we otherwise would. So what will be different with Trump and his minions? Maybe not a huge amount for Australia.
And if we're smart with our negotiations there is a potential for us to do better. Maybe there is a chance for us to take advantage of the chaos in the Trump administration.
The response may be that the difference now is that Trump will break agreements if it suits him, so there is no benefit to us in getting a better written agreement. Indeed Trump will break agreements, but mostly it will be where he wants publicity, and I think there are few situations where he would get good publicity even with his base, if he breaks agreements with Australia. And most of the agreements with us will be made with his minions, and they will mostly comply with written agreements, as its too risky for them not to do so.
So if we keep our head down, and negotiate cleverly, we can come out of the next 4 years without too much damage, and perhaps even benefits relative to others. But that doesn’t tell us what we should do morally or what is in Australia’s medium and long term interest. If we don’t assist our friends like Canada and Denmark as they are picked off, then there will be no-one left to defend us when our turn comes. But how we should act morally and with regard to our medium and long term interest is the subject for another post. My argument in this post is that we are likely to be OK in the short term, and that actually gives us some manoeuvring room as we plan for the medium and long term.