{"id":25335,"date":"2016-03-15T06:00:31","date_gmt":"2016-03-14T19:00:31","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?p=25335"},"modified":"2016-03-15T09:24:36","modified_gmt":"2016-03-14T22:24:36","slug":"seven-defence-white-papers-by-the-numbers-3-themes-and-memes","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/seven-defence-white-papers-by-the-numbers-3-themes-and-memes\/","title":{"rendered":"Seven Defence White Papers by the numbers (3): themes and memes"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
<\/p>\n
Australia\u2019s defence thinkers are ever worried about self-reliance and order.<\/span><\/p>\n The Rs reign: rules and self-reliance and region.<\/span><\/p>\n Those themes run through the 40 years from the first Defence White Paper in 1976 to the just-released seventh Defence White Paper.<\/span><\/p>\n On the order front, the 1976 White Paper described the demise of colonialism as producing \u2018a new world order\u2019 while the Communist victories in Indo-China made for an uncertain regional future. The White Paper said the US wanted \u2018a peaceful and stable world order\u2019 while the USSR sought \u2018disruptive political change\u2019.<\/span><\/p>\n The 2016 White Paper worries repeatedly that the old order is cracking. The US is still seen as central to a stable world order. One guess about the identity of the big player guilty of seeking disruptive change.<\/span><\/p>\n Welcome to another effort to seek strategic topography from the typography\u2014tracking the use of words\/concepts through the seven Defence White Papers in<\/span> 1976<\/span><\/a>,<\/span> 1987<\/span><\/a>,<\/span> 1994<\/span><\/a>,<\/span> 2000<\/span><\/a>,<\/span> 2009<\/span><\/a>,<\/span> 2013<\/span><\/a> and<\/span> 2016<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n Previous columns counted the number of times<\/span> countries<\/span><\/a> were mentioned and the use of<\/span> geographic constructs<\/span><\/a> (from Asia\u2013Pacific to Indo\u2013Pacific). Now to follow themes and memes over the 40 years.<\/span><\/p>\n One of the great Canberra mandarins,<\/span> Arthur<\/span><\/a> Tange<\/span><\/a>, was proud of getting Oz \u2018self reliance\u2019 into the 1976 paper. But self reliance\/self reliant appeared in the text only six times (once as a heading). That was enough to make it<\/span> seminal<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n The number of mentions isn\u2019t the only measure of the importance of a key idea\u2014although the usual White Paper habit is instruction and injunction by multiple iterations. Say the same thing repeatedly so everyone gets the point.<\/span><\/p>\n The full rhetorical flowering of the idea that Australia could defend itself came in Labor\u2019s 1987 White Paper. Australian \u2018self-reliance\u2019 got 43 mentions and \u2018self-reliant\u2019 defence got a further 13 goes.<\/span><\/p>\n By 1994, self reliance\/reliant was worth 24 mentions. The Cold War was gone. Asia would \u2018increasingly\u2019 determine its own affairs and \u2018a new strategic architecture will evolve.\u2019 The new architecture was supposed to deliver order.<\/span><\/p>\n In John Howard\u2019s 2000 White Paper, self-reliance was given due weight with eight mentions.<\/span><\/p>\n In Kevin Rudd\u2019s 2009 Paper self-reliance was worth 15 goes, while Julia Gillard gave it seven. The 2016 White Paper salutes \u2018self-reliant\u2019 twice.<\/span><\/p>\n