![\"Image](\"http:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/3653989792_6ff3c43a9e_z.jpg\" "\\"Image")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Happy the democracy waging an election with little argument about foreign affairs and defence.<\/span><\/p>\n The outside world isn\u2019t pressing too hard. The threats are far off and chances are good.<\/span><\/p>\n A democracy that dwells inward agrees on the big external issues, based on bipartisan consensus in the polity and a matching comfort among voters.<\/span><\/p>\n This is the significance of the sparse foreign and defence debate in the Australian election. Comfort and consensus rule.<\/span><\/p>\n Such was the<\/span> amiable tone<\/span><\/a> of the debate between the Defence Minister and her Labor shadow. China throbs but a Liberal\u2013Labor unity ticket prevails\u2014don\u2019t talk too loudly about the potential dark side.<\/span><\/p>\n No rows over international policy mean much is agreed. Or\u2014as with illegal boat arrivals and asylum seekers\u2014argued to a tough common position that both sides want to own.<\/span><\/p>\n View the foreign and defence elements of the election through the meaning of the silences. See agreements beneath the noise.<\/span><\/p>\n For this election, defence rates as a big and simple, \u2018Yes!\u2019<\/span><\/p>\n Want it. Must have it. Happy to pay lots\u2014in the future. Tick. What\u2019s next?<\/span><\/p>\n Australians love the slouch hat. They respect their military\u2014and know little about them.<\/span><\/p>\n Previous generations had an intimate knowledge because of the civilian soldiers of WW1 and WW2. No longer.<\/span><\/p>\n Still, the sense of ownership lingers. Ignorance isn\u2019t apathy, resting as it does on beliefs and commitments and history\u2014not much discussed, yet pulsing away.<\/span><\/p>\n The ANZAC mythology matters. Interesting that the other ANZACs have gone to a different place with their defence consensus\u2014the<\/span> Kiwis don\u2019t need to do as much<\/span><\/a> because they have Australia. Geography blesses them as it does us.<\/span><\/p>\n On the potent mix of Asia\u2019s geography and our history, Australia\u2019s political psyche retains the 20th Century moment of truth\u2014the fall of Singapore, the attacks on Darwin, the battle of the Coral Sea and the fight for New Guinea.<\/span><\/p>\n Coral Bell<\/span><\/a> got it right, as she usually did, referring to this patch of history that \u2018has haunted Australian strategic inquiry ever since.\u2019 The soaring<\/span> memorial<\/span><\/a> at the centre of Defence HQ in Canberra is all about that haunting moment.<\/span><\/p>\n While voters don\u2019t dwell on defence, it\u2019s a core competence. The threshold tests are that a leader and party must be judged able to drive the economy and deliver security.<\/span><\/p>\n If neither side of politics can dominate on defence (as neither can in this election) they must neutralise the issue. Agree to agree.<\/span><\/p>\n The consensus between the Coalition and Labor on defence policy and future spending is bipartisanship rendered as harmony.<\/span><\/p>\n Noting the calmness, glance over your shoulder at the extraordinary denouement a few moments ago when politics collided with geopolitics in Australia\u2019s biggest defence project.<\/span><\/p>\n The submarine comic opera is bizarre and byzantine business that beggars belief. Fortunate is the democracy that can afford to play around in such a manner.<\/span><\/p>\n The red hot politics meant the submarine choice had to be announced before the election could be safely launched. \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Remember that Tony Abbott as PM had a deal with Shinzo Abe to<\/span> choose the Japanese design<\/span><\/a>. The build would be in Japan with Adelaide adding finishing bolts. If Abbott had been a slightly different leader, that was the sure result.<\/span><\/p>\n The contest between Abbott\u2019s will and Malcolm Turnbull\u2019s destiny allowed the subs-for-SA-side a comeback triumph. Not the sushi subs. French, instead\u2014all built in Adelaide.<\/span><\/p>\n The drama has caused nary a campaign ripple. With the decision done, the submarines have hardly surfaced beyond Adelaide.<\/span><\/p>\n In distant elections, future taxpayers (beyond Adelaide) will judge the results of that $50 billion choice<\/span><\/p>\n The campaign issue that has featured is the turn back of boats carrying asylum seekers.<\/span><\/p>\n Labor\u2019s 2015 conference adopted turn backs, but the Coalition pitch to voters is the difference between the policy originator and reluctant converts.<\/span><\/p>\n Labor was furious with the ABC Vote Compass website for its judgement on the proposition: \u2018Boats carrying asylum seekers should be turned back.\u2019<\/span><\/p>\n The website stated Labor \u2018somewhat agrees\u2019 with this position, whereas the Coalition \u2018strongly agrees\u2019. Through the campaign Labor has had to hose down candidates whose past positions prove that \u2018somewhat agree\u2019 call.<\/span><\/p>\n Boats and asylum seekers have run through Oz politics in the 21st Century. The 2001 election was all about foreign and defence policy in the fraught days of Tampa and the 9\/11 attacks.<\/span><\/p>\n Today, however, the asylum\/boats issue is debated in internal not international terms.<\/span><\/p>\n In this election, there\u2019s been no discussion of what the issue means for relations with our important neighbour (and source of the boats) Indonesia, apart from one bit of boats-cattle linkage by Deputy PM<\/span> Barnaby Joyce<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n