PM rejects calls for more defence spending to our cost

China is rapidly building a massive military, the only reason for which would be, as the US Secretary of Defence says, to dominate the Asia-Pacific region. Seemingly oblivious to this reality, our Prime Minister has rejected calls for rapidly increased defence spending while declaring he supports the status quo for Taiwan, without seeming to realise this support means we and our regional allies must push back against China militarily, beginning now.

Regional countries such as Japan know this means stronger military forces and are acting accordingly. Anthony Albanese should talk to them before he further gambles with our future based on his leftie views of China and innate dislike of the US.

Doug Hurst, Chapman, ACT

The Republican government of the US would like us to double our defence spending. It’s normally largely spent on US hardware, so to do so would be good for the American economy and particularly for its military-industrial complex. The latter is a large supporter of the Republican Party. This request and the tariffs on our steel and aluminium are exploitative, unfriendly gestures. It’s time that Australia re-evaluates our relationship with the US. It has become a self-serving oligopoly far removed from the Australian value of egalitarianism.

Tariffs will increase the cost of most things in the US including armaments so we should look elsewhere, the EU and Britain in particular, and compare values.

Alister Wright, Younghusband, SA

Franklin Roosevelt warned in 1937 that the “epidemic of world lawlessness is spreading … and that Americans should not imagine that this Western Hemisphere will not be attacked and that it will continue tranquilly and peacefully to carry on the ethics and the arts of civilisation”. Nevertheless, by the time Winston Churchill and Roosevelt were firmly in control, the opportunity to readily stem the dictators had been squandered – and millions of lives that could have been saved were gone with it (“New Age of appeasement”, 31/5).

The parallels between the above and today are there for all to see. Deterrence is the key. Anthony Albanese should be grateful the US is taking such a strong interest in maintaining a free and open Indo-Pacific and follow the advice of defence experts to lift defence expenditure to at least 3 per cent of GDP (“Albanese can’t duck now, he must put a rocket under defence”, 2/6). A simple reallocation of the massive resources wasted on the renewable energy fantasy and other cornflake concepts would readily provide the funding without any adverse impact on living standards.

Ron Hobba, Camberwell, Vic

In just two weeks our Prime Minister will meet President Donald Trump at the G7 in Alberta and possibly in the Oval Office. Following an election that totally ignored the realities of our defence budget and preparedness for any form of conflict, it is highly likely the future of our crucial alliance with the US (the ANZUS Treaty; have many younger Australians even heard of that?) will be in the crosshairs.

US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth has done us a favour in issuing a warning ahead of the Trump-Albanese meetings that the US expects us to move swiftly to a 3.5 per cent of GDP defence commitment in view of the potentially imminent threat to Taiwan (“Taiwan war games get real”, 2/6). What should deeply concern us was the immediate response from our Prime Minister, who declared “We’ll determine our defence policy” and went on to defend our planned minuscule expenditure increases. Sadly, this Prime Minister was re-elected for three years on bread-and-butter issues, not in relation to our future security in the western Pacific region.

David Burt, Quindalup, WA

According to the Prime Minister and independent MP Zali Steggall, the Americans are not going to tell us how much to spend on defence. We’ll decide that. Well, they may in turn tell us to defend ourselves. Good luck with that, Prime Minister. The reality is we need them more than they need us.

It would seem our political leaders on both sides have not been listening to the conversation between the Trump administration and Western allies in Europe. In short: “We, the US, are not prepared to defend you if you are not prepared to defend yourself.”

Fair call. Spending less than 3 per cent would appear to be the line in the sand.

Barry Adamson, Fernleigh, NSW