http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...tion-in-a-crisis/story-e6frg8yo-1226197235810
Elite northern military unit allows US quick intervention in a crisis by: Brendan Nicholson, Defence editor From: The Australian November 17, 2011 12:00AM
THE arrival of a 2500-strong marines taskforce in the Northern Territory is just the start of greater co-operation with the US. Also planned are increased use of air and naval bases, army training areas and bombing ranges across the Top End.
There are usually 200 to 300 US military personnel in Australia working on defence co-operation and, in particular, planning the massive annual Talisman Sabre exercise involving US and regional armed forces.
By early next year, an advance party of about 250 personnel from a US marines air-ground taskforce will move into the Darwin area.
They will spend six months training through the dry season at the Australian Defence Force's Bradshaw and Mount Bundy training areas in the Northern Territory.
By 2016-17, the taskforce will be built up to its full strength of about 2500 personnel.
...It is designed to fight at short notice as a powerful, self-contained force with its own protective air power, able to land on a hostile shore or carry out non-combat operations such as disaster relief.
It will give Washington the ability to intervene in the region very quickly in the event of a crisis.
The marines will bring considerable equipment with them, including amphibious assault ships similar to the two giant landing helicopter docks being built for the Royal Australian Navy along with Harrier jump jets and troop-carrying helicopters.
The marines will be backed by artillery, engineers and light armoured vehicles.
They will be entitled to carry out their own training separate from the ADF.
There will also be many more visits to RAAF Base Darwin and RAAF Base Tindal, 330km south of Darwin, by US aircraft including giant B-52 bombers, a noisy echo of the Cold War.
The B-52s will increase their use of the Delamere Air Weapons Range, which lies about 140km southwest of Tindal.
Both governments have been at pains to stress that there will be no US bases on Australian soil, just continued access to joint facilities such as the intelligence-gathering base at Pine Gap and increased access to Australian facilities.
The military expansion takes place under the existing 1963 Status of Forces Agreement between Australia and the US and teams of officials from both countries have been working for more than a year on legal agreements governing US access to Australian facilities.
Still under consideration is the increased use by US warships and possibly nuclear submarines of HMAS Stirling naval base, south of Rockingham, in Western Australia.
Influential American commentators have been arguing strongly that the US navy needs to prevail on Canberra for greater access to Australian bases for US warships and submarines.
In a recent paper for the Lowy Institute, Toshi Yoshihara from the US Naval War College said that, with the rise of China and India, basing US surface warships and submarines at HMAS Stirling would give them the benefit of direct access to the Indian Ocean.
Mr Yoshihara said a big advantage of bases in Australia was that they lay between the Indian Ocean and Western Pacific "theatres" and well outside Chinese missile range.
"Warships and submarines based in Western Australia would benefit from direct access to the Indian Ocean, freeing them from the risks of passing through chokepoints and narrow seas," he said.
That's an idea that appeals to former defence minister Peter Reith, who recently reignited the nuclear submarine debate.
Mr Reith said that instead of building 12 conventional submarines, Australia should buy or lease a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines from the US and operate them from a joint naval base in Australia.
Greens leader Bob Brown said the plan for a greater US military presence in Australia should be debated by parliament.
Senator Brown said the Greens welcomed Mr Obama but Australia's mistake of following the US into Iraq and not bringing the troops home from Afghanistan, as Canada had done, showed the costs of not having an independent foreign policy.
