The TV Advertising War 1992

Updated Sunday 15 May, 2011 12:18 PM

The TV Advertising War 1992

The Australia-America Altercation

By David Atwell

Newspaper Quotes From The Original Time Line

“At separate meetings, the newly appointed US Secretary of Commerce, Ms Marilyn Franklin, and the deputy US Trade Representative, Mr Michael Moskow, detailed how Australian restrictive practices on trade in services such as film programs and television advertising had placed Australia on a US ‘watch list’, which in theory threatens American retaliatory action. But the issue is moving up the US Administration's hierarchy, ever since Congress in 1988 required it to ‘vigorously pursue’ what the Congress sees as unfair trading practices. President Bush even raised the issue during his visit to Australia in January.” Sydney Morning Herald, 14/03/1992

* * *

“The [Australian] Minister for Transport and Communication, Senator Richardson, yesterday slammed recent US criticism of Australia's local content rules for film and television programmes. ‘This is hypocrisy on a grand scale, not a small scale,’ he said ” Melbourne Age, 02/04/1992

* * *

“AUSTRALIA'S local-content limit for programmes on the proposed pay-TV service was yesterday attacked for being a protectionist policy by one of the United States' most powerful regulators. The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission in the US, Mr Alfred Sikes, said he supported other US Government officials' views that Australian-content rules were overly restrictive.

Mr Sikes is visiting Australia at the invitation of the Federal Department of Transport and Communications to share his experience as the chief regulator of the $US300 billion telecommunications and broadcast industries. At a media briefing in Canberra, Mr Sikes, who avoided being drawn into the Government's decision-making processes or policies for the new subscription television licences, warned against industry protection.” Canberra Times, 15/06/1992

* * *

“WASHINGTON, Friday: Amid signs that the US is escalating its campaign against Australian quotas for local television programs and advertising, Senator Graham Richardson has accused America of ‘massacring’ Australian wheat farmers. Turning the tables on the ‘watch list’ threat, Senator Richardson in one meeting invited US officials to come out to Australia and ‘watch’ Studs as an example of the type of American popular TV programs imported into Australia without restriction. ‘As Australia is only allowed to compete for 8 per cent of the US sugar market, and 2 per cent of the wheat market, while they are massacring Australian wheat farmers, I thought it a bit rich they were even raising the subject,’ he said afterwards.” Sydney Morning Herald, 20/08/1992

* * *

“While the level of public and private slanging over television content rules is hotting up, Australian and US officials are essentially engaged in an ‘issue management’ process. The US Administration must be seen by Congress to be actively pursuing perceived trade injustices. US Trade Representative, Ms Carla Hills, listed Australian local-content television broadcast rules as a restrictive trade practice, along with tariffs on textiles, clothing and footwear and copyright laws, which prompted fears of US retaliation.” Australian Financial Review, 27/08/1992

The Best of Friends

Of all the periods of history, the events of the early 1990s was, without doubt, the most ridiculous of times. Other than national economies in chaos, the Soviet Union disintegrated & along with it went communism. But the best was something else. A war over nothing. And all because of television advertising. Yes those annoying 30 second periods on television where most people, regardless of nation, tune out, get a drink or go to the toilet.

To big business, television networks & governments, though, television meant billions of dollars. Above all this meant advertising, & if one thing was at the centre of commerce & trade, it was advertising. Incredibly, what had started as a minor trade dispute between Australia & the United States, turned into a conflict that was out of control & a conflict which no-one wanted. Alas, by the time reason caught up with the madness, the chaotic insanity had taken on a life of its own.

It had all began in total obscurity. Australia had, in the Broadcasting Act of 1942, put into legislation that all advertising in Australia was to be 100% locally produced. Hence a total ban was put on imported advertisements. Over the years some amendments were made to the Act, the main one defining “New Zealand” products as “Australian”, but little else changed. Certainly the “Australian only” rule was kept in force.

Noting this situation in a major trading partner, an obscure United States Senator from California raised the Australian media “protectionist” content rules in Congress. Few others were interested, but lobbyist Jack Valenti (a former aide to President Johnson) got the ear of the new President George Bush. Although President Bush passed, onto the Australian Ambassador, a polite diplomatic note over the matter, it seemed a nonsense to everyone including, after some thought, even the President.

Then came the Gulf War against Iraq. Everyone had something real to deal with in international relations. It is not the focus of this article to discuss the Gulf War, except to mention the fact that along with several countries, Australia was one of the first to offer military help to the US led United Nations reaction. The then Australian Prime Minister, Bob Hawke, sent two frigates, a sea resupply ship & the elite SAS regiment. Although a small offer, in the overall scheme of things, it was nonetheless greatly appreciated by the United States. As a reward, President Bush promised to visit Australia in early 1992.

The United Nations would celebrate victory against Iraq. Even though its leader, Saddam Hussein, was not removed from government. Everyone, however, believed that his government would soon collapse. President Bush announced that a “New World Order” would see that injustice would be a thing of the past. There would be no more Hitlers, Pol Pots, or Saddams. The world was at the dawn of a new era of peace, according to the President, one where free trade was to be the key to peace & prosperity. Everywhere, especially at home, President Bush was popular, except maybe in Iraq, as after all he was the liberator of Kuwait. That popularity, however, would change by mid-1992.

Politics

The Altercation (as against calling it a ‘war’) between the United States & Australia was essentially all about populist politics. In both countries, national elections were due in November of that year. Yet, in early 1992, both governments enjoyed a good lead over their opposition counterparts. It seemed certain, to most political observers, that their re-election was almost certain. It would require something extraordinary to take place which would see them defeated.

But, as the saying goes, a week is a long time in politics. Needless to say, a month is a very ling time indeed. And so it was in 1992. America had gotten themselves involved with a United Nations operation in Somalia. At first it seemed to be completely successful. But, not long afterwards, Somalia exploded in violence. Soon, American soldiers were being killed in dramatic fashion. As a result, George Bush’s popularity, which a few months previous looked unbeatable, was soon dropping fast. He had to do something soon, or otherwise, come November, he could be defeated at the elections.

Meanwhile, in Australia, a similar situation was taking place. The Prime Minister, Paul Keating, started the New Year with a good showing in the opinion polls, but then something happened. It was not bad results coming from a battlefield, it was the election to the leadership of the Australian Liberal Party of John Howard. Howard was an old timer in Australian politics & at one point appeared to be on his last legs. But in early 1992, he was once again in the cut & thrust of Australian politics. Yet, unlike previous times, Howard seemed to have the measure of Keating & it showed. As a result, the public began to shift their support to Howard. And Keating needed to find a way to win this support back.

Thus these two national leaders, at the same time, were looking for a way to find that popularity which they had only a few weeks before. One thing after another was tried, but nothing seemed to stem the tide against them. Then, in an ordinary Committee on Trade sitting, of the US Senate, Marilyn Franklin the US Secretary of Commerce, testified that Australia practised restrictive trade in relation to television advertising. This caught the attention of the Senators present who, like the President, also faced elections in November. Although Franklin meant nothing overly by her testimony before the Committee, the Senators were soon, on the floor the Senate, debating whether some form of sanctions should be placed on Australia for its restrictive television practices.

Things soon got out of hand, which was further fuelled by the Australian Minister of Communication, Senator Graham Richardson, telling the Americans that they were hypocrites. A war of words soon developed between the two countries over the matter, but as yet the national leaders had remained out of the exchanges. This, however, would soon change as Senator Jack Valenti quietly told President Bush that he should intervene in this matter or else he, Valenti, would let it leak that the President was informed of the Australian matter at an earlier date & yet did nothing about it.

In a time of political uncertainty, such a revelation, even though completely pointless normally, now mattered. Congress was clearly up in arms over the stance by the Australians, & now it would appear that the American President was favouring a foreign power over the local American industry.

Furthermore, it seemed as if it could be a populist topic, one which seemed harmless enough, for the President to champion. Not only would it appear that the President was acting to protect American jobs, but the American media industry would be grateful, at least until the next election, to the current President. Come November, having media support would be fundamental in winning the President election. It seemed a blessing for Bush.

Unfortunately for Bush, Keating was facing similar problems. The Australian legislation in question ensured that a local industry thrived employing thousands of Australians all around the nation. Letting in the American industry would mean jobs. And an unhappy media industry meant certain death for any Australian government. But letting in the American industry would, whilst Keating’s popularity was low, was committing suicide, & such an act was not in Keating’s character.

As a result, thus, of two leaders wanting re-election, both decided to turn a non-starter political issue into a crisis. Soon both leaders were expressing outrage at the other country’s behaviour over the advertising issue. The media, of course, considering this war of words was central to their own interests, blew up the issue even further, ensuring little else in government was getting done. By mid September 1992 Congress had finished debating the issue & introduced legislation in order to punish Australia for its criminal economic activity. The next day, this legislation was sent to President Bush for signing into law. The President, however, began having second thoughts over the entire matter. He let it known to his Secretary of State, & senior Congressmen, that everything was moving way too fast with little afterthought about the consequences for the future.

You Know This Means War!

By the time the dust had settled in Washington, President Bush reluctantly announced, on 15 September 1992, various economic restrictions against Australia. Even though he personally had protested quietly against the Economic Fairness Act (1992), which Congress had just passed, he still did not veto the legislation either. Nonetheless, within minutes Australia had lost its “preferred trading partner” status. All trade was thus restricted by the Economic Fairness Act. Only humanitarian items, such as medical drugs & equipment, were permitted to continue to trade as before.

The Australians could not believe that a minor dispute involving television commercials had come to this. Furthermore Prime Minister Keating was furious. Without reference to the Australian Parliament, Keating announced that “mirror” legislation would be tabled in Parliament that day in an emergency sitting which would see the identical situation take place for any economic dealings with America. In a separate move, which would up the stakes, the Keating announced to Parliament that the Nationalisation Act (1905) & the Emergency Defence Act (1914) were both considered to be active doe to the current circumstances.

Although the Americans did not know what that meant, which incidentally most Australians were likewise ignorant thereof, it was assumed that this move by the Australians was provocative. The simple mentioning of the Emergency Defence Act sounded like a threat of military action to the Americans & this did not go down well at the White House. The CIA, on the other hand, could provide no information as to the actual reasons what Australia was up to, but argued that the Australians were in no shape to take anyone on militarily let alone the United States. When this was confirmed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, President Bush referred the matter to Congress, in order to distance himself from this growing mess. It was a massive mistake.

Congress by now, especially the Senate, were in war-hawk mode. Australia had threatened them. Immediately new legislation was drafted demanding that the President seize all Australian assets within the United States. Unfortunately for the Americans, as these things take time due to the way this particular matter was being handled, the Australian government was well forewarned. By the time a reluctant American President consented to this new legislation, Australia had already made its plans.

On 20 September 1992, the United States seized all Australian assets. Immediately after President Bush’s speech authorising such action, the Australian Prime Minister announced similar action. No one in the United States bothered to think about Australia’s reaction, believing wrongly, that Australia could not do much in reply. It was a blunder the likes of which would indeed worsen an already dangerous crisis.

By the time Prime Minister Keating had completed his speech, not only had billions of dollars of American assets been seized, several times more so than that which the Americans had taken minutes before during President Bush’s speech, but two extremely important “joint bases” (in other words two very much American only bases) in Australia had also been seized - Pine Gap (run by the CIA) & Nurrungar (run by the US military). To add insult to injury, the Australians had also captured several spy satellites which were controlled by these bases. If the loss of American commercial assets was one thing, then the loss of these vital bases, along with their spy satellites, was another. More to the point, these events meant that the two countries were in a defacto state of war.

Yet few at this very moment, in the United States, were all that concerned about anything Australian. In the international scheme of things, this dispute was nothing in comparison with other international matters. Virtually everyone in the American government was looking towards Europe. Thus resources, personnel & political planners were busy with the collapse of the Soviet Union & the various Communist governments of Eastern Europe. Few resources & personnel were leftover for the Australian Crisis. In hindsight, of course, one can say that America was looking in the wrong direction. Still, considering the collapse of America’s number one enemy was taking place in Europe, where there could be extremely dangerous ramifications for America & her European allies, few could blame them. Nonetheless, the next day after Australia’s actions, the American government woke up to a real dangerous situation on their hands rather than an improbable one.

Naturally the Americans were outraged at Australia’s actions. Former US President Ronald Reagan, whom George Bush had replaced, basically summed up the mood of Congress (apart from the liberal wing Democratic Party) by stating “Well, ah, you know, this means war!” Worse still, the US military were brought forthwith screaming to the political games table. Until now, the US military had seen this political game for what it was. But, thanks to the actions of the Australians, they were dragged unwillingly into a chaotic political mess. Although they were not wanting to get involved in military action with the Australians, unless something political was not done soon to stop the critical situation, American security was in jeopardy. Not only had the US military’s security been transgressed, on a more practical note, they were totally blind to all activity in the Pacific & Indian Oceans not to mention most of Asia as well.

The Battle of the Currencies

After each country had seized the assets of the other, no one really knew what to do next. Whilst America thought about the next phase, that being a military consideration, the Australians decided to go onto the offensive albeit in a peaceful manner. This would not be military in nature. Nonetheless it was aimed to hurt the power of the United States just as much as any military attack could. In order to do this, it meant it was to be solely in the economic arena. And it was a far more realistic strategy for Australia than anything else.

Thus with the opening of the Sydney Stock Exchange, at 9am local Australian time on 22 September 1992, came the initial attack. The Australian government decided to dump every Greenback that they had. At the same time, in a prearranged agreement, the New Zealand government would do the same thing. Although this amounted to only $15US billion, it nevertheless had the desired effect.

Next came the Tokyo market. The Japanese currency traders immediately knew that something was up. A run on the US dollar was clearly on the way. Even though they knew it was a likely stunt, holding on to US dollars meant a loss. Furthermore, several countries, including Japan, had seriously criticised the US over its actions with Australia, so the Japanese anticipated that these countries, especially the Europeans, would sell their Greenbacks. To support this analysis, the Japanese government dumped their US dollars almost instantly after trading began. The result was horrendous. Along with the private Japanese sector, $315US billion entered the market from Japan.

Hong Kong, the most speculative market on the planet, reacted immediately to the Japanese one. Regardless of the circumstances, the Japanese reaction to the run on the American dollar dictated the response here. And like the Japanese, they started dumping the Greenback. Although this only amounted to a further $35US billion, it was enough to alert the Europeans that something was up. This alert then went into panic mode as several other countries, such as China, India & several Middle Eastern ones, also dumped Greenbacks. As a result, a further $280US billion flooded the international currency market

Finally came the turn of the Europeans. The French & the Germans, in fact most of the countries of Europe, were thoroughly aghast as to the situation between the Americans & Australians. In fact most had given their support, in the UN & elsewhere, to Australia. There were a number of reasons for this, & these varied from country to country, but America had little support in this region of the world. Furthermore, noting that the American Greenback was in serious trouble, they were in no mood to support it. Fearing massive losses, the European currency traders decided to act even before their respective governments did. By the end of trading in London, well over $680US billion had been dumped by the Europeans alone.

Prior to the closing of the Frankfurt & London markets, the Australians, now with much profit thanks to the American dollar sell off, began buying up every available Australian dollar. Not only would this action ensure that the Australian dollar would remain high, it also gave the Australian currency protection against the anticipated American response. This was bound to come, & in fact had already begun, even before Europe started selling the Greenback. Unfortunately for the Americans, their response was too little, too late.

A Show of Strength

Naturally, when America woke up later that day, there was a stunned silence. Overnight, the value of the American currency was cut in half, regardless what the Federal Reserve tried to do in an effort to reduce the trend. Nothing, it seemed, could stop the fall in the US dollar, regardless what the Reserve tried. Immediately, the effects of the great drop of the American currency was already being felt in industry. Within 24 hours, downsizing, a trend already current due to the weak American economy, was being mentioned everywhere. Soon, millions of job were at risk in all sectors of industry. This would make Bush’s popularity even worse.

More importantly, at least in the short term, was the Congressional reaction. Viewing Australia’s actions as nothing short as a declaration of war, Congress was soon demanding Bush to do something. Similarly too, Bush was far from happy with what had happened within the last 12 hours. Thanks to the actions of Australia; any chance that a peaceful negotiated settlement, to find a way out of this mess, was now dashed. Congress wanted Australian blood & that meant war. Congress, though, for many reasons, refused to declare war on Australia & preferred that the President use his powers to make Australia “surrender”. This meant that a door was still left open for negotiations, but at the same time it meant that the President was to use the stick in order to get Australia to take the carrot.

The noises coming out of Australia, however, did not help the situation. Senator Richardson was adamant that there would, especially after the current developments, be no changes to Australia’s legislation on any matter. It seemed that even the US bases recently seized, not to mention all the other American assets, would not be returned to their previous owners. But when the Americans announced that they would be sending two aircraft carrier groups to Australia, Keating expelled the American Ambassador.

The expulsion of the American Ambassador was probably the event that tipped the scales to war. Not only was the Australian Ambassador to the United States expelled in reply, but the Americans got serious with their military deployments. Essentially, two carrier battle groups would now head towards Australia. From Pearl Harbour, came the USS Kitty Hawk, along with several escorts, whilst from the Mediterranean Sea, came the USS Enterprise & its escorts. Furthermore, & far more importantly, their rules of engagement permitted the Americans to attack, without warning, any Australian plane, ship or submarine that came within 200km of the aircraft carriers. This was made public as deliberate message to the Australian government.

When this information became known, thanks to a public broadcast made by President Bush himself, it may have gotten cheers from the American People, but almost everyone else condemned it. Soon the UN was debating the matter & it quickly became apparent that the United States was more or less alone in the world. The French, furthermore, raised the issue in the UN Security Council, which then put to the vote a censure motion against the US. This, of course, was vetoed by the US, but nonetheless indicated how things had deteriorated at the international level. Still, even though the UN General Assembly successful passed a motion condemning the United States, for its actions against Australia, the Americans simply ignored the UN motion.

The tension in Australia, meanwhile, was very heavy indeed. It was clear to Keating & the government that the political games had completely spiralled out of control, but to give in now to the American demands would ensure, not only would the Keating government be thrown out of office, but Australia would lose all independence as a sovereign nation. The Australian military, though, were of the opinion that they had no chance against the Americans, until the head of the Navy reminded everyone that Australia’s submarine service had, in exercises with the Americans, successfully “sunk” several American ships including their vaunted carriers.

Keating, thus, on this information decided to hold out. In a press conference, on the same day as the USS Kitty Hawk left Pearl Harbour for Australia, Keating announced that the departure of the American fleet, in an effort to coerce Australia into surrender, is tantamount to an act of war. He went on to say that Australia would act in various ways in order to defend itself. Basically, it meant that Australia & the Untied States were, for all intents & purposes, at war.

The Battle of the Coral Sea (1993)

The Battle of the Coral Sea, unlike its namesake in a previous conflict, was a disaster for the United States. Regardless of the continuous warnings coming from Australia, the US Government ignored them. So too did the Defence & State departments. Using tactics that they had used around the world, the US Navy would continue with them again & deploy an aircraft carrier to operate off of the eastern & western coasts of Australia. It was a deliberate provocative act & intended as such.

Yet the US Navy was not up against Libya or Iraq. Australia had a sizeable number of F/A-18 fighters & F-111 strike-bombers. Although Australia’s Navy was nothing in comparison to the US Navy, it did have six submarines: a service that the Australians took very seriously. The two newer submarines, those of the Collins class, had been, ironically, greatly improved upon by thanks to the US Navy. More importantly, however, the Americans had lost their eyes & ears in this part of the world. As a result, they had no idea what the Australian military was up to.

The Australians, on the other hand, knew everything that the US military was up to in the Pacific & Indian Oceans. Thanks to the Australian seizure of the two American bases in Australia, not to mention the “capture” of several American spy satellites, the Australians simply used this captured technology against their pervious owners. Noting that the USS Kitty Hawk, along with its escort, had left Pearl Harbour, as announced by the American President, the Australian planners could track this task force. And in doing so they made their plans against them.

* * *

It was the HMAS Oxley, an Oberon class submarine, who first made contact with the American task force. The orders from Canberra were clear. The USS Kitty Hawk was to be sunk. If other ships were within range, then they were to be targeted as well. No warning was to be issued to the Americans. They were going to do to the Americans, what the Americans had announced what they would do to the Australians. As far as the Australian government was concerned, the Americans had had enough warnings.

Under these circumstances, thus, it would be pointless for the crew of the HMAS Oxley to disobey their orders. The Australian Fleet Command had, thanks to pin-point satellite accuracy, positioned its submarines to hunt in groups. Hence the six submarines were divided into two flotillas of three submarines each. The strategy was to cover both the Indian & Pacific Oceans. In the event of an engagement, it was believed that at least one of the three submarines would survive long enough to engage the primary target - the aircraft carrier. So along with the HMAS Oxley came HMAS Onslow & HMAS Collins. All had the same orders.

Unfortunately for the Australians, it was the Americans who got in the first shot. Even though the HMAS Collins was new, it was nonetheless a lot noisier than the older Oberon class submarines. The USS Boston, a Los Angeles Class submarine, easily heard the HMAS Collins with its advanced sonar equipment. With orders to shot to kill, the USS Boston sent two Mk 46 torpedoes into the Australian submarine. It was sunk with the loss of all hands. It did, however, act as a warning to the other two Australian boats of the real intentions of the American navy. Any doubts about firing on the American vessels were now long forgotten.

At 10.13 am on 20 October 1992, the HMAS Oxley fired four ADCAP torpedoes at the USS Kitty Hawk. The HMAS Oxley had taken just over two hours to manoeuvre into position. Naturally the torpedoes were heard on American sonar, much to the horror of the American commanders. Action was immediately taken, but the ADCAP torpedoes, ones identical to those used by the US Navy, & supplied to the Australian Navy by America, were far too advanced for the Americans to avoid. In the mayhem which followed, the HMAS Oxley managed to elude detection, even though the Americans tried in vain to catch the Australian boat.

All four torpedoes hit the USS Kitty Hawk midships causing great damage in the process. HMAS Oxley then fired all eight of her remaining torpedoes (four of which had been reloaded) at four new targets. This time the Americans heard the submarine & immediately located HMAS Oxley’s position. The Australian boat did not last much longer. Nonetheless, the ships which the HMAS Oxley fired at all had their own problems a few minutes later. Even though the HMAS Oxley was sunk with all hands, the Ticonderoga class cruiser USS Antietam, the Kidd class destroyer USS Scott & two Perry class frigates, the USS Flatley & USS Boone, were all hit & sunk. Not long afterwards, USS Kitty Hawk joined them at the bottom of the sea. Four other American ships & the HMAS Onslow survived the battle. The Americans rescued their comrades & returned to safer waters transferring the injured to Guam. The HMAS Onslow returned to Sydney without firing a shot.

Allies, Enemies & Vipers

Within minutes of the Battle of the Coral Sea had become public knowledge, the reaction from around the world varied greatly. Some countries, such as the real enemies of both combatants, celebrated with joy at the defeat of the American forces. Saddam was the most noted of these, but still the leaders of Iran & North Korea also announced their pleasure.

The reaction in Australia was very subdued. Not wanting to have this war in the first place, Keating said that he was aghast in the resulting battle, especially the lives of those hundreds lost in the combat. He, in many ways, reflected much of the European countries, not too mention the reaction from America itself. The politics of popularity, followed by both Australia & America, had hit home with a vengeance. Yet neither leader, Keating or Bush, were willing to accept that their arrogance led to this dreadful encounter.

The most notable reaction, however, came from Japan. In a statement, which was carefully worded, the Japanese Prime Minister more or less insulted the Americans reminding them of what had taken place during World War Two. Ignoring that fact that it was Japan who had started the Pacific Conflict in 1941, the insult was clearly there for all to see. Furthermore, Japan also announced that the American military had better leave their country, in other words the US Naval base on Okinawa, or face eviction through any means necessary. Considering the circumstances, this was not viewed at all well by the Americans.

The Americans, at first, were stunned by their defeat in the Coral Sea. President Bush was clearly quite shaken when he addressed the nation not long after news had gotten out, via CNN, that the American fleet had suffered sever losses. As strange as it seemed, though, Bush did not show any anger at the Australians, even though Australia clearly used a clandestine tactic, in regards to using the submarines as they did. Just as strange, most American citizens did not know how to react to the news. There were some who expressed their anger, but most people could not fathom what they were being told.

But then came the news from Japan. This was seen by the Americans as nothing short of treason. It was one thing to have a stand-up battle with someone & even lose, but it was another thing entirely different to treat America in the manner as the Japanese Prime Minister announcement. The reaction from Bush pretty well summed it up for most Americans - and that was America was not leaving. Japan would have to use military force, if necessary, in order to removed the American base at Okinawa. And if it came to that, then America would gladly welcome a war with Japan, even if it meant to say that it would be fighting with as Australia well.

Ironically in Australia, Keating, like Bush, did not know what to make of the new Japanese position. Just as things had gotten out of hand leading up to the Battle of the Coral Sea, everyone was even more so concerned, now that Japan had shown its true hand, after all these years as an ally of America, that a Pacific War would soon erupt everywhere. Clearly, Japan was flexing its muscles &, furthermore, could make do its threat on removing the Americans by force. And this threat, & not the fracas with Australia, would soon become America’s focus. Or so President Bush thought.

An Uneasy Peace

Change can take place rapidly in life. And this is more than true for politics. As part of the reasons for the war, that trying to gain popularity just prior to the American Presidential elections, George Bush was hoping, from a patriotic surge in support due to a war, that this patriotism would translate in votes for him. He was to be bitterly disappointed. Instead of support, the majority of Americans, 55% of them, dumped Bush in favour of the Democrat candidate Bill Clinton. Campaigning against war, the majority of Americans agreed. Only a few wanted revenge against Australia for their defeat in the Coral Sea. Most, it seemed, were against the Altercation with Australia in the first place. Moreover, the election showed then even more were against it now.

However, the national American feeling about Japan’s turnaround had created deep-seated ill feelings. Even though Clinton announced that he wanted no further conflict with Australia, he remained somewhat ambivalent over the American base on Okinawa. Due to American commitments to South Korea, Okinawa was an extremely important asset for the USA, especially after their bases in the Philippines had been surrendered a few years earlier. But, fundamentally for the US, it was the fact of how they were told to leave. And especially during a time of conflict with another nation of the Pacific Ocean.

Furthermore there was still the case of Australia. Like George Bush, Paul Keating would only last three more weeks in office than the American President. Australia went to the polls in late November 1992. And as Keating was hoping to gain support, for standing up to the Americans, he too was to be bitterly disappointed. The Australian electorate, like their American counterparts, wanted nothing to do with such a conflict. Thus, the election was a walkover for the Coalition Parties, who gained a large majority in the Australian House of Representatives.

Alas, in the aftermath of this ruinous time, it would take a lot more than merely dumping the respective governments of each country. Deaths had been caused & it would take a lot more than mere lofty speeches in order to heal the rifts between two old friends. Far more importantly, however, the tension in the Pacific region had hardly eased. Japan still wanted the Americans out, whilst Australia & America had a lot of negotiating to do over a whole range of topics. Clearly, as the 20^th Century was the century of war in Europe, the 21^st was fast becoming the century of war in the Pacific.

Hit Counter

Discussion Forum