It was clear before Australia’s recent elections that the previous Labor government under Kevin Rudd would have supported US ‘punitive’ action against Syria – and this despite Australia taking over the presidency of the UN Security Council (UNSC) this month. However, while the Rudd government may have given political support to the US, it is not known if Rudd would have provided any military support apart from the intelligence and communications resources that are based in Australia.
That was before last Saturday’s election. Australia’s conservative incoming Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, is a hard right supporter of the US and Israel and, while it is too early to tell what Abbott is likely to offer the Americans, it will, in all likelihood, be much more than Rudd would have offered. A lot will also depend on what the US actually asks for. At the moment, Obama is desperate for support from wherever he can get it, as are the British.
Julie Bishop, who is likely to become the next Australian Foreign Minister, has already said that she has spoken to the Americans and has spoken to British Foreign Minister William Hague and indicated that there will be more talks with Hague later this week though one can only speculate what those talks may be about.
It is now fairly clear that the war in Syria will soon escalate if the US attacks Syria. The question for Australian’s is: Will Tony Abbott provide military support for such a strike and, furthermore, if the war escalates to include attacks against Iran, will Abbott continue to commit Australian forces to fight elsewhere in the Middle East.
The coming war in the Middle East could quickly become what I have called the Final Confrontation between the US/Israel/the West and Iran/Syria/Hezbollah/Hamas that I have warned about for years. All that was needed for the US, Israel and their allies to launch their final confrontation against their Middle East enemies was an alignment and sequence of events that would provide a casus belli to kick off just a war.