‘WDWYFP’, the Signal China Really Deserves

In an article in Tuesday’s Australian, Greg Sheridan rightly calls out the arrogance of Chinese officials in seeking to block Sky News reporter Cheng Lei at the joint Li Qiang /Pekingese Albanese (thanks Johannes Leak!) press conference and, more importantly, Anthony Albanese’s typically pathetic response – ‘Nobody told me about it’.

But Sheridan missed a far more telling incident.  One that seems to have flown under the radar.  Sheridan gives the Albanese government some credit for his handling of China, including “it will call out Chinese military misbehaviour if there’s absolutely no alternative.”

Really?  Categorizing blatant and dangerous provocation as ‘acting unprofessionally’, which is as far as Albanese has been prepared to go, does not come within a bull’s roar of calling out misbehaviour.

In a recent article, Peter Jennings noted how often, in relation to China, PM Albanese resorts to the refrain ‘we co-operate with China where we can, disagree where we must and engage in our national interest’. And sure enough, he trotted that line out again yesterday.

Of course, with Albanese, the ‘disagree where we must’ always takes place behind closed doors. That is so he can be given riding instructions by his Chinese puppetmasters. Hence, in an oblique reference to recent incidents that have put Australian servicemen at risk, yesterday Albanese told us:

one of the very practical measures that we spoke about was improving military to military communications so as to avoid incidents.

In other words, we might have been just as much at fault when a Chinese fighter dropped chaff in the path of a RAN helicopter, operating in international waters, as China was.   The Chinese reactions to Albo ‘calling out misbehaviour’ has been a) to deny it did anything at all or b) to blame Australian servicemen.    At least Albo hasn’t gone as far as that.  Just conceded that the unprofessionalism might have been a two-way street.

How would this improved military to military communication play out, I wonder?  Here’s a possible scenario:

Panda One to unidentified client state aircraft:  Withdraw immediately from PRC South China Sea or face the consequences.

Kangaroo One: Roger out.

What a sellout.   As a former professional infantry officer and Vietnam veteran, that mightily offends me.  More importantly, how will it be received by our currently serving veterans, in particular those who were directly affected?  With disgust, I imagine.  Should help recruiting and retention no end.

If we ‘must disagree’, then we must disagree in public.

I have a coded diplomatic message for China.  It’s one Albo should have sent.  WDWYFP.  Their cryptographers should have no trouble deciphering it.

12 thoughts on “‘WDWYFP’, the Signal China Really Deserves

  • cbattle1 says:

    Remember back when Western leaders were falling over themselves to KowTow to Mao, and we stopped recognising the KMT dictatorship on Taiwan as the true government of China? Why do we now see a return to the “Red China” of the past, and now recognise Taiwan as a free and sovereign nation?

  • Sindri says:

    Slow and not social media savvy, I give up on WDWYFP. I assume it’s not a Welsh village. Peter, could you give us a hint, sanitised where necessary?

  • Farnarkle says:

    “We don’t want your flaming pandas”

  • Sindri says:

    The “hotline” is nonsense of a high order, premised on the idea that what happened was simply a terrible misunderstanding. Rubbish. China’s military provocations have been crude and deliberate. One can only hope that they know that we know that this “hotline” is just a sop to commercial diplomacy, otherwise they will be laughing all the way home and think we are even more idiotic than we probably are.

  • Brian Boru says:

    Diversity in exports and self reliance in strategic manufacturing as quickly as possible please.

  • Geoff Sherrington says:

    Blind Freddie can see dreadful acts committed by hormone+/-narcotics charged youngsters under 30. When I flew my first RAAF aircraft at 18, at least the narcotics were not a factor.
    Is there any literature on steps the military are taking in various countries to avoid a battle triggered by fentanyl?
    Geoff S

  • lenton1 says:

    As any military commander would attest, first know your enemy’s willingness and capability to defend. China is bating “Handsome man”, to see how much effort/risk in the future will be required to achieve their covert desires. And Albo is indicating it’d be a cakewalk. Now, if Albo was a master strategist we might think his continual acquiescence as a Churchillian master stroke in deception, but I’m guessing, and it’s a wild guess here, he isn’t. Albo, exactly the wrong guy at the exactly the wrong time!

Leave a Reply