Commando News issue 15 2019

What would the Services Reconnaissance
Department (SRD) have done to get close, even inside
the 9-dash economic line? They would already be in
experimental houses on hills behind Cairns and
marching to the muffled beat of silent feet. They would
be getting brown men and women to spend many
nights with a million mosquitos to get ready to go belly
to belly behind the Bamboo Curtin.
What would the Ferdinand bulls have done to get
close? Their Falung Gong missionaries and Filipino
deep sea fishermen would already be staring out to sea
in the South China Sea and the South West Pacific.
What would the Joint Clandestine Organization
(JCO) have done to get close? Their Chief of
Destruction would have already be reporting to the
Ministry of Economic AKA Ungentlemanly Warfare and
be planning umpteen false flag and red flag mission
profiles by filibusters.
What would the Phantoms of the Jungle have done
to get close? They would have been up to their armpits
in Confrontasi shoot and scoot Claret style, e-tractor
(AKA ‘click bait’) ambushes on the New Silk Road and
training Montagnards in pseudo operations and proxy
war fighting on their border.
What would Krazy Horse Stan Krasnoff and the
AATTV have done in War Zone C? He was the master of
the close embrace and Project Rapid Fire. He would
have said “kill those Orange Fuckers.”
What would Taur Matan Ruak and Falintil have done,
part from sleeping with one eye open in Timor? He
would have resisted on at least four domestic and
international clandestine fronts and he would have
dramatically increased the membership of the Catholic
Church in China using GetUp.
What would the Bearded Devils have done to get
closer to the Chinese border? They would have trained
the Mujahedeen and other non-communists to storm
hell using disproportionate effects and industrial-scale
‘balls on a bulldog’ skill sets.
So are the Chinese communists and the Australian
democrats and businessmen on a collision course in
Political Warfare? Is it true that the Australian defence
and security establishment is placing too much
emphasis on democratic values and human rights rather
than the economics of Australian house hold, which is
the largest in the world? When do predatory Economic
Warfare practices like bribes, opaque agreements and
the strategic use of debt to hold countries captive to the
demands and wishes of Beijing become more than illdefined
conflict amongst nation states?
How do Crisis Practitioners and Continuity Planners
and Emergency Response Professionals answer these
questions? Quite simply they plan for the best and
prepare for the worst. They know that like strategy, crisis
leadership and crisis brinksmanship begins before the
first ‘GO’ move on the board. So should Australia’s
political, economic, defence and social strategy just be
to outlast the communists? This delay approach has
worked for the Taliban and they have defeated
everyone including us.
Should our extant strategy of turning Australia into a
quarry for China be enough to keep the Chinese
diaspora out of our polling booths? Indeed should we
regard China as Australia’s silent enemy of the state?
Has the Australian establishment set the “it’s the
economy, stupid” above everything? Or do we need to
take a slightly different stand, with some counterinfluence
and thereby protecting our freedom from
China’s incursions? What are the strategic options and
how do we “win-win” to quote Xi Jinping? What do you
do about unconscionable conduct?
It requires more than a seminal change in attitude.
Australia needs to think harder about its self-reliant
defence strategy in order to be able to conduct
demanding military operations alone. We need to be
able to fight harder and to be able to punch well above
our weight. The required change is not black and it is
not white. It is brown and very dark grey. We need a
small-scale approach with a light footprint, working
through regional and global partners supported by
5G++ enablers. We need to be able to turn military
success into the political leverage needed to
consolidate peace. The greatest use of Special
Operations is the threat to use them and not their actual
use themselves. This is the template that we need when
the only Chinese rule is that there are no rules.
Option one is clearly and always diplomacy and
trade; especially in the current cold war. The parallel
option two is always the military and the enduring
default option three is always proxy war by fifth
columnists in the land, sea, air and ether gap. We must
be ready to hit them hard and send a message. No one
loves a warrior until the enemy is at the gate. What has
General Scomo said about getting close to the Bamboo
Curtain and a rules-based order to foreign policy? He
says that it must speak of our character and our values.
What we stand for. What we believe in and if need be,
what we will defend.
History has shown that a Ministry of Economic
Warfare AKA Ungentlemanly Warfare is needed to
bypass the bureaucracy and to approve the clandestine
and illegal building of weapons when the rule is that
there are no rules. History has shown that a ‘work
outside the law’ organization and a freelance approach
to warfare is needed, as unrestricted warfare can never,
and will never fit in with the conventional military where
there are rules. History has shown that the Ministry of
Economic Warfare must be in overall charge of proxy
warfare as it not constrained by military rules, command
structures and centralized barracks.
History has shown that there is a need to employee
civilians, foreign nationals and native people for
subversive activities in breach of the laws and usages of
war. The philosophy of using business people to assist in
the collection of intelligence on an adversary is well
based and sound. All Chinese organizations and citizens
support and cooperate with and collaborate in national
intelligence work so what should we do this as well?
M.R.D Foot queried why you should even bother to
fight conventionally in war.
COMMANDO NEWS ~ Edition 15 I 2019 73