Fullscreen HTML5Med Res (??MB)HTML4

PUBLISHER’S LETTER www.siliconchip.com.au Publisher & Editor-in-Chief Leo Simpson, B.Bus., FAICD Production Manager Greg Swain, B.Sc.(Hons.) Technical Staff John Clarke, B.E.(Elec.) Peter Smith Ross Tester Jim Rowe, B.A., B.Sc, VK2ZLO Rick Walters Reader Services Ann Jenkinson Advertising Enquiries Leo Simpson Phone (02) 9979 5644 Fax (02) 9979 6503 Regular Contributors Brendan Akhurst Rodney Champness, VK3UG Julian Edgar, Dip.T.(Sec.), B.Ed Mike Sheriff, B.Sc, VK2YFK Philip Watson, MIREE, VK2ZPW Stan Swan SILICON CHIP is published 12 times a year by Silicon Chip Publications Pty Ltd. ACN 003 205 490. ABN 49 003 205 490 All material copyright ©. No part of this publication may be reproduced without the written consent of the publisher. Printing: Hannanprint, Noble Park, Victoria. Distribution: Network Distribution Company. Subscription rates: $69.50 per year in Australia. For overseas rates, see the subscription page in this issue. Editorial & advertising offices: Unit 8, 101 Darley St, Mona Vale, NSW 2103. Postal address: PO Box 139, Collaroy Beach, NSW 2097. Phone (02) 9979 5644. Fax (02) 9979 6503. E-mail: silchip<at>siliconchip.com.au ISSN 1030-2662 * Recommended and maximum price only. 2  Silicon Chip Should we be part of Star Wars II? Over the last month or so, there has been considerable news in the media about the possibility of Australia becoming involved with a deeper alliance with the USA, both in defence and in trade. As far as trade is concerned, it would probably be a good thing, especially if our farmers can get better access to the American market. However, regardless of an overall beneficial outcome, there are bound to be losers in some sectors of our economy. A closer alliance the USA in defence is another matter entirely, and far more debatable. There are many people who would say that our existing alliance, via the ANZUS treaty, is already far too close. A majority were initially against our participation in the liberation of Iraq and we were fortunate indeed, that we did not lose any soldiers in combat (up to the time of writing this editorial, at least). Part of the reason for the recent discussions are the worrying developments in North Korea. They reportedly already have one or two atomic bombs and they have a ballistic missile under development, to deliver nuclear weapons over long distanc­es. Mind you, just because the North Koreans have a ballistic missile under development does not mean that they will succeed soon or at all. Nevertheless, the Americans are working hard on producing a missile shield, based initially in Fort Greely in Alaska and on warships in the Pacific. The USA is also developing powerful laser to be carried in a Boeing 747. On detection of a missile launch in North Korea, the airborne laser would make the first attempt to knock it out. If that didn’t succeed, it would then be up to a highspeed “interceptor” launched from the warships or Alas­ka, to kill the missile. Inevitably, this program has been dubbed “Son of Star Wars”, after Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defence Initiative which proposed having missile interceptors housed in giant “garages” orbiting the Earth. It was eventually abandoned as being infeasible and you would have to think there is a major risk that this new anti-missile venture won’t succeed either. After all, there are too many ways of circumventing it. Want to protect a missile against a laser strike? Easy, just give it a highly reflective coating. Or launch a lot of decoys. Or whatever. Ways around it will be thought of, probably long before it is fully operational, if that ever happens. The Americans are certainly spending huge amounts of money in developing this new shield and no doubt they are pushing the technology far ahead of what was possible just a few years ago. But high-tech defences are often circumvented with low-tech approaches by people who are especially determined – witness the September 11 attack in New York. Which is why Australia should be especially wary of being involved. Sure, there might be some technology transfer to our industry but the cost of participation in this program is going to be extremely high. There are already concerns that our exist­ing overseas defence commitments are stretching the budget too far. Arguably, we don’t need to be part of any “missile umbrella”. That is not to say we should not continue to work with the USA under the existing ANZUS treaty. But let us hope that heavy diplomatic pressure brought to bear by the United Nations and particularly China can relieve the precarious situation in North Korea. That is how Australia should be working, not in an extremely expensive high-tech approach which has no guarantee that it will work. Leo Simpson www.siliconchip.com.au