This is only a preview of the August 2003 issue of Silicon Chip. You can view 31 of the 104 pages in the full issue, including the advertisments. For full access, purchase the issue for $10.00 or subscribe for access to the latest issues. Items relevant to "PC Infrared Remote Receiver":
Items relevant to "Digital Instrument Display For Cars, Pt.1":
Items relevant to "Home-Brew Weatherproof 2.4GHz WiFi Antennas":
Items relevant to "Fitting A Wireless Microphone To The PortaPAL":
Items relevant to "Jazzy Heart Electronic Jewellery":
Articles in this series:
Purchase a printed copy of this issue for $10.00. |
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
|