Australia, a country of Oceania, was one of the British colonies. Therefore, the relationship among Australia, European countries and American is closer than with Asia countries in aspects of politics, economy, diplomacy and culture. Basically, from the geographical strategic point of view, Australia locates near the Asia-Pacific Zone that impels Australia greatly depends on its neighboring countries. Especially the national security and economical benefit of Australia relies on the stability and development of the Southeast Asia countries. After WWII, the economy in Southeast Asia grows significantly which forced Australia to enhance its communication with the countries of Asia Pacific Zone to sustain its national security and economical benefit. From post Cold-War period to 2004, in order to respond the change of international situation, the security and strategy of Australia under the instructions of the Defense White Paper and the Foreign Trade Policy White Paper are as the following: ¡]1¡^Maintain strong military capability which is able to defend Australia;¡]2¡^Maintain and reinforce the traditional alliance with Europe and America;¡]3¡^vigorously maintain the security and stability of the neighboring countries;¡]4¡^Support multilateral regional security mechanism in Asia-Pacific region;¡]5¡^Participate in the UN. Therefore, according to the papers, the Australia national security strategy can be categorized into two principal axises. First, maintain the security alliance with the United Stated, to acquire various resources from the United States. In hence, Australia would become a great country in the region. Secondly, build a buffer zone of Australia by maintaining the stability of the region and the completion of Indonesia territory, avoiding the turbulent of neighboring region and evade it becoming the hotbed of terrorists.

This thesis argues that the Australian military intervention in East Timor in 1999 was motivated primarily by the need to defend Australia’s own strategic interests. It was an act of Australian imperialism understood from a Marxist perspective, and was consistent with longstanding strategic policy in the region.¶ Australian policy makers have long been concerned about the security threat posed by a small and weak neighbouring state in the territory of East Timor. This led to the deployment of Australian troops to the territory in World War Two. In 1974 Australia supported Indonesia’s invasion of the territory in order to prevent it from becoming a strategic liability in the context of Cold War geopolitics. But, as an indirect result of the Asian financial crisis, by September 1999 the Indonesian government’s control over the territory had become untenable. Indonesia’s political upheaval also raised the spectre of the ‘Balkanisation’ of the Indonesian archipelago, and East Timor thus became the focal point for Australian fears about an ‘arc of instability’ that arose in this period.¶ Australia’s insertion of military forces into East Timor in 1999 served its own strategic priorities by ensuring an orderly transfer of sovereignty took place, avoiding a destabilising power vacuum as the country transitioned to independence. It also guaranteed that Australia’s economic and strategic interests in the new nation could not be ignored by the United Nations or the East Timorese themselves. There are therefore underlying consistencies in Australia’s policy on East Timor stretching back several decades. Despite changing contexts, and hence radically different policy responses, Australia acted throughout this time to prevent political and strategic instability in East Timor.¶ In addition, the intervention reinforced Australia’s standing as a major power in Southeast Asia and the Southwest Pacific. The 1999 deployment therefore helped facilitate a string of subsequent Australian interventions in Pacific island nations, both by providing a model for action and by building a public consensus in favour of the use of military intervention as a policy tool.¶ This interpretation of events challenges the consensus among existing academic accounts. Australia’s support of Indonesia’s invasion and occupation of East Timor from 1974 was frequently criticised as favouring realpolitik over ethical considerations. But the 1999 intervention, which ostensibly ended severe violence and secured national independence for the territory, drew widespread support, both from the public and academic commentators. It has generally been seen as a break with previous Australian policy, and as driven by political forces outside the normal foreign policy process. Moreover, it has been almost universally regarded as a triumph for moral conduct in international affairs, and even as a redemptive moment for the Australian national conscience. Viewing the intervention as part of the longstanding strategy of Australian imperialism casts doubt on such positive evaluations.