The stable doors are open

China has been securing its own bases. Having helped fund the Sinhalese to defeat the minority ethnic Tamils in a bloody civil war, China is building a major naval base in Sri Lanka and to support its territorial ambitions is propping up a corrupt Sinhalese government that shows every sign of moving to a one party state. It is also building a naval base in Burma and two in Pakistan, all with the aim of protecting trading routes.

The middle ground that Hugh White was urging we look for appears to be fading fast.

The United States has shown in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan that it is prepared to do whatever it takes to secure its interests with, amongst other things, the extra judicial incarceration of individuals deemed dangerous enemies of the state. China has a similar single minded approach to enemies of the state which are a lot more numerous on her home soil than the US has to contend with - for the moment.

China recently flexed its muscles in the area of vital supply, cutting Japan off from heavy metals over an island territorial dispute. Reaction was swift. Japan backed off and the US and other states looked for alternative suppliers which as it transpired are few.

The G20 has served to highlight the economic tension between the two, with China holding the whip hand in terms of cash and the US in terms of assets,  both material and skills. But as Hugh White notes both need each other, they do not need to go down the path of confrontation, but at this point in its history the US seems to understand no other.

It is to Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd that we look for leadership and this last week both disappointed. Kerry O'Brien, ABC, 7.30 Report, asked Rudd on 8 November, "Former senior Australian Defence official Hugh White wrote today that, 'China's rise presents the US with a serious challenge to its leadership of Asia for the first time in decades and presents Australia with an impossible choice between our traditional alliance and our economic future.' Now, has Hugh White got that wrong?"

Rudd responded, "Yes, he has. And the reason is that skilful, careful diplomacy is able to manage a whole range of different interests which we have at any one time..." But that begs the question, how does the Foreign Minister propose to handle the conundrum posed by Hugh White and articulated by Kerry O'Brien? He cannot hide behind the diplomats of his department; the decision is his to make. Will Australia have the wit, wisdom and courage to find and follow the middle ground?

Forget it; Gillard and Rudd have caved in. Weak governments make weak decisions, they seek the easy road, but I am not sure that all the way with the USA will be easy for Australia in the longer term.