Australian expert exposes false flag of 'spy ship' claim

Jennifer Parker, a security expert with Australian National University, who has over 20 years experience in the Australian Department of Defence, raised a good question on how far the unfounded "China threat" conjecture can go in fueling paranoia in Australia particularly during an election season.

During the height of the national election in late March, some China-bashers in the country hyped up the "threat" of a Chinese marine research vessel sailing off Australia's coast, labeling it a "spy ship" with the intention of turning its presence into a political flashpoint in a bid to impact the direction of the election.

But as Parker wrote in a signed article "China's 'spy ship' that wasn't off the coast of Australia" published by The Lowy Institute recently, their speculation about China using the ship to map submarine cables proved unfounded.

"The vessel maintained active use of its Automatic Identification System throughout its passage and was easily tracked via services including Starboard Maritime Intelligence and Ship Atlas. It travelled west at a steady speed of 8 to 13 knots, slowing only when encountering rough weather west of the Great Australian Bight," she wrote.

"The vessel's speed and steady westward track were inconsistent with deploying its submersible, used for probing the ocean depths, or conducting the overlapping passes needed for seabed mapping."

Ridiculously, a simple course change of the Chinese vessel also triggered speculation that it was mapping submarine routes near Australia's only submarine base.

But, as Parker observed, its course and speed made such activity unlikely. "The vessel eventually slowed to 1 knot — effectively stopping — likely to deploy its submersible more than 700 nautical miles west of Perth, well beyond Australia's Exclusive Economic Zone," she wrote.

That the ship has explored two main positions near the trench prompted further accusations that it was mapping routes for the deployment of nuclear-armed ballistic missile submarines or deploying acoustic sensors to monitor Australian submarine movements.

But as Parker pointed out in her article, while countries have deployed seabed sensors — such as the US SOSUS system during the Cold War — these were placed on continental slopes and seamounts aligned with the deep sound channel, not extreme depths like the Diamantina Trench, near the Chinese vessel's course, which is more likely to trap sound than support long-range detection.

"Although technology has advanced, there is little evidence to suggest the Diamantina Trench holds acoustic relevance for deploying seabed sensors. As for the claim that China might position nuclear-armed submarines in the area, the logic doesn't hold," Parker argues.

"Transiting such submarines through the closely monitored Indonesian archipelago would carry significant risk, and the location offers no operational advantage ... Parking an ballistic missile submarine 900 nautical miles off the Australian coast would provide no meaningful benefit."

The studied silence of the China-bashers who painstakingly peddled the "China threat" theory speaks volumes of the nature of their moves. By packaging their conjecture, speculation and even lies as facts, they sought to try and mislead the public to meet their own narrow ends.

It is to be hoped that more Australian experts and professionals will stand up to expose such deceitful actions for what they are. The healthy development of Sino-Australian ties relies on the friendly relations between the two peoples, who need to have a true perception of the two countries as cooperative partners.

With broad common interests and great potential in economic and trade cooperation, China and Australia have been and should continue to be supportive of each other.