Talk:Pine Gap

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Associated task forces (nations and regions): Australian military history task force

Portal	Pine Gap is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Northern Territory.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian military.
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Since 1988 the official title for Pine Gap has been the JOINT DEFENCE FACILITY PINE GAP. It is an Australian Defence Department property and is jointly operated by the Australian and US governments. More than 50% of the employees are Australians. There are not any "no-go" areas within Pine Gap for the Australian and US senior managers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.166.96.239 (talk • contribs) 11:32, 22 May 2005

Pine Gap is totally Australian sovereign territory and is protected by Australian Government personnel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.13.45 (talk • contribs) 12:30, 17 August 2006

[edit] Sovereignty

Does anyone know what the legal status of the sovereignty of the base is? Is it considered US soil, and protected by US military personnel, or is it Australian soil and protected by the Australian Protective Service and/or the Australian Federal Police? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rolinator (talk • contribs) 23:23, 20 April 2006

Australian Protective Service is on the front gates, and I do believe the entire facility is controlled by the Australian government. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.125.157.4 (talk • contribs) 09:40, 14 July 2006

Besides who protects it, sovereignty also affects which state can enter the base. This seems to have changed over time. Access to the base by Australian officials was tested in 1999 when a parliamentary committee had to decide whether to extend the treaty that allows Pine Gap. Committee members were upset at being repeatedly denied access to the facility while their American counterparts were not ([1], 1999). The report by the committee was scathing:

2.19 Our experience has confirmed the anomaly, perhaps highlighting it even more starkly:

• a congressional committee voting on an annual appropriation is able to visit the Joint Defence Facility and receive a classified briefing; while
• the Treaties Committee, seeking to advise the community on whether Australia should be bound to an international obligation for the next ten years, is denied access to the facility and entrusted with less information than can be found in a public library.[2]

After the Australian committee eventually agreed to the treaty extension[3], subsequent Australian enquiries were granted visits more readily. While visiting, Kim Beazley said he had "total access" ([4], 2004) and Defence Minister Robert Hill said on his visit that the Government had "full knowledge" of facility activities ([5], 2002). 123.51.3.24 12:55, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Iraq/Afghanistan Mismatch

In the body, mention is made about protests during the war in AFGHANISTAN, but the protest section makes clear this protest was really about the war in IRAQ. Maybe the first paragraph could be cleared up? I know I got the wrong impression the first time 'round. Knnos (talk) 07:49, 9 June 2008 (UTC)