Kathy Marks: A friendship that has grown too close for comfort

Matters were not helped when President Bush described Australia as a 'regional sheriff'

The love-in has ended. George Bush was in Australia for barely 20 hours this week, and spent a chunk of that time asleep inside the fortified US Embassy compound. But his lightning visit to a country that has offered uncritical support in the war against terror was heavy in symbolism.

Mr Bush has few allies more loyal than the Prime Minister, John Howard, whose foreign policy is driven almost exclusively by a desire to please the US. On Thursday Mr Howard received his reward, hailed by Mr Bush as "a leader of exceptional courage who exemplifies the finest qualities of one of the world's greatest democracies".

Australia has been a trusted ally of Washington since the Americans - according to the mythology - saved it from Japanese invasion after the fall of Singapore. Every post-war prime minister, with perhaps the exception of Labour's Gough Whitlam, has looked to the US to protect the country from perceived enemies in a hostile region. Under Mr Howard, though, a cordial friendship has grown claustrophobically close.

Mr Howard happened to be in Washington on 11 September 2001, and he immediately pledged unequivocal backing for US retaliation, whatever shape it might take. When the focus swivelled from Afghanistan to Iraq, Mr Howard was at the front of the queue again, clamouring to send troops - jumping up and down, almost, like a schoolboy demanding his teacher's attention. The Americans were gratified, but Australia - as I sometimes have to remind myself - lies on the edge of Asia, in a region that is predominantly Muslim. Australia's neighbours, already alienated by the anti-Islamic rhetoric of its politicians, were deeply unhappy that it joined the invasion of Iraq.

Matters were not helped recently when Mr Bush described Australia as a regional "sheriff". Malaysia's irrepressible prime minister, Mahathir Mohamad, retorted that "puppet" was a more apt characterisation.

Some Australian leaders, such as Paul Keating and Bob Hawke, walked a diplomatic tightrope, nurturing the alliance with the US while occasionally disagreeing with US policy and remaining on good terms with their neighbours. Mr Howard, despite claiming that he is not obliged "to choose between history and geography", has been content to let relations with Asia slide dramatically.

Mr Howard is cut from old-fashioned cloth. He does not feel particularly comfortable in Asia - nor especially curious. During a visit to China, so one story goes, he did not bother visiting the Great Wall. As opposition leader in the late 1980s, he called for Asian immigration to be cut. As prime minister, he feels far more at ease dealing with Australia's traditional Anglo-Saxon allies.

He also shares his countrymen's paranoia about living in a supposedly inhospitable region, surrounded by people of alien cultures and religions who gaze in envy at Australia's spacious lands and mineral wealth. Many Australians believe Indonesia would invade at the drop of a hat.

Still, fear is a potent motivating force, and Mr Howard is convinced the US is the best guarantor of Australia's security - provided Canberra can store up enough goodwill by sending its men and women to fight alongside the Americans in whatever adventure Mr Bush dreams up next.

This is the kind of insurance policy that a financial adviser would counsel you to avoid like the plague. Firstly, there is no certainty the US would dash to Australia's aid in the unlikely event of it coming under threat. That would depend on whether American interests were at stake too. Secondly, Mr Bush will not be around for ever, and a future Democrat president is unlikely to feel the same theoretical indebtedness.

The biggest danger facing Australia is a terrorist attack, particularly with Jemaah Islamiyah - the terrorist network responsible for the Bali bomb - still active. But the more closely Australia aligns itself with the US, the more of a potential target it makes itself. It now features regularly in the list of enemies of Islam reeled off in the tapes purportedly made by Osama bin Laden.

At a time when Australia and Indonesia should be working closely to combat terrorism, relations are in a parlous state. President Megawati Sukarnoputri did not even bother joining Mr Howard in Bali for ceremonies marking the first anniversary of the bombing, which killed 88 Australians.

In Australia, there has been virtually no debate about why a nightclub frequented by Westerners - many of whom had no idea even that Bali was in Indonesia - should be targeted by Islamic extremists. As in the US post-11 September, such questions are viewed as unpatriotic and an insult to the dead.

The superficial consensus was enforced during Mr Bush's visit, with protesters kept at a distance and the opposition leader, Simon Crean, who opposed the Iraq war, excluded from a barbecue hosted by Mr Howard. Mr Bush had no contact with the ordinary Australians whom he praised so highly in his address to parliament. There was no motorcade, not even a press conference. Parliament House was closed to the public for the first time in history.

But Mr Howard, basking in warm feelings of self-importance, had no complaints. The visit could even help him to win an election next year. That would be great for Mr Howard. But would it be great for Australia?