They say that bad things happen in threes, and that certainly seems to be the case in Chinese-Australian relations. Over the past week, Beijing has castigated Canberra over the decision by leading Australian politicians to meet the Tibetan spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama. It has issued a formal diplomatic protest to Australia over its decision to participate in a joint defence meeting with the US, Japan and India last month. And Australian Trade Minister Warren Truss has alluded to the fact that the much vaunted proposed free-trade agreement with Beijing is proving elusive. It's too early to suggest that relations between the two, which have been going swimmingly for a number of years, are about to turn sour. But there is no doubt that the road ahead is going to challenge both countries' diplomatic patience. It would be foolish for anyone to get too nervous about the row over the decision by Australian Prime Minister John Howard and opposition leader Kevin Rudd to meet the Dalai Lama last week. Having finally decided, after much sidestepping of the issue, that they would meet one of Beijing's chief irritants, both men would have expected the mainland government's warning that such meetings could damage relations. But Beijing's view that Australia - by participating in the strategic defence talks - is joining India, Japan and the US to gang up on it, is potentially a more serious impediment to smooth ties. Hugh White, a visiting fellow at Sydney's Lowy Institute for International Policy, said in The Age newspaper that the leaders in Beijing were 'irritated' by what they perceive as a change in attitude from Australia in joining the Japanese and the Americans, who are less well disposed towards Beijing. 'The Japanese and the Americans have, for some time, been developing the view that they'd like to have a closer relationship to, in a sense, hold China out at arm's length,' said Professor White. '[Beijing sees] this as a pattern in which the US and Japan have been trying to consolidate an alliance of democracies in Asia, which they feel is directed against them.' The last thing Australia needs right now is for Beijing's 'irritation' to turn into something more like fury, and for that fury to manifest itself in the free-trade-agreement negotiations. Trade talks between Canberra and Beijing have been going on for two years now and, if you were a betting person, you might think that the odds of the two countries achieving such a deal were getting longer. In fact, a fortnight ago, Ric Wells, Australia's chief negotiator in the free-trade talks, told a parliamentary committee that he doesn't think Beijing wants a deal at all. And although Mr Truss wasn't as blunt in a speech last week, he did admit that progress has been 'slow', and that there needs to be some fairly rapid 'demonstrable achievement' to lift the flagging talks. Mr Howard has staked a fair amount of political capital and prestige on such a deal with Beijing and he cannot afford to see the talks become deadlocked, or crumble, in the run-up to the general election, which will be held later this year. So, when the free-trade talks resume this week in the Chinese capital, there's no doubt that Mr Howard will be hoping to see a substantial breakthrough - such as a final agreement on the industry sectors to be coerced in the agreement. But, for this to happen, Australian officials can ill afford to raise the ire of Beijing any more than they have done of late. And that is a difficult task. On the one hand, Mr Howard's government cannot afford to be seen to be fawning to Beijing. But, on the other, it does not want leaders of the world's fastest-growing economy to walk away from the free-trade talks anytime soon. Greg Barns is a political commentator in Australia and a former Australian government adviser
