Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese meets Chinese President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Bali, Indonesia, on November 15, 2022. Photo: Xinhua
Opinion
Sameed Basha
Sameed Basha
Confused Australia must decide: is China a friend or a foe?
By extending an olive branch to Beijing to reset economic ties while continuing with its military posturing, Canberra is sending out mixed messages
Australia must set its own path to reconciliation with China and not let third-party ambitions derail it
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese backed a joint statement at the recent G7 summit in Japan about de-risking trade with China as his trade minister, Don Farrell, concluded a trip to Beijing seeking to end tariffs on Australian exports due to the country’s posturing against its biggest export partner.
This contradictory approach from Canberra has been a hallmark of its diplomacy with Beijing. On one hand, it extends an olive branch, seeking to cease or de-escalate economic tensions which affect its exports. On the other, it grabs a pitchfork and displays hostility through diplomatic forums like the Group of 7 or militarily, like with the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue and Aukus alliance.
This has been exacerbated as Albanese’s government marks one year in office. His strategy towards China was labelled a “reset” but it needs to be more transparent on how Canberra wants to label China: as a friend or a foe.
Politics is in turmoil and Foreign Minister Penny Wong is advocating for peace and cooperation. At the same time, the Department of Defence, under the leadership of Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles, is consistently unveiling new military endeavours in partnership with the United States, explicitly aimed at China.
During her visit to Beijing to celebrate 50 years of diplomatic relations, Wong said “ice thaws, but slowly”. The military posturing and joint statements targeting China could freeze relations again. Not since World War II has Australia’s foreign policy been so military-centric. It is a departure from the decades of diplomatic ventures central to Australia achieving its foreign policy objectives.
Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong meets her Chinese counterpart Qin Gang on the sidelines of the G20 Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in New Delhi, India, on March 2. Photo: Xinhua
Wong’s diplomacy has been a cornerstone of Australia’s diplomatic reset with China. Her actions align with her intentions, re-engaging and stabilising relations in a respectful manner, reflective of her Asian heritage.
This level-headedness and the basic tenets of courtesy and respect as part of her diplomatic posturing have allowed her to court top Chinese diplomat Wang Yi on the sidelines of the G20 meetings in India and Indonesia, which opened the gates to Beijing last year.
This could potentially set up a state visit for Albanese to coincide with the 50th anniversary of the first visit by an Australian prime minister (Gough Whitlam) to China, in October. Such gestures show that, within Canberra’s halls, people wish to see Australia and China through a geoeconomic lens, rather than a security prism.
But others, politicians and think tanks alike, still have the colonial mindset of muscling their way through, wanting to threaten sanctions, coerce regional partners into an isolationist strategy against China and persuade them to de-link with the allure of grants and special provisions.
This commotion is being spurred on by the fear of China’s military build-up within its own territorial waters. Australia is building its military capacity to defend its borders and safeguard its sea lines of communication.
01:57
Australia unveils biggest defence reform in decades, prioritising long-range missiles
Australia unveils biggest defence reform in decades, prioritising long-range missiles
If China – Australia’s largest export and import partner – really wished to inflict harm, it would be much easier for Beijing to simply shut down trade with the country – which it pretty much did in 2020 – rather than engage militarily.
Even if China-US military conflict was to break out in the region, Beijing’s maritime forces would focus more on the first and second island chains and would be very unlikely to extend its efforts to Australia. This is recognised in Canberra’s latest strategic defence review, which makes it clear that China poses no direct threat to its border security.
The Five Eyes intelligence network – consisting of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Britain and the US – recently launched another front to demonise China. In a Sydney Morning Herald article, they accused Beijing of a systemic campaign of covert interference and intimidation in other nations, without providing specific examples. This has echoes of the disinformation campaigns of the 1990s to discredit Saddam Hussein and justify the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan.
FBI Deputy Director Paul Abbate’s comments in the article – he said that China “poses a grave danger to each of our countries, our way of life, our democracies and the freedoms that we value so much” – hark back to president George W. Bush’s 2001 speech on terrorists. Bush said then: “They hate our freedoms – our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other.”
Such rhetoric to galvanise public support is dangerous, as it will further divide and create mistrust between China and Australia, and cause transnational efforts, such as the narcotics crackdown, to break down.
02:18
Australian government orders review of Chinese-made surveillance cameras in defence offices
Australian government orders review of Chinese-made surveillance cameras in defence offices
Australia must set its own path to reconciliation with China and not let third-party ambitions derail it. Canberra has two courses: Wong’s, based on building trust and mutual respect, and Marles’, which aims to continue the policies of the Morrison government – antics that led to A$20 billion (US$15 billion) worth of Australian goods being sanctioned or having tariffs placed on them.
Beijing has invited Albanese to visit later this year. He is adamant that the export bans must be lifted before his trip. It is worth noting that China has never required Australia to relinquish its military assertiveness as a prerequisite for talks. This is because China is clear in its policy regarding Australia.
But the Albanese government is confused – about whether it wants to extend an olive branch to bolster its ailing economy or sacrifice a limb for the US to contain China in the Indo-Pacific.
Sameed Basha is a defence and political analyst with a master’s degree in international relations from Deakin University, Australia
