Arch rivals

One wonders what possessed Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to call last week for the creation of an 'arc of freedom and prosperity' involving his country, the United States, India and Australia. It appears a needlessly provocative act, given that it is clearly aimed at containing China. And it certainly doesn't help a nation like Australia, which carefully balances its relationships in Asia.

No doubt Mr Abe's brand-new idea will get some airplay, even if informally, at next week's Apec meeting in Sydney, which President Hu Jintao will attend along with US President George W. Bush. So it's an ideal chance for the host of that meeting, Australian Prime Minister John Howard, to use his influence to persuade Mr Abe to drop the concept.

It appears that an opportunity will arise for Mr Howard to do exactly that. Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said in an interview on Monday that Australia, Japan and the US are considering holding a separate meeting when the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation forum gathers on September 8 and 9.

He was asked: 'What signal does it send to China if this meeting of three of the leaders goes ahead, particularly considering China's suspicion of an American policy of containment to which Australia could be seen to be a part?'

His reply was enlightening: 'Well, the Chinese know we're not part of it, and we don't support containment.'

Mr Downer said 'a policy of containment is wrong' and 'a policy of engagement is right', in his view.

So if anyone is going to kill off Mr Abe's proposal it has to be Australia, because it has the most to lose from being associated with it. India and the US have their own domestic and strategic reasons for wanting to be seen as counterpoints to China, and if Japan wants to provide a vehicle for them to do that, then they might find it difficult to resist. But Australia, a middle-ranking power of some influence in the Asia-Pacific region, has a lot riding on stability and harmony in this part of the world, from both a self-interested, and a broader, regional perspective.

Mr Howard and Mr Downer have cleverly cultivated Beijing over the past few years, while at the same time deepening Australia's commitment to both Japan and the US. And Australia recently proposed a free-trade agreement with India and a bilateral, uranium sales agreement.

So with the leaders of China, Japan and the US all in one room at Apec, Mr Howard and Mr Downer have an ideal chance to get the ball rolling on trying to change the atmospherics in northern Asia.

Former Australian prime minister Paul Keating, who was instrumental in the establishment and early years of Apec almost 20 years ago, said as much last week. Australia, he said, needs to use the Apec meeting to 'encourage China to include a future for Japan in its regional view of things, and to oblige Japan to include a point of accommodation with China which goes to Japan's economic future, its declining population and some real recognition of the none-too-laudable parts of its 20th-century history.

'In the first instance, all will resist it,' he said. 'The Chinese won't like it; the Japanese won't like it; and the Americans would probably regard it as an intrusion into the international game they usually conduct.'

But Australia must still try.

And what better way to show leadership than for Mr Howard to kill Mr Abe's idea stone dead by announcing that Australia will have no part of it?

Finally, there are two fairly practical reasons for Australia to kill off Japan's 'arc of freedom and prosperity' concept.

Mr Abe's political future, or lack of it, must be considered by Australia. Unlike his predecessor, Junichiro Koizumi, Mr Abe has proved to be a lacklustre performer since he took office last year. His ruling Liberal Democratic Party just got thumped in recent upper house elections, and there is no guarantee that the stridently nationalist Mr Abe will be around in six or 12 months' time.

And then there is the question of Australia's forthcoming election, due to be held sometime over the next two or three months. It would be dangerous in such a climate - and particularly with the likelihood of a change of government now a real possibility, as Mr Howard's popularity sags - for a government to commit Australia to any controversial foreign-policy initiatives.

Greg Barns is a political commentator in Australia and a former Australian government adviser