AUSTRALIA’S FOREIGN POLICY NOT SO INDEPENDENT AFTER ALL
Travelling to the US during Covid-19 is no small effort and by doing so Australia’s Foreign Affairs Minister Payne and Defence Minister Reynolds demonstrated just how important the Australia-US alliance is. The agenda at the Australia-US Ministerial Consultations (AUSMIN) included: freedom of navigation, electronic warfare and hypersonic technology but the talks all came back to one topic, China. The meeting saw Australia’s posture towards China harden and Australia edge closer to the US, much to Beijing’s frustration.
When the Trump administration came into office they were accused of not having an interest in their allies and the outside world. The opposite has proven true and the US has demonstrated that peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific is a priority. The US has provided a coherent strategy for balancing power and countering China’s rise in the Indo-Pacific.
US Foreign Minister Pompeo came out guns blazing at AUSMIN, his fiery speech calling for a formation of a “new alliance of democracies” to counter China’s rising power. In contrast, Payne’s speech was much more subtle, only mentioning China once, when criticising Beijing for its crackdown on Hong Kong. Payne emphasised that “Australia’s position is our own” and the “relationship with China is important and we have no intention of injuring it”. Based on Payne’s speech commentators concluded that during AUSMIN, Payne resisted the US pressure to take a tough stance on China. However, looking past the diplomatic rhetoric and focusing on the actions taken at AUSMIN, it’s difficult to identify how Australia could have taken a tougher stance on China (The Strategist).
Australia and the United States’ Joint Actions at AUSMIN:
- Signing a “statement of principles” to expand defence ties and increase cooperation in response to the threat of a rising China.
- Condemning Beijing’s crackdown on Hong Kong.
- Rejecting PRC maritime claims in the South China Sea.
- Expressing their intent to “maintain strong unofficial ties with Taiwan”.
- Expressing “deep concern over the PRC’s campaign of repression of Uyghurs” in Xinjiang.
- Pledging to combat state-sponsored malicious disinformation and setting up a joint working group to “monitor and respond to harmful disinformation”.
- Reaffirmed that allowing foreign governments to supply 5G network equipment creates unacceptable risks to national security.
- Reaffirmed Australia’s refusal to be intimidated by China following Canberra’s calls for an independent review into the origins of the pandemic.
Despite not wanting to damage Australia’s relationship with China the discussions at AUSMIN struck a nerve with Beijing. Australia has long maintained that it will not choose between America, its security partner and China, its economic partner. Nevertheless, rejecting PRC claims in the South China Sea is a significant shift in Australia’s policy as it has long held a position of neutrality on maritime issues in the South China Sea. Despite Australia’s efforts to remain neutral and maintain its “love triangle” with the PRC and the US, recent actions at AUSMIN have seen Canberra shift its weight towards the US. Beijing has since responded to the bilateral meeting warning Canberra not to “go further on the road of harming [bilateral] relations”. A spokesperson from the Chinese Embassy stated that:
“[Beijing] firmly rejects and opposes the unfounded accusations and attacks against China on issues related to Hong Kong, Xinjiang and the South China Sea made in the recent Joint Statement of Australia-US Ministerial Consultations.”
Further, China’s most senior diplomats have said that Australia’s push for an independent inquiry into the origins of the pandemic has damaged the relationship. Recently China has imposed an 80% tariff on Australian barley, warned students against studying in Australia, suspended Beef exports from Australian abattoirs and launched two investigations into Australia’s wine exports. Whilst China has formally credited the three trade disputes as regulatory issues, each has had “political overtones” (Jack Derwin, Business Insider). Foreign Affairs representative Zhao Lijian claims that the Australian abattoirs were guilty of “repeated violations of inspection and quarantine requirements” and the investigations are not related to China’s increasingly tense relationship with Australia. However, Beijing has a history of targeting countries’ primary trade industries when they run into political disputes. According to Tim Hunt the Rabobank head of food and agribusiness research “China has often found reasons to reduce purchase of agri products from countries when tensions arise.”
Australia is likely paying a heavy price for its hardline position on China and the trade relationship may deteriorate further. Payne and Reynold’s actions at AUSMIN have further antagonised China but the ministers have decided that the price is worth paying. Australia’s joint criticisms with the US against China have been viewed as risky, considering the US may change its foreign policy at the next election and Australia may lose US support. Nevertheless, whether January 2021 results in Trump or Joe Biden as president, Washington will likely remain firm in its resistance to CCP aggression.
At AUSMIN Australia did make one notable variance to the US China strategy. Payne resisted Washington’s pressure to ramp up its navy exercises in the South China Sea, stating that Australia’s “approach remains consistent, we will continue to transit through the region in accordance with international law.” This is a minor divergence from US strategy, especially on the face of all of the measures taken at AUSMIN. Nonetheless, the resistance offers reassurance that Australia has some independent strategy from the US.
Defence Strategy
Despite the refusal to increase navy exercises in the South China Sea, actions were taken during AUSMIN to strengthen the Australia-US defence relationship. Significantly, at AUSMIN the US agreed to fund a strategic military fuel reserve in Darwin. The strategic fuel reserve is to be used in case of a supply chain breakdown. Jian Zhang, a Chinese foreign policy expert at the University of New South Wales, contends that the fuel reserve facility in Australia was designed for US use if a conflict between the US and China is to eventuate.
The alliance also agreed to increase collaboration on hypersonic, electronic warfare and space-based capabilities. Further, under the defence partnership a Bilateral Force Working Group was formed to provide advice on how Australian and US forces can counter “coercive acts” in the Indo Pacific. Whilst the agreement is confidential, it is believed to include issues such as joint exercises, military infrastructure, greater interoperability with other countries’ defence forces and training regional militaries. Reynolds stated the agreement would “strengthen our shared ability to contribute to regional security and to deter malign behaviour in our region.” “Malign behaviour” seems to be an indirect reference to China. Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs Penny Wong responded to Payne and Reynolds, offering her support for the “pursuit of opportunities for cooperation in coordination with other likeminded and regional partners.” The governments’ hardline on China has not yet been met with any substantial criticism from the opposition.
Supply Chain Diversification
At AUSMIN there was much discussion over the US and Australia cooperating on supply chain diversification, specifically for pharmaceuticals, medical supplies and rare-earth. China has a monopoly on the market for processing rare-earth materials, controlling 80% of production. The production and processing of rare earth is essential for the manufacturing of high tech goods such as TV, phones and defence technology. In the wake of China’s trade sanctions there is increasing pressure on the US and Australia to diversify their supply chain. In 2010 during a territorial dispute between Japan and China, Beijing cut off exports of rare earth to Japan, which was detrimental to Japan’s manufacturing of high tech goods. This demonstrates the importance of supply chain diversification and not letting China, or any single country monopolise a critical market.
The Imperfect Alliance
Despite the smiling faces at AUSMIN not everything is perfect in the alliance. In the joint Global Health Security statement both sides agreed to support the global efforts to ‘prevent and mitigate’ health crises. However, this statement seems superficial as the US has withdrawn its membership and funding for the World Health Organisation. Further, the US hoarded the entire global stock of Remdesivir, one of two drugs demonstrated to assist in COVID-19 recovery, leaving little supply for its “close allies” such as Australia (Ewen Levic, Defence Magazine Australia). The US has shown itself not to be a team player when tackling the Covid-19 pandemic. Additionally, there are glaring ironies in the US committing itself to combat infodemics when its leader Donald Trump routinely disseminates disinformation.
During talks, Payne stressed that Australia would seek to promote its national interests. Payne stated that Australia and the US “don’t agree on everything,” however when it comes to China the two nations are on the same page. The joint condemnation of China’s actions, the implementation of a Bilateral Force Working Group, and the joint commitment to supply chain diversification demonstrate the bolstering of the US-Australia partnership and the growing divide between Australia and China.
