BY DEAN ANTOS –
In Victoria, one political figure has stood apart from the rest due to their personal efforts to be on our TV screens each day – Premier Daniel Andrews. During his daily press conferences, Andrews has constantly stated that “staying apart keeps us together”. Whilst Andrew’s intentions may be to keep us together, his government’s approach to foreign relations can be no further apart to that of our Federal Government and other states. The Premier has certainly kept us Victorians apart from the rest of Australia, who have subverted any advancements from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to participate in, or recognise, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). This year the CCP has come under scrutiny for a lack of transparency regarding the initial COVID-19 outbreak, potentially hindering the ability for fellow states to adequately prepare for the virus. Similarly, the lack of transparency with regard to many CCP policies, inclusive of the BRI, should concern states who must be cautious of the fact that the CCP are looking to deceive as many states with ‘debt trap diplomacy’.
The BRI is used by China to increase its geopolitical power and coerce developing nations by saddling them with debt. The notion of debt trap diplomacy incorporates ‘sharp power’, in line with China’s Military-Civil Fusion Development Strategy, rather than ‘soft’ or ‘hard’ power diplomacy. Sharp power diplomacy involves manipulating and financially pressuring other countries to guide, buy or coerce political influence and military presence. There are quite frankly a plethora of poignant examples which illustrate the use of sharp power diplomacy in tandem with the BRI. A case in point was China’s ability to put pressure on Sri Lanka to complete a debt-for-equity swap. This was due to Sri Lanka being unable to service an US$8 billion loan (at 6 percent interest) for the construction of a deep-water port in Hambantota. The once ‘civil’ infrastructure project, funded by a Communist Party loan, resulted in China coercing Sri Lanka to agree to a 99-year lease for the port. These actions are not isolated, as a recent NATO economic and security committee briefing on the BRI linked the debt trap diplomacy strategy to China’s expansion of naval power, reasserting its importance to the Military-Civil Fusion Development Strategy.
While the Federal Government and state governments have appropriately welcomed Chinese investment into Australia, the BRI is regarded as an anomaly. Victoria is the only Australian signatory to the BRI, agreeing to a memorandum of understanding in 2018 and officially signing up to the program on 22 October 2019 during the Premier’s visit to Beijing. The trip was Andrew’s sixth to China in five years as Premier. During the visit, the Premier insisted on “facilitating success” whilst “personally continu[ing] to share the opportunities present” in Victorian infrastructure projects. However, the Victorian Government and the Premier have embarked on a “China Strategy” as early as April 2016. Personally facilitating success to Chinese BRI affiliated companies is not new to the Andrew’s Government. Victoria’s close ties to the BRI were evident with the tender for the state’s new train fleet in 2016. This was won by Chinese company CRRC Corporation, which beat local bids for the $2.3 billion contract. The Age later revealed through a freedom of information request to the Department of Premier and Cabinet that a department advisor recommended to Andrews that he at least “offer similar meetings” as had been given to CRRC to other bidders as a matter of formality. Yet, the same opportunities were not given to other bidders, meaning CRRC’s success was a foregone conclusion at the expense of local jobs.
What is more alarming from a national security perspective is that the Australian Strategic Policy Institute has reported CRRC has been a beneficiary of Uighur labour. In the US, the company has also been blacklisted by the US Government as a potential cyber-security threat. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (Democrat – New York) has demanded an investigation into the national security risks with CRRC’s involvement in New York’s subway system. This was due to concerns malware could divert data collected from on-board security cameras to be used for facial recognition. The security concerns raised suggest that it is integral that state leaders work together with national government agencies and consider the consequences when dealing with BRI associated corporations.
The Federal Government’s proposed Foreign Relations (State and Territory) Arrangements Bill 2020 (Foreign Relations Bill) has been heavily referred to as the antidote to this fragmented foreign policy due in part to the disunity within the federation. As seen in the case with Victoria, China is seeking to implement its BRI within a federation by securing deals directly with states when national governments decline to cooperate. Whilst Premier Daniel Andrews has referred to Victoria as “China’s gateway to Australia”, foreign policy is not the domain of state governments. Specifically, through the external affairs power, the drafters of the Australian Constitution sought that only the Federal Government should control foreign affairs, not individual states. As such, the proposed laws will allow the Australian Foreign Minister to cancel agreements that states, as well as public and private institutions, enter into with foreign governments should they contradict Australia’s national interest.
Currently, it is Australia’s policy to not enter into agreements that would result in BRI projects being commissioned within Australia. The Federal Labor Opposition also rejects the idea of Australia signing up to the BRI and endorses the Coalition’s Foreign Relations Bill and approach to take Chinese investment decisions on a project-by-project basis. Both the Federal Government and Opposition understand that this Bill could terminate the Victorian BRI agreement, including memorandums of understanding. Thus, in a year when ‘collective isolation’ can be undermined by the actions of a few individuals, the actions of one Premier with regards to foreign government dealings has subsequently diminished the strength of our collective foreign policy agenda, placing our national security at risk.
The proposed Foreign Relations Bill will rightly curtail any personal advancements of state governments that prioritise relationships contrary to our national interests. The Bill will centralise foreign policy and promote cooperative federalism to bring Australians together, in a vital assertion of national sovereignty.
This article was edited on 13/01/2021
