Never have ties between Australia and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) been so estranged in the nearly five decades since Canberra and Beijing established diplomatic relations. As Geoff Raby, a former Australian ambassador to the PRC, remarked at the end of last year, the bilateral relationship is at its ‘lowest ebb’.
Beijing and Canberra often tout their ‘comprehensive strategic partnership’ but their political leaders have stopped meeting one another – although, it seems, not for a lack of trying on Australia’s part. Australian politicians have reached out to their PRC counterparts to open dialogue but have thus far received no response. At the same time, the Morrison government continues to publicly express its concerns and criticisms of issues ranging the mistreatment of the PRC’s Turkic Muslim population in Xinjiang and the enactment of the controversial national security legislation in Hong Kong. Last month it stepped up its rhetoric on the South China Sea, declaring as ‘invalid’ PRC claims.
Unsurprisingly, Beijing has lashed out against Australia’s criticisms, accusing Canberra of ‘interfering’ in the PRC’s internal affairs. The PRC government was particularly rankled by the Morrison government’s call for an independent, international inquiry into the origins and spread of Covid-19 earlier this year. The PRC ambassador to Australia warned Australia at the time it could pay a heavy economic price for adopting this position. Beijing has imposed tariffs on Australian barley, suspended imports of Australian beef, and launched an anti-dumping probe into Australian wine.
That Australia continues to walk a fine line in balancing its relationships between the PRC and the US is obvious. And while disputes between Washington and Beijing over trade and who is to blame for the spread of the pandemic have drawn international attention to this intensifying great-power rivalry, an equally and perhaps even more dangerous tussle has been on full display in recent months: increasing US and Chinese naval/maritime rivalry in the South China Sea and near the Taiwan Strait. As a close US ally, there is a real possibility that Australia could become entangled in an US-PRC conflict.
The US has ramped up its military activities in the region in recent months, despite (and perhaps because of) the pandemic, which earlier had paralysed a number of US surface ships, including two aircraft carriers. The Pentagon is sending a clear message to Beijing that the US is determined to maintain a free and open Indo-Pacific and will support its allies and friends, an aim that is clearly spelled out in the 2019 Pentagon Indo-Pacific Strategy Report. The US conducted more freedom of navigation operations (FONOPs) in the South China Sea in 2019 than it has since it started assertively contesting the PRC’s claims in 2015. Beijing has been pushing back, staging multiple military exercises, the frequency and scale of which have been unprecedented in recent years.
The ratcheting up of military activities by the US and the PRC in the South China Sea have serious security implications. One is the risk of inadvertent escalation. In 2001, a US Navy EP-3 reconnaissance plane collided with a People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Air Force fighter aircraft. Since then, several more incidents have occurred over the airspace and at sea in the Western Pacific. These have resulted in serious bilateral military consultations, producing several memoranda of understanding (MoUs) aimed at preventing future similar incidents. Yet despite these MoUs, the US and PRC militaries have continued to engage in close encounters as both step up their activities.
With the Trump administration increasingly showing a willingness to test the PRC’s red line vis-à-vis Taiwan with sales of more advanced weapons systems and cabinet-level official visits, and since the re-election of Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen in January, Beijing has resorted to undertaking more coercive and intimidating measures against the island. The PLA has been conducting military exercises in the vicinity of the Taiwan Strait that include night-time manoeuvres and mock landing drills in a show of force and resolve to deter the island’s independence.
Australia clearly has a significant stake in the outcome of Sino-US relations. In the short to medium-term, any major disputes or disruptions in the South China Sea will likely affect Australia’s economic interests. More serious is the real possibility of Australia being called upon to support its American ally in the event of a military showdown with the PRC, directly or indirectly, especially where the US military plans and actually makes use of its assets in Australia-based depots, joint facilities and bases – including those in the country’s Northern Territory and Western Australia – as these will be seen by the PRC as an essential part of US military operations. At the recent Australia-US Ministerial Consultations (AUSMIN), Canberra and Washington agreed to strengthen defence cooperation, including military exercises and the construction of a US-funded strategic fuel reserve in Darwin. These developments will not be viewed in a favourable light by Beijing, which is quite upset by what it views as Australia’s growing animosity toward the PRC and its closer security cooperation with the US and other regional partners.
With relations between Canberra and Beijing experiencing significant deterioration since 2017, it is imperative that some sort of stability be restored. How might Australia mitigate the risks of being caught in US-PRC crossfire, metaphorical or otherwise?
Canberra should seek, and be seen as seeking, to uphold its independent foreign policy, sometimes against US wishes and pressure. Likewise for Beijing, it is critical that it accepts, and indeed appreciates, that Canberra, despite occasionally carried away by its own rhetoric, has, by and large, sought to maintain its autonomy in formulating and executing its PRC policy. Australian policies do not always follow in lockstep with those the Trump administration wants its ally to adopt. The recent statements by Australian foreign and defence ministers at AUSMIN are clearly reflective of Canberra’s determination to follow its own script, for example on issues such as economic decoupling and FONOPs.
Australia needs to recognise that the regional order has undergone a fundamental change and should be more actively engaged in middle-power diplomacy, promoting an emerging new order based on multilateralism and regional institutions, with binding norms and rules on all players, including both the US and the PRC.
The current deep freeze in bilateral relations should not preclude exchanges at the non-governmental level; far from it, the latter should be introduced, developed and promoted. Unfortunately, non-governmental dialogues between Australia and the PRC are few and far between. The few voices in Australia’s business community calling for the stabilisation of bilateral relations have been criticised as being driven by self-interest; they are advised against stepping into the foreign policy debate. Academic and think tank discussions exploring areas of common interests and cooperation are also liable to criticism that they may be susceptible to PRC political influence. Serious dialogues are therefore rare and inconsequential in their impact on government policies. This is unhelpful and should change.
The current strain in bilateral relations and growing distrust between Beijing and Canberra are deeply worrisome and could negatively affect otherwise healthy and mutually beneficial economic ties. Clear-headed and pragmatic approaches based on national interests, a changing regional order, and non-governmental engagements between the two countries may help pave the way toward restoration of Australia-PRC relations.
This article was first published by the Australia-China Institute.
Jingdong Yuan is Associate Professor at the University of Sydney, where he specialises in Asia-Pacific security, Chinese defence and foreign policy, global and regional arms control and non-proliferation issues.
Jingdong Yuan is also Associate Senior Fellow, Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
Comments
10 responses to “Avoiding military conflict and restoring Australia-PRC relations: a pragmatic way forward (Australia-China Institute Sep 4, 2020)”
At a time when Australia’s economy lies in tatters, is it really wise to keep on offending our major trading partner? I have to wonder why the powers that be in Canberra don’t heed Bill Clinton’s sage observation in the lead-up to the 1992 US election: “It’s the economy, stupid.”
James ONeill writing in New Eastern Outlook (https://journal-neo.org/2020/09/09/australia-confronts-a-changing-economic-world/) makes the interesting point that, “It is not just exports that will be affected by the rapid cooling of China – Australia relations. Chinese students in 2019 comprised by far the biggest number of foreign students in Australian universities. That market has virtually vanished this year. Similarly, with Chinese tourists, again the largest group in 2019. It would be extremely unwise for either the tourist or the University sectors to expect any improvement in the foreseeable future. Both sectors contributed billions of dollars to Australia’s foreign exchange balance and supported tens of thousands of jobs.”
In what sense is it smart to turn our backs on billions of dollars and tens of thousands of jobs?
Instead of willingly going down Route 66, Canberra would be wise to heed the maxim attributed to Lord Palmerston: a country has neither friends nor enemies, only interests.
This is a very thoughtful essay by Dr Yuan. One wonders why our government is so keen to play “hard ball” (one can hear the Chinese giggling) in a situation that is so fraught with danger (economic and militarily). Australians stamping the floor about Chinese human rights abuses, while we are doing exactly the same to our own refugees. Not very convincing on the international market.
I don’t understand our government. It has nothing to gain and only to lose by this.
It is possible that years of politicising the public service has removed the availability of independent and fearless advice as public service heads may well lose heir positions if they present advice the government, or worse, the Americans don’t like. In fact, many have been employed to do exactly that: provide advice that complies with government’s ideology.
In the present climate it is hard to perceive how independent and non-government Contacts could thrive, as it is quite possible that our security services will quickly close down such contacts. Of course, the Chinese may well do the same on their side.
The idea of getting Kevin Rudd involved in reopening contacts with the Chinese sounds like a good idea. He seems to have the standing and expertise to do it.
But does the Morrison government have the intelligence and nous to do this?
Australia’s side = unsubstantiated allegations and a complex maritime dispute China = Manus Island, Nauru, Iraq genocide, PRISM spying etc. I don’t think Beijing will be taking advice from ‘Scummo’
You’re dreamin. The current Australian government is not interested in improving relations with China.
Well, it seems that only one side is trying to contact the other and start making improvements. China is simply pretending it’s not at home. What evidence have you that the current Chinese government is interested in improving relations with Australia?
I did not make any statement about whether or not the current Chinese government is interested in improving relations with Australia. It wouldn’t surprise me if they’re not interested. However, if you are looking for evidence that the Chinese are interested you could look at the speech made by the Chinese minister at the Chinese embassy in Canberra, Wang Xining, which is analysed here https://publish.pearlsandirritations.com/bruce-haigh-china-policy-children-are-in-charge/
You seem to think that the current poor relationship is all China’s fault ‘only one side is trying ….China is …not at home’. I think this is an unbalanced and inaccurate view. Both sides contribute to the relationship and so both are at fault.
However, I don’t think China’s attitude should be used as an excuse by our government. Just because China is difficult to deal with that doesn’t let our government off the hook. It is incumbent on our government to have good working relations with all countries. China may be difficult to deal with but other countries such as Japan, who also have to balance their relationships with the U.S.A. and China, are able to do it so why can’t we? The China – Australia relationship keeps deteriorating. As we are able to successfully manage our international relations with other countries it appears that incompetence by the Department of Foreign Affairs is not the reason for this deterioration. To me the only possibility left is that we are not trying and the current Australian government is not interested in improving relations with China.
In the article I mentioned above the Chinese Minister, Wang Xining, is quoted as saying that as far as he is aware no approach has been made to the Chinese Embassy in Canberra to facilitate Ministerial contact. So, perhaps you’re right, maybe only one side is trying.
Without these well written and unbiased article appearing in the main stream media, there is no way the ordinary Australian is fully informed of the real situation and the geopolitics between US & China. Most news are condensed to Democracy – good and Communism – bad; the ill-informed public suits both Labor and LNP. Previous articles in P&I suggested that we cannot afford to go war anywhere, we cannot afford to risk further economic depress if economic uncoupling sets in bw Australia and China, we cannot afford to rearm to the teeth; and finally, we cannot win any war with China as the Korean war at 38th parallel was a good example. Faced with negative and lose-lose consequences, we should take 2 step backwards and revamp our foreign policy to main a policy of mutual inclusiveness, peace and prosperity; and be a leading middle power nation in the Asia Pacific with friends all round us and no enemies. MAD threathens every nation on earth! Peace brothers and sisters!
Well, yes; business is warned against getting involved. But are these warnings realistic (mixed I would guess); and how to proceed?
Looks like one of those wicked problems and many thanks for laying out very succinctly and with great clarity the pragmatic issues. Not sure where the present government is coming from with its introduction of AUSTRALIA’S FOREIGN RELATIONS (STATE AND TERRITORY ARRANGEMENTS) BILL 2020 and I’m not sure how helpful this will be in maintaining people to people relations such as sister to sister city entities in the PRC and Australia.. .
When I listen to the likes of Kevin Rudd and his obvious breath of knowledge and lived experience in PRC matters and with his ability to speak Mandarin and plus his distinguished diplomatic manner, what better person to try and put relations back on track?
I don’t think the small minded nature of partisan politics in this country would be open to this suggestion.
That’s an intelligent suggestion, just the same. Rudd has been gone long enough to be able to avoid partisan politics if he is careful.
Not everything Australia has done is unwise, though. Is there any sign that Beijing will accept anything other than the sort of abject acquiescence to Beijing’s line that the China lapdogs on this site suggest? America doesn’t like it either, but has accepted that Australia will steer its own course.