Floating the idea of a Foreign Interference Commissioner in the face of a diplomatic storm front is not going to steer us into calmer waters
Last week China Matters researcher Dirk van der Clay published a paper entitled, “What should Australia do about… the influence of United Front work?”
Depending on who you believe the United Front Work Department (UFWD) is either a sinister and shadowy arm of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) hell bent on infiltrating the Chinese global diaspora and democratic foreign governments; or it is a cheerleading squad for the CCP that largely preaches to the converted.
A recommendation of van der Clay is that a commissioner be appointed to monitor interference in the diaspora. This point was leapt upon by mainstream media outlets who enthusiastically trumpeted the call.
In the United States—which remains Australia’s key security policy influencer— the term “The Commission” is associated with the group formed by gangster Charles “Lucky” Luciano in 1931. That Commission was the governing body of the American Mafia.
In our “Yes Minister” system of government even recent arrivals are aware that commissions can be set up to guarantee openness and transparency or become equally effective instruments to shut people up.
Beijing “agents” in from the cold
Typical of mainstream media hypocrisy, a China Matters report on curtailing the influence of the CCP was lauded by the major mastheads, including Rupert Murdoch’s The Australian.
In June, Murdoch journalist Ellen Whinnett ran a smear piece on China Matters, spectacular in its defamatory imputations, without evidence accusing an eminent group of China experts of being under “China’s grip” and actively “lobbying against Australia’s national interests.”
Whinnett’s piece was so lacking in research that an accompanying image—hit piece mugshots of China Matters associates—included Liberal senator Concetta Fierravanti-Wells. She is one of the leading cheerleaders in the LNP’s right wing anti-China faction.
What a difference a critical report makes. It seems the way to get any oxygen with mainstream media is to spout views that fuel the anti-China narrative.
In the SMH and The Age, Eryk Bagshaw upgraded van der Clay’s Foreign Influence Commissioner idea from a recommendation to expert “urges” the government acts. Canberra-based Bagshaw, who is Nine Newspapers’ China correspondent, has never been posted to China and appears to lack even a rudimentary understanding of China and its people.
His piece was co-authored by, equally China-ignorant reporter, Anthony Galloway, the mastheads’ Foreign Affairs and National Security Correspondent. Geographically his closest post to Asia, outside of Canberra, was as a junior reporter with the Townsville Bulletin, just six short years ago.
To advance the story, Baghshaw and Galloway warmed up the old Sinophobe chestnut of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) whose Alex Joske faithfully ramped up the heat of “CCP influence” in Australian politics.
These three “leading voices” on China-Australia relations were two decades away from being born when Gough Whitlam established diplomatic relations with the PRC. Experience counts for little in their narrative.
Joske, whose research position is principally funded by the Defence Department, foreign governments and foreign weapons manufacturers, thought a Foreign Influence Commissioner was a workable idea. His caveat, however, was that an organisation like the Human Rights Commission could not oversee the role.
His tone suggested ASPI’s benefactors in the security establishment are far better placed to engage constructively with Chinese-Australians.
How much Chinese political influence is there?
Van der Clay answers the question on Chinese political influence quite simply by asking how much influence does China really have over the Australian government?
He quite rightly points out that numerous government decisions, particularly since COVID-19, have been punitive measures against China and anybody seen to be influenced by Chinese interests.
When ASIO and AFP leak to the media that a legitimate pretext for raids on the homes of Chinese people is belonging to a group on Chinese social media app WeChat, it seems there is little influence over Australian government policy.
Van der Clay writes, “Australia need not substantially alter its approach towards political influence. In terms of Australia’s federal policy decisions, United Front work has been a dismal failure in the past few years.”
Is there a Chinese front against Australia?
As an independent journalist in the China space, sometimes even I find it hard to gauge the narrative across Chinese groups in Australia. Whilst they are not friends or close contacts, I know all four Chinese journalists whose Sydney homes were raided by ASIO in June.
I did not learn of the raids until their names were published in The Australian and they’d long since returned to China.
It didn’t take long before journalists from Nine Newspapers, Murdoch and the ABC worked out I had connections to the four. I fielded several calls and, after having to explain myself, they accepted that just because I know someone does not mean I agree with them, let alone actively promote their views.
Quite possibly because I have always made it clear that I do not support the policies of the Chinese government, local Chinese community members have never tried to influence my political views.
Since establishing China-focused business news website APAC News in 2019, I’ve had one conversation with a Chinese community leader who has been identified as a United Front “operative”.
His (unsolicited) advice to me was, “Don’t become a mouthpiece for the Chinese Communist Party and don’t let anybody in the Chinese community tell you what to write.”
A personal view on Chinese influence
Assessments on the influence of local Chinese groups are inherently subjective. From my reading they operate in small groups which, much like radio shock-jocks and News Corp columnists, largely preach to the converted.
Media reports on the China Matters research pointed to the finding that thirty Chinese-Australians were identified as having been intimidated by the Chinese Communist Party—a small number in a community of more than 1.2 million.
This is not to say that small groups within Australia are not seeking to steer a China narrative which is in line with Beijing’s thinking. China Matters has for some time identified this as a key issue and stated clear opposition to Chinese meddling in Australian affairs.
The problem is the loudest voices in this space are not Chinese, they belong to the anti-China academics, think tanks and the national security community. With the support of their agents in the mainstream media they have polarized debate to the point where you are either with them in howling down China or against Australia—there is no middle ground.
A concerning issue that van der Clay highlighted is Chinese government intimidation of its citizens living in Australia. A number of Chinese-Australians may have good reason not to trust Beijing, however, Chinese community members are abundantly aware that ministerial offices, ASIO and the AFP are continually leaking China-related reports to their media lackeys.
Some Chinese-Australians may have sufficient concerns to consider reporting intimidation to Australian authorities. However, in the current environment, they would surely pause to consider whether such a report would make them the personal target of surveillance by Australian security forces deeply suspicious of the Chinese.
Worse still, after trusting Australian officials with their confidential information, could they wake up one morning to find their story splashed across the front page of a major newspaper?
Marcus Reubenstein is an independent journalist with more than twenty-five years of media experience, having previously been a staffer with a federal Liberal Party senator from 1992 to 1994. He spent five years at Seven News in Sydney and seven years at SBS World News where he was a senior correspondent. As a print journalist he has contributed to most of Australia’s major news outlets. Internationally he has worked on assignments for CNN, Eurosport and the Olympic Games Broadcasting Service. He is the founder and editor of Asian business new website, APAC Business Review.
Comments
9 responses to “Chinese interference overblown”
Sir,
I think this is a timely article that expresses concern for, and of the Australians of Chinese heritage. Thank you. I write as a genetically Chinese person. I have to say genetically just to make it clear that I am not part of the Chinese diaspora (I dislike this word) or have any connection with China. What I have said in the pages of this journal is my own thoughts, unencumbered by partisan politics or racial instincts (mixed marriages have been very much part of my family). I write because I feel that I must when a minority group of Australian is misunderstood. As I have written earlier, that if a minority component of a democracy is not allowed to stand up and explain that they have been misunderstood, then that country that I came to 35 years ago to seek a democratic haven has become another dictatorship of the majority.
When Pauline Hanson made us feel unwelcome, adding a political dimension to the on the streetwise racial stereotyping that we had to endure, my friends and relatives in Malaysia said choosing to migrate to Australia was like jumping from the pan into the fire. I had always explained that discrimination in Australia is an individual phenomenon, not enshrined in the constitution as in Article 153 of the Malaysian constitution. Moreover, each time someone from One Nation or any such party abused us, there would be other Australians who would stand up for us. I have always remembered that on a march against racial discrimination, one of my wife’s colleagues brought along her little daughter of about five, saying that she did not want her child to grow up thinking that the colour of skin matters.
Today, we have yet again another phenomenon. The fight against what is called Chinese influence by the government, the media and sectors of the population that have an irrational fear of difference. When the fight is against “Chinese” influence, one is naturally lumped together with others of Chinese appearance and made to suffer under the same cloud of suspicion. I felt obliged as a person who values our democracy to explain the position of the Chinese if I thought that the misunderstanding was a cultural one. Of others that take on a political or economic dimension, I also spoke my mind against arguments that were irrational and based on impulse. Now, I am beginning to experience some concern, not just because people of Chinese appearance are made to suffer stress and often abuse, but because of what Australia is fast becoming – a clone of Trump’s America. We have indeed morphed into a society that says, “You are either with us or against us!” The worse part is that if one if not for the challenger, one is now the enemy without mitigation. Moreover, one can’t even be for the challenger because ones appearance puts one in the category of the enemy.
What I like to tell the people who abuse the power given to them by the people is that constantly attacking others of being bad is a greater reflection of your own shortcomings than the target of your invectives. I thought that I found a safe haven for me and my children. I still think so but with a caveat. That if I do not stand up to preserve that precious democracy that is still ours, we might see the country dropping that “liberal” component of our democracy. I may not have a big voice but I believe that many small voices can add up to a big one.
Sincerely,
Teow loon Ti
Dear Teow loon Ti. Because you always write so circumspectly, I’m afraid I don’t have a clear idea of what it is that is causing you concern.You and I have sometimes disagreed, but I welcome the 1.2 million people of Chinese ethnicity in Australia. I have many Chinese friends, not least because I am addicted to table tennis and there are so many Chinese in the competitions in which I play. I don’t look on a single one with suspicion or anything other than warmth – even when they beat me, which is invariably what happens.
I don’t fear difference with Chinese or other ethnic/cultural groups. I welcome it. What I am concerned about is particular activities of the CCP in Australia, and in China too. I understand that you feel I have no right to criticise what goes on inside China, as I am not part of that culture/community. But we can agree, in theory at least, that I am entitled to be concerned about what happens in Australia. (The usual argument here when I express that concern is that I am misguided, reading too many News Ltd journalists, or indeed any mainstream media as apparently it makes up 99% of its China coverage, or that I am simply stupid.) In your view, am I the problem? If you do think so, I’d be grateful if you describe more clearly why that is so.
Glad you don’t fear other ethnic groups – there is no need to and such fear is corrosive; however others do. Usually it is not those, such as yourself, who have contact with people dissimilar to themselves who are blighted with that conceptual and ethical malignancy – racism, xenophobia – but those who have not. Fear, repulsion, hatred are engendered by purveyors of stereotypes – sometimes out of ignorance, sometimes from baser motives. Both are operating today in Australia. Outside your personal experience I am surprised you have not come across media accounts – print, radio, video – of the most despicable acts, both verbal and physical, to which some of our fellow citizens have been subjected because of their Asian ancestry. I hope, and expect, that you regard this with as much concern as I do. Beyond this personal level, at the community and national scale, I abhor the voices that sow the seeds (and sometimes fertilise the subsequent growth) of racism and xenophobia. In relation to China in particular these include those in politics, academia, ‘think tanks’ and the press who relentlessly portray China in a negative light. It is not a matter of China being exempt from criticism, far from it, but of objecting to the simplistic, jingoistic tunnel vision that portrays all China’s actions as malicious. Not surprisingly some of the fear, and worse, rubs off into the attitudes formed by some Australians who don’t have personal contact with the local Chinese community.
I could not agree more.
Certainly I am shocked at some of the incidents I have seen reported. Until recently it tended to be Muslims who were the subject of such awful racism – especially women, because their hijabs clearly identified them. It is utterly unjustified and quite despicable, whether Muslims, Chinese, Jews or anyone else.
But, Bob, you join the litany of complaints here against the mainstream media as relentlessly portraying China in a negative light. I don’t think even News Ltd are the willing tools of ASPI etc. I counter with the suggestion that there is colossal ignorance about how the media operates, and too much suspicion. The solution, I submit, is to read very widely across the political spectrum.
Though those who post here will resent the suggestion, I think they have supped far too freely at Donald Trump’s dining table of fake news. It is far rarer than they suppose, and I speak as one who has spent 45 years as a journalist. That media organisations have agendas and can be unfairly selective, I acknowledge, but simply making stuff up almost never happens.
Mr Zwartz,
Yes, you do indeed have the right to criticise what goes on inside China. Criticisms if not circumspect as you say cause friction and unnecessary tension. You don’t have to be concerned about what happens in China and the CCP because surveys, of which there were several, indicate that the government of China has very high approval rating among its people. The problem comes for all of us that when geopolitical conflicts arise out of petty attempt to remain the dominant power in the world, we are subject to a huge barrage of propaganda. The difficulty is to distinguish the facts from the fiction. I do not blame you from seeing China through the eyes of the Western media because they understand your cultural lens while the Chinese ones do not. All the time that I speak of unfair criticisms, I do not have any reason other than the fact that apart from a Western lens I also have an Eastern one which allows me to see through the the glitzy covers.
The fact that you are concerned says partly that propaganda both East and West do work, and quite profoundly. They create fear and anxiety which is the best bait for garnering support for the powers that be. There is no necessity to be concerned as long as we are vigilant. We do have the means to defend ourselves. Even if we do feel the need to voice our objections, there are many ways to do it without offending others unnecessarily, not when our futures are so intricately linked, not just in global responsibilities such as the environment but also in trade.
I do have an advantage in seeing through the cattle droppings of the mainstream media in that I am in retirement and make it a point to read the freely available free media e.g. CCN, Al Jazeera, Deutsche News and CGTN amongst others to get all sides of an issue.
May I say in jest that if I have to have an enemy, you would be the ideal one because you say things as you see them. I have had no reason to doubt your sincerity, even though I do not agree with them.
Sincerely,
Teow loon Ti
Thank you for that explanation. I certainly don’t see you as an enemy, but as an interesting interlocutor. I appreciate the chance to see things a little through your eyes.
Immigration Minister Tudge ended this morning webinar conversation with representatives of the 1.2 million Chinese Australians nationally. I must say that he came across very confidently and passionately defending the interests of the Chinese Australians particularly on racism and loyalty to Australia. Listening to his answers to questions, he is frienhdly, polite and showed empathy for Chinese Australians who went thru the stress and trauma of racism and their loyalty questioned.
Despite the Minister good intentions, our real feeling have been weary and frightful about the new foreign relations bill because many important terms like foreign interference/influence and foreign principals are not adequately defined. Our fear is that such draconian legislation appears to target the 1.2 million Chinese Community. How can government allays our fears and most of us escape draconian legislations overseas to settle in Australia as a free and democratic country, as accurately descripted by Teow Loon Ti;s comments.
Hence, we feel that Minister Tudge is alone in the coalition government with most of his colleagues at the other end of the pendulum. Nevetheless, we still thank him for his concerns for us.
Mr Ti’s experience with the 1948 Malayan Emergency Laws are still vivid and they seem similar to national security of many countries topday; curfews, road blocks, arrest and jailed without trial at HM pleasure etc. We came to Australia to seek a new life and wanted to enjoy the fruits of a liberal democracy and if men and women of goodwill don’t speak out aganist “mob rule of the majority” then we would have migrated here in vain.
Lastly, many thanks to Marcus for writing about this sensitive topic and to P&I for providing a platform to hear our voices frequently.
Mr Pun,
I was only 2 years old in 1948. I did not mention emergency laws. Article 153 of the Malaysian constitution is about privileges awarded according to race and religion. It also came to be distorted and misinterpreted. Ill defined laws lend themselves to misinterpretation and distortion just like the ones you mentioned above.
Sincerely,
Teow Loon Ti