As part of our Foreign Policy Rethink series, Joseph Camilleri sets out the case for breaking with a militarised, US-aligned mindset and building a more independent, cooperative approach to security and global engagement.
Innovation and boldness have featured prominently in Australia’s foreign policy rather infrequently, and then only briefly and in small doses. But seldom has the conduct of Australia’s external relations plumbed such depths of banality and myopia.
And this at a time when a deeply convulsed world calls for a drastic reappraisal of the traditional policy mindset and existing institutional arrangements.
Sadly, neither passionate exhortation nor reasoned argument seems likely to sway those presently holding office in Canberra. As for the Coalition and far-right camps, the less said the better.
For some time now governments of different political complexion have made it their business to act as the mouthpiece of the security policy establishment.
Here we are dealing with a loose but nonetheless effective network comprised of key elements in the armed forces and the various security and intelligence agencies, as well as powerful voices in the civil bureaucracy, influential media players, well-endowed think-tanks and an array of other lobbies, not least the defence industry and the various actors that control pivotal advanced technologies. To all this must be added the decisive pull of US strategic interests and priorities, to which Australia’s political and military elites cling as if joined at the hip.
Any serious attempt to rethink Australia’s place in the world must therefore contend with the immense leverage at the disposal of this multifaceted, transnational military-industrial-political complex.
One other obstacle compounds the task, namely a still influential mindset in the White Australian narrative which goes back to the earliest years of colonial settlement, and which powerful elites have shamelessly exploited for their own purposes.
This colonially inspired racism has been accompanied by a deep-seated sentiment that our friends are necessarily located in the West and our enemies in the East.
Governments have repeatedly justified their policies by proclaiming their commitment to the west’s democratic values, even when that commitment has functioned as a flimsy slogan designed in the main to obscure its racist undertones.
Scratch a little below the surface of foreign, defence and immigration, not to mention refugee and asylum seeker policies, and racial prejudice soon rears its ugly head.
Australia’s political elites remain organically connected to the west, largely ignorant of the cultures and wisdom of the First Nations, or the cultures, faiths and civilisations of the Orient. They feel at home when connected to the anglophone world and at best uneasy when dealing with the East. The AUKUS agreement is perhaps the most vulgar expression of this demeaning reality.
Over time, elite discourse has combined with racist tendencies to cement the widely shared fear of external threats. Fear has in turn entrenched the perception that Australia needs to be protected by an imperial power, and with it the idea that protection requires of us repeated demonstrations of loyalty to the protector.
The excesses of the second Trump administration offer new possibilities. The have made it clear that the United States, far from offering security, risks embroiling Australia and other allies in new military expeditions, Iran today, perhaps China tomorrow.
A clear option now lies before Australians. We can move towards the progressive demilitarisation of security, and pay greater attention to the needs of people at home and abroad. This would entail a new understanding of security that attaches greater weight to economic and social wellbeing, as well as respect for human rights and environmental values.
In an increasingly interdependent and fragile world, we have no option but to strive for the common security of all peoples, and do it as cooperatively and comprehensively as circumstances allow.
But to have any chance of success, the radical rethinking of our place in the world has to confront two key challenges.
First, we can no longer remain fixated on the remote possibility that either a Labor or Coalition government will in the foreseeable future undertake a transparent and thoroughgoing review of our external relations. At this transformative moment in our history it is civil society in all its diversity that must initiate an informed, respectful and sustained conversation about Australia’s future direction.
Secondly, the many groups that have been drawing attention to the folly of current policies must go beyond mere opposition. “No AUKUS”, “No nuclear submarines”, “No war with China”, “No foreign military presence on Australian soil” may be justifiable demands, but alone they will have limited traction.
The national conversation needs to address several key questions: How should Australia respond to the new iron curtain that is descending across Europe, Asia and beyond, and the spiralling military spending and revived nuclear threat that go with it? What does a stable, mutually beneficial relationship with China look like? What constructive role can Australia play in the resolution of regional conflicts, not least the Taiwan and South China Sea disputes?
Other problems abound: proliferating armed conflicts aided and abetted by great powers, war crimes and other gross human rights violations, mass displacement of peoples, growing signs of environmental collapse, technological innovation fast running out of control, the prospect of future pandemics, and the glaring deficit in institutional capacity to address these challenges either regionally or globally.
Addressing these problems calls for a pattern of regular consultation and collaboration with regional neighbours and other like-minded countries.
When it comes to the Pacific Island nations, two aspirations stand out: bolder efforts on climate change and decisive action to eliminate nuclear weapons. Rather than grand posturing on the China threat, a more positive Australian response would be to phase out its fossil fuel industries and sign up to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.
The US alliance has become hugely problematic not so much because it does not offer adequate protection from some distant and ill-defined threat – this was hardly ever a realistic expectation – but because it forecloses here and now the possibility of effective international citizenship.
Out of this conversation a new narrative can emerge in which engagement with Asia is no longer viewed as codeword for expanding trade and countering the ‘China threat’. Rethinking our external relations will in no small measure mean shedding the visceral attachment to notions of western superiority and the psychology of dependence on imperial power.
It will instead be sustained by familiarity with the histories, cultures and languages of our Asian neighbours, and attuned to the new opportunities for cultural, educational, professional and diplomatic partnerships.
At home, the new narrative would be sustained by a deeper appreciation of the colonial violence that established contemporary Australia and renewed efforts to heal the wounds of Indigenous dispossession. It would draw strength from the wisdom of Country and the rich multicultural fabric of Australian society.
Joseph Camilleri is Emeritus Professor at La Trobe University in Melbourne, a Fellow of the Australian Academy of Social Sciences, Convener of Conversation at the Crossroads, and Co-Convener of SHAPE (Saving Humanity and Planet Earth)