An excessively unpredictable and isolationist United States, under the US President Trump, whose transactionalism borders on being simplistic, has caused discomfort globally – even more so in the Asia-Pacific region now referred to as the Indo-Pacific. This discomfort is exacerbated the fact, that the US’ unpredictable approach, has been simultaneously accompanied by an increasingly assertive China.
Along with India, Japan and ASEAN members like Singapore, one of the countries which has taken note of the Trump Administration’s unpredictable approach towards the Indo-Pacific region is Australia.
Australia’s reservations with regard to US isolationism and Chinese expansionism
In a White Paper on Foreign Policy (2017), the Australian government while recognizing the less pro-active approach of the Trump Administration, unequivocally argued in favor of more robust engagement between the US and the Indo-Pacific Region
‘We believe that the United States’ engagement to support a rules-based order is in its own interests and in the interests of wider international stability and prosperity’
The White Paper while drawing attention to the unpredictable approach of the US, also highlights the rise of China. While Australia has robust economic ties with Beijing, with bilateral trade estimated at well over 100 Billion USD in 2016 and Chinese Investments in Australia estimated at over 15 Billion USD for 2016, The White Paper has not refrained from expressing concern over China’s assertive stand on the South China sea issue.
‘Australia is particularly concerned by the unprecedented pace and scale of China’s activities.. Australia opposes the use of disputed features and artificial structures in the South China Sea for military purposes’.
The Chinese media has been unsparing in its criticism of the White Paper. An editorial in Global Times went to the extent of saying that:
‘ …China can move its ties with Australia to a back seat and disregard its sensitivities’.
It is not just the White Paper which has drawn attention to China’s increasing influence. There has been skepticism with regard to the One Belt One Road Project. Commenting on the OBOR, Commenting on the project, Foreign Affairs and Trade Secretary, Frances Adamson stated:
‘We know from our neighbours in the South Pacific in particular that infrastructure projects can come with very heavy price tags and the repayment of those loans often can be absolutely crippling and that’s why you’d expect Australia has an interest in governance arrangements’.
Australia’s Role in the Indo-Pacific and Quad Alliance
Keeping in mind the twin challenges discussed above, Australian policy makers, think-tanks and strategic analysts have been working towards building an alternative narrative in the Asia-Pacific/Indo-Pacific. One of them is nudging India to play a more significant role in the Indo-Pacific.
A 2013 White Paper on Defence released by the Australian government (Department of Defense), referred to what was earlier called the Asia-Pacific as the’ Indo-Pacific’ region. The White Paper also spoke about the importance of the India-Australia relationship:
‘India and Australia have a shared interest in helping to address the strategic changes that are occurring in the region. Australia and India are also important trade partners and share a commitment to democracy, freedom of navigation and a global order governed by international law’
During former PM Julie Gillard’s state visit to India in October 2012, the joint statement between her and Dr. Manmohan Singh:
‘India and Australia share a common interest in the Indian Ocean and in the maintenance of stability and security through the Indian-Pacific region’.
Common Values which bind the Quad
Ironically, while Australia has been worried about US isolationism, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson in his address delivered on the eve of his India visit in October 2017, at CSIS, Washington DC had not referred to not just the close strategic ties, but also to the possibility of Australia ‘anchoring’ the India-Japan-US alliance.
Earlier too in 2007, Australia, Japan, India and the US had established ‘Quad held naval exercises, but due to Chinese pressure, Australia walked out of the alliance. This time, all the four participants in the alliance are much clearer and Australia too is not likely to blindly toe the Chinese line. A meeting of the Quad was held in Manila on the eve of the ASEAN Summit, with representatives from all four countries.
The statement of the Australian Foreign Ministry post the meeting outlined the key factors which bind the Quad Alliance. Said the statement:
“The officials examined ways to achieve common goals and address shared challenges in the region. This includes upholding the rules-based order in the Indo-Pacific and respect for international law, freedom of navigation and overflight, increase connectivity,”
Beyond the strategic dimension
It is important to bear in mind, that the Quad is bound by democratic values, openness and a respect for the rule of Law. Shinzo Abe, who was one of the key architects of the Quad grouping had thought of it as a ‘concert of Asian Democracies’
Australia has strongly stood for some of the ideas and values which are under threat; Democracy, Diversity, Freedom of Speech.
One clear instance of Australia’s reasonable commitment to freedom of speech is it’s nuanced but reasonably firm response to the aggressive behavior of Chinese students on Australian campuses. This in spite of the fact that out of the roughly 5,80,000 overseas students in Australia (taking into account Vocational Training, English Language Training along with higher education) Chinese students (estimated at 170,547) account for roughly 29 percent of the enrollment. A large section of the media, intelligentsia did not shy away from lashing out at the assertive and aggressive behavior of Australian students
While in one instance, students objected to a Professor at the University of Newcastle, mentioning Taiwan as independent. In another, an IT Professor at Sydney University displayed a map showing Arunachal Pradesh, Aksai Chin, and Ladakh as part of India, and had to apologize to Chinese students. While in the second instance, the Professor was forced to apologize to the students, a number of articles in the media have drawn attention to the aggression of the Chinese students and hit out at them. Government officials to have drawn attention to this. While Secretary of the Foreign Affairs Department, Frances Adamson commenting on these incidents stated that international students should engage with ideas they disagree with and not ‘silently withdraw’ or ‘blindly condemn’. The head of Australia’s spy agency had also drawn attention to increased Chinese interference on Australian campuses through organizations like the CCSA (Chinese Students and Scholars Association).
The Australian government decision to announce laws which curbs foreign funding, was also done with an eye on China, which has been seeking to influence the domestic political system. The Chinese have criticized this move, saying that Beijing has not interfered in Australia’s domestic political system and such Australia’s recent move would harm the bilateral relationship.
Conclusion
While Australia can emerge as a key stakeholder in the alternative narrative emerging in the Indo-Pacific, it needs to be consistent in its commitment to open borders, and not put in place tougher anti-immigration laws which are insular and not in consonance with the aspirations of a more open Indo-Pacific. While being vigilant, it needs to be a true beacon of freedom and openness, something which has been emphasized by its Government and something the Quad stands for. While the alternative narrative need not be Anti-China, but it has to have a clear and tough stand on certain values.
