[Meanwhile] Gutsy diplomacy of Down Under
KANG HYE-RANThe author is the international news editor of the JoongAng Ilbo.
A Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarine was floating off the coast of California behind the leaders of the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. This is the USS Missouri, a submarine the three-nation security group Aukus will supply to Australia.
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s face was bright in front of the camera, posing with U.S. President Joe Biden and British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak. As a result of the Aukus summit held in San Diego on March 13, the United States will share advanced nuclear technology with Australia for the first time since it did so with the UK in the 1950s.
Needless to say, the bold U.S. decision is to check China’s expansion in the Indo-Pacific region. The Australian prime minister responded that his government was determined to invest in defense.
Australia seems to be determined to engage in a one-off battle with China, but actually, China is its biggest trade partner. Last year, a third of Australia’s trade was with China, even after the two countries had intense discords over Huawei and Covid-19 and after Australia got the “economic retaliation” from China in 2019.
After China banned coal imports from Australia, it suffered from extreme power shortages. As soon as Albanese’s Labor government was established last year, China first sent a gesture of reconciliation. There are signs that the trade frictions would be “dismissed,” allowing imports of coal and cotton from Australia soon.
I wondered, “What nerve did Australia have to confront China?” — a question I most frequently asked when I recently visited Australia to cover the India-Pacific Security Strategy hosted by the Korean Women’s Journalists Association.
In meetings with not only the Australian government officials but also think tank researchers and journalists, the conversation went around and settled down to “China.” It was especially impressive that the Labor Party — which habitually mocked the preceding Scott Morrison administration’s hardline diplomacy for being “megaphone diplomacy” — succeeded the previous administration’s major policy toward China after taking power.
At the time of signing the Aukus agreement, the Labor Party denounced it for procedural issues. But now, it is busy promoting it as the current administration’s accomplishment, advocating that the construction of the submarine strengthens the security alliance and creates tens of thousands of jobs.
Apart from criticism of the former government, Australia’s stance toward China has been consistent in principle, said Deputy Foreign Minister Tim Watts when I met him on March 6. The principle is, in short, “national interests.” He stressed that on matters related to China, past Australian administrations have supported bipartisan policies and said that the country will speak up on issues related to its fundamental interests while cooperating with China on possible areas.
It won’t be an easy stance unless you have a vast territory and abundant natural resources, as well as the “backing” of a close value alliance with America and Britain. But Canberra’s principle of “responding to diplomatic discords at a long-term and national level, not for short-term and political interest,” looked quite refreshing to me.
with the Korea JoongAng Daily
To write comments, please log in to one of the accounts.
Standards Board Policy (0/250자)