For those who remember the excesses of Cold War rhetoric and the spurious fears used to justify our ill-fated interventions in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, the current China bashing is déjà vu. It is also deeply troubling.
Judging from comments made a few days ago by Kurt Campbell, Biden’s senior adviser on Indo-Pacific affairs, there is more of this to come. Describing China’s approach as ‘unyielding’, he saw little prospect of the Australia–China diplomatic freeze easing any time soon. The only consolation he could offer was the vague promise of continuing US support.
The souring of relations with Beijing dates back to the 2016 Defence White Paper and the 2017 Foreign Policy White Paper. In a major speech in March 2017, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop declared that China could not be trusted to resolve its disagreements in accordance with international law and rules because it was not a democracy. A few months later, Turnbull spoke of the dangers of ‘a coercive China’.
Since then Chinese actions in the South China Sea have been used to justify greater Australian participation in bilateral and multilateral military exercises, port visits, maritime surveillance operations and ship transits in the region.
In April of this year, Prime Minister Morrison stated that Australia’s objective was to build ‘a strategic balance that favours freedom’, leaving his audience in little doubt that freedom was codeword for the West generally and the United States in particular. Soon after came the intervention by Home Affairs Secretary Mike Pezzullo. Reminding his audience that this was the 70th year of Australia’s principal military alliance, he offered this chilling scenario:
‘In a world of perpetual tension and dread, the drums of war beat — sometimes faintly and distantly, and at other times more loudly and ever closer. . . We must search always for the chance for peace until we are faced with the only prudent, if sorrowful, course — to send off, yet again, our warriors to fight the nation’s wars.’
Two days later Scott Morrison unveiled the $747 million spending package on four key training bases in the Northern Territory. Adding grist to the mill Peter Dutton declared Australia to be ‘already at war’ in the cyber world. For dramatic effect, he told the ADF that Australia was prepared for action.
'Achieving a workable, culturally sensitive partnership with China is no easy task.'
In all of this, there is more than meets the naked eye. The souring of relations with China is driven not just by prime ministers, foreign and defence ministers, or even by Cabinet. It is the product of converging interests with immense reach and influence.
The net result is a vastly expanded security establishment. It includes some of the more powerful government departments, the armed forces and an array of security and intelligence agencies, all in close contact with their American counterparts. It is actively supported by a range of conservative think tanks that see themselves as guardians of US military orthodoxy, the most influential media chains in Australia, and the growing defence industry.
The anti-China hysteria that now grips Australia has been carefully orchestrated. Investigations have been launched into alleged foreign interference. Classified reports have been leaked suggesting that the Chinese Communist Party is seeking to influence Australian politics at all levels. Rumours have spread that Chinese students in Australia are promoting the policies of the Chinese government, while Australian universities are accused of entering into compromising contracts with their Chinese partners.
In June 2018, sweeping national security legislation stiffened penalties for leaking classified information, broadened the definitions of existing crimes like espionage, and added 38 new crimes to the record. China, though not named, is the intended target.
In August 2018, it was announced that the Chinese telecom giant, Huawei, would be blocked from bidding to build Australia’s 5G network. In line with Washington’s wishes, national security concerns were used to justify the ban, as well as the blocking of takeovers by Chinese companies and the refusal to participate in China’s signature Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).
Remarkably, little concrete evidence has been offered to support claims of rampant Chinese political interference. China, it is safe to assume, is trying to cultivate friendships and connections in Australia as elsewhere. But these efforts are but a pale imitation of what the United States has been doing for decades. The reach of its defence establishment, security agencies and other institutions within Australia is hardly denied and seldom questioned.
In retaliation, China has frozen diplomatic contact with Australian ministers, suspended the China–Australia Strategic Economic Dialogue, and imposed a series of trade restrictions targeting primarily Australian shipments of beef, barley, coal, cotton and wine worth billions of dollars.
It is time to think anew. Australia must pursue a more prudent and ethically based set of options. Critically important is the need to arrest the present military build-up in the Indo-Pacific region and propose concrete tension reduction measures in the region.
To this end Australia has to act in concert with interested Asian and South Pacific neighbours and other like-minded governments. Collectively, such a grouping can impress on China the need and opportunities for collaborative action on several fronts.
Jointly with others, Australia can actively promote regional consultation and collaboration with China on climate change, the COVID pandemic, cyber security, organised crime, human trafficking and other transnational challenges to security. Over time, these efforts could pave the way for concrete steps towards the creation of a more effective regional security architecture.
'We need to engage in an ongoing conversation with China about fundamentals, about the key principles that should govern an effective international human rights regime.'
Achieving a workable, culturally sensitive partnership with China is no easy task. The human rights issue is especially challenging. Australia will wish to advance human rights throughout the region, but not as a stick to beat China with.
Nor is much to be gained from projecting Australia as a great human rights champion. Let’s not forget, our own record on First Nations rights, treatment of refugees and asylum seekers, restrictions on civil liberties, and support for the human rights of oppressed minorities in our neighbourhood is far from exemplary.
We need to approach the task with a healthy dose of humility. We need to engage in an ongoing conversation with China about fundamentals, about the key principles that should govern an effective international human rights regime.
We can do this in multiple international forums, in government-to-government dialogues, societal exchanges, and importantly through the educational and cultural institutions of the two countries.
While doing so, the Australian interlocutors need not be shy of acknowledging that political stability is a worthy objective for any society. But we can legitimately pose the question: is recourse to the iron fist, whether in the securitisation of life in Hong Kong, the re-education camps in Xinjiang or use of the death penalty, conducive to stability?
Rather than appeal to Western liberal values, we may achieve more by invoking the principle of harmony that lies at the heart of Confucian wisdom, which is now a prominent feature of contemporary Chinese discourse. Indeed, ‘harmony but not uniformity’ has become an important element of Xi Jinping thought. The harmony principle requires that we discard practices likely to foment resentment, grievance, hatred and violence. China in line with its own best instincts and Confucian heritage can maintain stability without doing violence to the dignity of the human person.
In short, we need to convey to our Chinese interlocutors, in words and deeds, the simple message that we oppose the trend towards authoritarianism not because it offers us an opportunity to wax lyrical about our superior liberal values, but because we believe that a China that is at peace with itself can more effectively assume a constructive leadership role on the world stage.
Joseph Camilleri is Emeritus Professor at La Trobe University, a Fellow of the Australian Academy of Social Sciences, and Managing Director of Alexandria Agenda, a new venture in ethical consulting offering services in diversity, education and governance. He was founding Director of the Centre for Dialogue 2006-2012, and has authored or edited some thirty major books and written over 120 book chapters and journal articles, covering issues of security, dialogue and conflict resolution, the role of religion and culture in society, multiculturalism in Australia, Australia’s place in the Asia-Pacific region. He is presently associated with a major new initiative Conversation at the Crossroads.
Main image: Prime Minister Scott Morrison delivers a keynote address during a luncheon at the Perth USAsia Centre on June 9, 2021 in Perth, Australia. Morrison gave the keynote address, ahead of the G7 Summit. (Photo by Matt Jelonek/Getty Images)