Australia recently cancelled its order for eight French built submarines. The cancellation was incredibly badly handled with the French being kept in the dark about the decision until long after it had been taken. The problem was compounded by the Defence and Foreign Ministers being in communication with the French after the cancellation decision had been taken, but failing to mention it to their French counterparts. The decision badly damaged Australia’s relationship with the French and it will take some considerable time to be repaired.
The decision to cancel the French submarine order was taken because Australia had decided to replace those conventional submarines with an American alternative that was nuclear powered. The details of that purchase have not yet been revealed. It has become apparent however, that no decision has yet been made on a number of features of the proposed submarine fleet. The decision is apparently still a year or more away.
Equally unclear is the precise role these new submarines, when they finally come into service at least a decade away, will actually play. The general assumption seems to be that they will supplement United States submarines designed for a hostile role against the Chinese, in waters close to the Chinese mainland.
Australia’s decision to participate in clearly anti-Chinese manoeuvres in waters close to the Chinese mainland has not been well received in Beijing. Political relations between China and Australia are at a very low point, with the Chinese refusing to receive visits from any Australian politicians. This has been the situation for more than two years and the Chinese have given no sign that they want or expect relations to improve.
Part of the Chinese reaction to Australia’s clumsy anti-Chinese attitude can be traced back to the incredibly stupid remarks made by Prime Minister Scott Morrison about the alleged Chinese origins of the Covid virus that is sweeping the world. There is now serious doubt about any alleged Chinese origin of the virus, although these doubts have not been reflected in any official Australian government statement.
As a result of the freeze in relations, there has been a huge reduction in volume and value of Australian exports to China, with a current loss in excess of $20 billion. One of the great ironies is that the loss of trade has been replaced by the United States that has stepped in and replaced Australia as a source of multiple exports. It is one of the consequences of Australia’s subservient relationship to the Americans that there has been little or no protest about American exporters stepping in to replace the Australians in their exports to China.
The proposed purchase of nuclear submarines has also raised a concern among Australia’s neighbours to the north, notably Indonesia and Malaysia, neither of whom have nuclear submarines nor any intention of buying any in the foreseeable future.
They, and other Asian countries, have been strong supporters of a nuclear free Asia-Pacific region, and the Australian decision is seen as a direct challenge to that policy. Several Asian – Pacific political leaders have already made adverse comments about the decision. The participants in this new treaty, the so-called AUKUS pact also sends a particular signal to the region. They are three white powers and none of them have a particularly good reputation in the region.
The United States has fought three wars in the Southeast Asian region since the end of World War II, 75 years ago, fighting in Korea, Vietnam and Afghanistan. None of those wars were won by the Americans, yet they killed millions of people and inflicted huge and lasting damage. The British have no better a record in the region, and only with much reluctance finally leaving Hong Kong that they had occupied for 150 years.
The British have been unable to accept that they are no longer relevant in Hong Kong, and despite the territory being handed back to the rightful Chinese owners, have persisted an anti-China policy despite leaving. They provided support for an anti-China hard core of resistors in the region that are only now being brought under control.
The Americans have also waged a relentless propaganda war over the alleged ill-treatment of China’s Uighur population. Those allegations have been completely rebutted, but the propaganda war rages on. It is absolutely no coincidence that the Uighur region is a vitally important component of China’s Belt and Road Initiative, a system the Americans are bitterly opposed to and are doing everything they can to undermine and discredit.
It is the policy that Australia has bought into with it joining the manifestly anti-China AUKUS agreement. This body of anti-China colleagues seems to have replaced the earlier four nation agreement involving Australia, India, Japan and the United States.
The Indians were always an unlikely member of this grouping, given such factors as their membership of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and there close ties on multiple levels with the Russians. Although India’s relationship with China is not without its difficulties, India joined and remains an active member of the SCO. China has recently made a number of moves to improve its relationship with India, with the Russians acting as a friendly third-party seeking to facilitate the relationship.
India has also recently made significant arms purchases from Russia, much to the consternation and annoyance of the Americans who undoubtedly saw the Quad as a means of drawing India into the anti-China camp. That seems doomed to failure.
That leaves Australia as the ever-willing dupe to United States ambitions in the region. As noted above, Australia seems determined to follow a path that is directly contrary, not only to its geographical position, but also its own economic self-interest.
The next Australian general election is due no later than May of this year and the polls strongly suggest a victory for the opposition Labor Party. Whether they will alter this manifestly self-defeating anti-China policy remains unclear. The United States influence on both major parties is as alarming as it is real.
The recent warnings given by former prime minister Paul Keating seem to have fallen on deaf ears. For Australia’s own self-interest one hopes that Keating’s warnings are listened to and effect a substantial and much needed change in Australian foreign policy.
James O’Neill, an Australian-based former Barrister at Law, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
