# Path for Australia between the world's two great powers – long-time ally the United States and China



## barryqwalsh (Apr 13, 2016)

*Malcolm Turnbull has little room to move on China*

Share via Email
Share on Google Plus
Post on facebook wall
Share on twitter
Post to Linkedin
Share on Reddit






The trip to China will be a tick-the-box exercise for the Prime Minister. Dominic Lorrimer
by Angus Grigg

Six days after becoming Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull laid out how he planned to handle Australia's often awkward relationship with China.

It would require "careful diplomacy" and "balancing" he told viewers of the ABC's _7:30_ program.

The language chosen by Turnbull was a deliberate departure from Tony's Abbott's perceived clumsiness in dealing with Beijing during his time as leader.

Turnbull was looking to portray himself as a man who could bring nuance and high level understanding of China to the top job.


There would be no more misguided statements about China moving towards "democracy", as Abbott embarrassingly proclaimed during President Xi Jinping's visit to Australia in November 2014.

And there would most certainly be no more declarations about Japan being Australia's "best friend" in Asia, as Abbott said – much to the annoyance of Tokyo's long-time rival, China.

Turnbull showed during that interview in September 2015 that he believed he was capable of navigating a path for Australia between the world's two great powers – long-time ally the United States and China, our largest trading partner.

But seven months into the job, as Turnbull prepares to arrive in China on Thursday for his first visit as Prime Minister, he would be hard pressed to identify the "careful diplomacy" and "balancing" he's brought to the relationship.



*LITTLE TIME FOR FOREIGN POLICY*
In fairness circumstances have conspired against him. The fractious nature of domestic politics in the lead-up to an election has left no space for lofty foreign policy ideals.

At the same time China's own behaviour has given Turnbull little room to move.

What place after all does "careful diplomacy" have in a relationship where the other side builds artificial islands in disputed waters and then goes back on its word not to militarise these outposts.


And so as Turnbull heads for Shanghai and Beijing it is largely with the same playbook as Abbott and governments going back as far as John Howard and Bob Hawke.

Turnbull, like his predecessors, will focus on the economic opportunities presented by rising incomes in China and the government's desire to keep building infrastructure at a pace matched nowhere else in the world.

At the same time Turnbull will run through the usual talking points expressing his displeasure at Beijing's increasingly aggressive actions in the South China Sea, which is partly why Australia is in the process of letting a contract for 12 new submarines.

It's an approach to China characterised by former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd as "engage and hedge". The doctrine goes that Australia should attempt to incorporate Beijing into the world community as much as possible, while at the same time making contingencies for China going rogue.


Abbott had a similar approach and memorably described it as "fear and greed" in a meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, according to a report by Fairfax Media at the time.

Put all this together and it means now is not the time for Turnbull to execute his big vision on China.

The trip is therefore a box to be ticked prior to the election.

Only after this – presuming he is re-elected – can Turnbull countenance finding a new accommodation with Beijing where his business pragmatism and foreign policy smarts can be melded together into a new China policy.



Read more: Turnbull has little room to move on China 
Follow us: @FinancialReview on Twitter | financialreview on Facebook


----------



## xband (Apr 13, 2016)

The US will always come to the defense of Australia and/or New Zealand. I am not so sure that the US will come to the defense of Russia, England or France like we did in the past more than once. Bring back the Monroe Doctrine and stay out of European Wars.


----------



## waltky (Apr 13, 2016)

I feel for ya'll...

... bein' that close to China.


----------



## cnm (Apr 13, 2016)

xband said:


> The US will always come to the defense of Australia and/or New Zealand.


The ANZUS furore showed how much weight could be put on statements like that.


----------



## cnm (Apr 13, 2016)

xband said:


> Bring back the Monroe Doctrine and stay out of European Wars.


Hurrah for banana republics?


----------



## cnm (Apr 13, 2016)

waltky said:


> I feel for ya'll...
> 
> ... bein' that close to China.


Yup, a quarter of the globe away is pretty scary all right.


----------



## barryqwalsh (Apr 14, 2016)

xband said:


> The US will always come to the defense of Australia and/or New Zealand. I am not so sure that the US will come to the defense of Russia, England or France like we did in the past more than once. Bring back the Monroe Doctrine and stay out of European Wars.




When our natural resources and farmland are sold off to foreign dictatorships, what will there be to defend?


----------



## cnm (Apr 14, 2016)

Do I hear a murmur against the free market?


----------



## barryqwalsh (Apr 14, 2016)

"At the same time China's own behaviour has given Turnbull little room to move.

What place after all does "careful diplomacy" have in a relationship where the other side builds artificial islands in disputed waters and then goes back on its word not to militarise these outposts."


If the Australian government was silly enough to believe China, the Australian government is the problem.

China is a rising empire and Australia will become a province.


----------



## cnm (Apr 15, 2016)

barryqwalsh said:


> If the Australian government was silly enough to believe China, the Australian government is the problem.


Tell me, if the Australian government wasn't silly enough to believe China, what was it going to do about it?


----------

