The US’ long-term allies are bewildered about the direction and future of their relationship with the world’s — still — most powerful country.
Take Australia, which has loyally stood by the US for a century, forging stronger ties during World War II and subsequently sealing it with the Australia-New Zealand-US (ANZUS) alliance. It fought alongside the US in the Korean and Vietnam wars, and is part of the US-led coalition in wars in the Middle East. You name it, and Australia is there by the US’ side.
It is also the site of some important electronic US intelligence gathering stations, which serve as the eyes and ears of its military machine. It hosts US troops in rotation in its north and there is some talk of permanent US bases.
It is important to point out that Australia’s loyalty has been largely self-serving for reasons of its own perceived insecurity. Having been more-or-less abandoned by Britain during World War II, which was preoccupied with the European theater, it was the US that found in Australia a very useful and important ally in its war with Japan in the Pacific.
However, when the US decided to grant Japan autonomy — essentially under US supervision and control — Australia was not too happy about it against the backdrop of Japan’s war record. To assure both Australia and New Zealand of the US’ protective role, Washington signed the ANZUS treaty. Originally designed against possible Japanese national revival, it subsequently became a larger, all-purpose alliance.
With China now emerging as a security threat with its activities in the South China Sea, Australia’s role as a US ally is even more relevant. The sort of role it will have is a subject of discussion in Australia, especially in this new era under US President Donald Trump.
Australia has a security complex about its Asian neighborhood, being the only predominantly European/white country in the region. The “White Australia” policy was an expression of its fear of being swamped by Asian immigrants, particularly from China.
Now that China is powerful and potentially threatening, Australia’s security alliance with the US is regarded as even more important.
At the same time, China has also emerged as Australia’s biggest trading partner, with Australian commodity exports an important mainstay of its economy. Therefore, Canberra is trying to tread a delicate balance between its security ties with the US and its trade ties with China.
When Trump talks off-script on foreign and security affairs, it creates a bit of a shudder in the Australian political establishment.
A case in point was the way Trump hung up on a telephone conversation with Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, reportedly cutting it to 25 minutes from the scheduled one hour.
It happened because Turnbull urged Trump to honor the agreement, signed with former US president Barack Obama’s administration, requiring the US to take the bulk of boat refugees — so-called because they arrived in leaky boats — that Australia had subcontracted to its small neighbors for detention in camps. They happen to come from some of the Muslim countries banned under Trump’s executive order.
To its disgrace, Australia bribed its tiny neighbors Nauru and Papua New Guinea to put these 2,000-or-so asylum-seekers in some of the most inhumane camps as a deterrence to other boat refugees.
Trump’s snub of Turnbull created quite a stir in the Australian media with a sense of helplessness and foreboding. The US has been Australia’s — and much of the region’s — security shield for a long time, even for those countries that are not formally part of the US alliance system.
Sensing that times are suiting China — especially with Trump’s emphasis on “America first” — Beijing seems to believe that in the medium and long-term, Canberra might not have any option but to develop closer relations with China.
During a recent visit to Australia, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi (王毅) appeared quite relaxed about Australia’s security relations with the US.
He said at a joint news conference with Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs Julie Bishop that Australia “can continue to be an ally of the US and at the same time be a comprehensive strategic partner for China.”
The personal chemistry between the two ministers was quite encouraging with Wang reportedly kissing Bishop on both cheeks after dinner, a gesture regarded as unprecedented.
Sydney Morning Herald international editor Peter Hartcher said that Wang also abandoned his standard lecture critiquing the ANZUS alliance as “a relic of the Cold War.”
With Trump’s rejection of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and his seeking renegotiation of the US’ trade agreements, including that with Australia, China is emerging as the champion of globalization.
Australia, as a trading nation, now finds itself on the Chinese side on this issue.
China is seeking to emerge as the leading proponent of globalization. Chinese President Xi Jingping (習近平) strongly supported globalization at the recent World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
Chinese Premier Li Keqiang (李克強), during a recent call with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, said: “China and Germany should send stable signals to the global markets, and jointly safeguard the existing international system through trade and investment liberalization.”
This is against the backdrop of Trump’s threat to Germany that the US might impose a border tax on BMW cars assembled in Mexico. He wants Germany to buy US cars.
Germany is also a NATO ally. Trump has said that NATO is now obsolete, though his message is moderated by increased defense spending by other NATO countries. He is also not fond of the EU, having said that Brexit could be a “great thing.”
In the Asia-Pacific region, Trump’s withdrawal from the TPP has created a sense of exasperation among the US’ friends and allies.
If he continues his Twitter diplomacy of random policy pronouncements, China might emerge as the standard bearer of global stability amid the international polity’s lowered standards.
Sushil Seth is a commentator in Australia.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry