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.
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS