When Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison defended the Australian credentials of the first ethnic Chinese person elected to Australia’s parliament as a ruling party member, he apparently won appreciation in some quarters in China.
The member of parliament (MP) in question had come under question in the parliament, largely from the opposition Labor Party, which wanted her to explain why she had not declared, as required, her membership in some of the front organizations of the Chinese Communist Party.
In defense of his party’s MP, Morrison attacked the implied racism in this inquiry, which questioned the patriotism of 1.2 million Australians of Chinese descent.
It is easy to see why it would have been well received in the relevant quarters in China, after all the scandals in the media of foreign (mainly Chinese) interference in Australia.
However, any positive impact from this in Australia’s tense relationship with China was negated by Morrison’s statement — made during his US visit — that was supportive of the US position in the ongoing US-China trade dispute.
Morrison reportedly said that China was no longer a developing country and hence not entitled to special treatment, like preferential tariff and related concessions.
He seemingly supported US President Donald Trump’s position that only a “sustainable outcome” was worth signing between the US and China. Morrison said: “It’s got to be a durable outcome; it’s going to deal with the real issues that are there in their relationship [apparently the entire gamut of it].”
He added: “And I’m quite confident that’s what President [Trump] is seeking to achieve.”
He also reportedly said that Australia would push for strict rules to protect intellectual property, technology transfer or how foreign investment operates.
These are precisely the issues that the US is pushing for in a new trade deal with China. As Trump reportedly said, “The second-largest economy in the world should not be permitted to declare itself ‘a developing country’ in order to game the system at others’ expense.”
Not surprisingly, Beijing is not happy, to put it mildly. This sentiment is best captured in East China University Australia Studies Director Chen Hong’s (陳弘) statement that Australia had played a “pioneering role in an anti-China campaign.”
He added that Australia-China relations had entered a freeze “which in Chinese means a very cold period.”
The question is: Who should take the initiative to unfreeze the relationship?
From China’s viewpoint, it is Australia that started it all with media reports over increasing Chinese interference in Australian political affairs and the follow up legislation to deal with it.
With Australia’s ban on Huawei from participating in Australia’s 5G network for reasons of national security, the relationship became even more tense.
Now, with Morrison questioning the ‘developing nation’ characterization of China with preferential treatment in trade terms, Beijing apparently is not taking it kindly.
Against this backdrop, China might think that Australia would need to do some soul-searching and take the initiative to mend the relationship.
As Chen said, “I think the responsibility [to unfreeze] is totally on the Australian side. China always promotes friendship.”
One way, of course, would be to invite Morrison to visit China to discuss the state of relations between the two countries.
However, China is playing hard to get because, in its view, it is Australia that is responsible for the dive in Australia-China relations.
According to Wang Yiwei (王義桅), a professor at Renmin University in Beijing, an invitation for Morrison to visit China remained out of the question without Australia offering to compromise on Huawei and other issues. In his view, “The thing about any political visit is to do something. Solve the problem first and then visit.”
In other words, Australia would need to follow China’s script for relations to improve.
This was the broad message conveyed by China’s foreign minister Wang Yi (王毅) to his Australian counterpart Marise Payne in a meeting at the UN.
Expressing China’s concerns in a formal meeting, he urged Australia for a “constructive” approach in handling sensitive disputes, apparently referring to the entire gamut of issues from the ban on Huawei to Morrison’s remarks on trade issues.
Morrison has sought to fend off criticism on remarks about China. He said: “The United States is our great ally, China is our comprehensive strategic partner.”
He added, “We continue to maintain that this isn’t a matter of choosing, it is a matter of working closely with both nations in the spirit of both of these histories and those relationships … I reject the binary narrative that keeps being thrust towards me on this … I think it is a very narrow-cast analysis.”
Beijing, though, is unlikely to be impressed by this. Hence, the China-Australia relationship is likely to remain troublesome for quite some time.
Sushil Seth is a commentator based in Australia.
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
Whether in terms of market commonality or resource similarity, South Korea’s Samsung Electronics Co is the biggest competitor of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). The two companies have agreed to set up factories in the US and are also recipients of subsidies from the US CHIPS and Science Act, which was signed into law by former US president Joe Biden. However, changes in the market competitiveness of the two companies clearly reveal the context behind TSMC’s investments in the US. As US semiconductor giant Intel Corp has faced continuous delays developing its advanced processes, the world’s two major wafer foundries, TSMC and
Authorities last week revoked the residency permit of a Chinese social media influencer surnamed Liu (劉), better known by her online channel name Yaya in Taiwan (亞亞在台灣), who has more than 440,000 followers online and is living in Taiwan with a marriage-based residency permit, for her “reunification by force” comments. She was asked to leave the country in 10 days. The National Immigration Agency (NIA) on Tuesday last week announced the decision, citing the influencer’s several controversial public comments, including saying that “China does not need any other reason to reunify Taiwan with force” and “why is it [China] hesitant
We are witnessing a sea change in the government’s approach to China, from one of reasonable, low-key reluctance at rocking the boat to a collapse of pretense over and patience in Beijing’s willful intransigence. Finally, we are seeing a more common sense approach in the face of active shows of hostility from a foreign power. According to Article 2 of the 2020 Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法), a “foreign hostile force” is defined as “countries, political entities or groups that are at war with or are engaged in a military standoff with the Republic of China [ROC]. The same stipulation applies to
RSS