Prime Minister Gough Whitlam visited the People’s Republic of China fifty years ago this month, forging a bond that has benefited both China and Australia in terms of economic growth and development.
It was a brave move into the unknown in many ways. Although the two markets are unmistakably complement, Anthony Albanese, the prime minister of today, frequently points out that their political systems are very dissimilar.
Due to Labor’s vote victory in 2022, the Coalition government struggled to address the necessary confusion in Australia-China relationships, deciding that elections( and, in some cases, ideology ) had to take precedence over economy.
Starting this weekend, Albanese will travel to Beijing, which is encouraging because it represents a change from the blatant hostility that pervaded little of Australia-China relations after 2017.
From” firm ties” to” drums of war”
The then-Home Affairs director, Mike Pezzullo, forewarned his team that the” drums of battle” were beating in an Anzac Day 2021 message that was eventually published to some flourish in The Australian. The conflicts between Australia and China were explicitly mentioned.
The defence minister, Peter Dutton, concurred that a war with China over Taiwan” should not be discounted.” Weeks later, he claimed in an interview that the Australian Defense Force was” ready for action”:
[…] It is still a distinct priority to protect our territories and our waters to the north and west.
The Albanese state has rejected this viewpoint of the Morrison state, echoing Winston Churchill’s 1954 remarks at the White House that” teeth – jaw is often better than war-war.”
” Job towards fruitful and stable relations with China based on mutual advantage and value” is the new government’s guiding principle. Penny Wong, the foreign minister, and Albanese have both emphasized that Australia will engage where it can and disagree when it has.
This distinction with its father may seem little more than facetious given the government’s dedication to the US alliance. However, speech has a lot of weight when it comes to international politics. This is particularly real during times of political unrest, like the one we’re currently in.
There is room for assistance
What the authorities may hope to accomplish and what Australia should anticipate from Albanese’s journey to Beijing are constrained by this broader perspective.
The days of a more receptive and amicable relationship are unlikely to return anytime soon due to the emergence of an obvious” proper competitors” between the US and China and Australia’s participation in that contest through AUKUS.
Even though it has recently taken center stage, the Australia-US empire is only one aspect of the connection between Australia and China.
In the Pacific, Australia and China even have different interests and goals. Additionally, both nations continue to own markets that are very complementary. These connections call for a more complex control of the relationship, and Albanese’s visit may bring up these issues.
The Pacific territories have long been seen by Asian governments as having significant geopolitical and economic significance. However, up until recently, these countries’ concerns and development priorities — namely, the effects of climate change and the requirement for basic infrastructure— had not received the same level of attention.
Through its Belt and Road Initiative, China has filled this space. The American authorities responded to the Chinese government’s attempts to reach security agreements with some of the Pacific islands with a number of standard visits, additional financial support, and the guarantee of programs to foster economic and cultural ties.
China and Australia can work together in this place without a doubt. Despite continuing to use fossil fuels, China has grown a sizable renewable energy sector that is significantly larger than Australia’s in terms of energy output.
Additionally, the two nations may work together to provide the Pacific with growth aid.
Both parties care about the business relationship.
The diplomatic business relationship will undoubtedly be discussed in Beijing. With 34 % of all exports and 28 % of imports, China is Australia’s biggest trading partner.
More significantly, Australia is one of the few nations with a sizable business deficit with China. Australia’s surplus on the trade of goods with China in 2022 – 2023 was approximately A$ 87 billion.
The removal of this economic partnership may present an equally important issue despite the language of the Morrison government portraying China as a threat to Australia. This has only been made worse by the subsequent failure of deals to create a free trade agreement between Australia and the European Union.
Despite the disparity in the size of the two economies, industry is currently one aspect of a relationship that is extremely important for the Foreign leadership.
While the transfer of American resources is undeniably substantial and there is some evidence that the tariffs China imposed hurt its own economy, China’s focus on trade is abroad.
The Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement is now being sought by the Chinese state. This is the Trans-Pacific Partnership’s replacement free trade association, from which then-US president Donald Trump withdrew in 2017. China needs the backing of its members, including Australia, to achieve this.
There has been trust that a diplomatic basis for renewed balance is now emerging during the series of meetings between American and Taiwanese officials this year, which resulted in the first high-level dialogue between the nations since 2020.
Without these cues, Albanese probably wouldn’t be in Beijing right then. It might not be as serious a shift as Whitlam’s 1973 visit, but there is always some element of stepping into the unknown.
David S. G. Goodman is the chairman of the China Studies Center and a teacher of Chinese government at the University of Sydney.
Under a Creative Commons license, this post has been republished from The Conversation. Read the article in its entirety.