Aug 8, 2013

Carr v Bishop: business or diplomacy the foreign policy choice

Bob Carr debated Julie Bishop in a battle of foreign policy at the Lowy Institute last night. The differentiation came down to motivation: do you engage with the world for trade or diplomacy?

Professor Damien Kingsbury

Crikey international affairs commentator

If Australian foreign policy has generally been marked by bipartisanship and, frankly, an element of disinterest by voters, the Lowy Institute debate between Foreign Minister Bob Carr and opposition foreign affairs spokesperson Julie Bishop last night changed all that. There was a clear divide between the two that could, potentially, resonate with voters on September 7.

Bishop carved out a new Coalition policy position that foreign affairs would henceforth be about trying to secure Australia’s economic interests. All else fell away by comparison. “Foreign policy will be trade policy,” Bishop said, “and trade policy will be foreign policy.”

Free Trial

Proudly annoying those in power since 2000.

Sign up for a FREE 21-day trial to keep reading and get the best of Crikey straight to your inbox

By starting a free trial, you agree to accept Crikey’s terms and conditions


Leave a comment

7 thoughts on “Carr v Bishop: business or diplomacy the foreign policy choice

  1. Gavin Moodie

    Didn’t Australia subordinate foreign affairs (and human rights) to trade several years ago when the departments of foreign affairs and trade merged? How vigorous are Australia’s secret human rights ‘dialogues’ with the Peoples’ Republic of China?

  2. MJPC

    Does the LNP policy mean, if the South China sea tensions develops to a shooting war we will be supplying iron ore for both sides bombs?
    I find J Bishops foresite breathtaking.. China has just purchased an aircraft carrier from Russia, such ships are offensive weapons. They also purchased Backfire bombers from the Russia? The Backfire was developed by the USSR to counter and attack US carrier groups. China might not be interested in a shooting war at present, but they are certainly getting the weapons to be a player in one sometime in the future; re-taking Taiwan perhaps for a start?

  3. klewso

    Bishop’s born for this job – she’d just plagiarise US foreign policy.
    …… so there probably isn’t much between them – except one’s got a “twin sister(?)” – Bronwyn?

  4. Gavin Moodie

    I’d want Australia to keep out of all wars in future, particularly any between China and Taiwan.

  5. Arno

    Securing Australia’s economic interests equates to trade policy? I thought it was a little more nuanced than that….

  6. AR

    The Hegemon’s toady, usedCarr, will do/say wotever is in the interests of his spiritual (sic!)home.
    Not Maroubra.

  7. Hamis Hill

    “Reverse Colombo Plan”, so this involves, in order to be the exact reverse of the original, wealthy Asian nations paying for impoverished Australian students to attend their universities, something which said poverty prevents them from achieving.
    Poor little Australians, look what six years of Labor has done to them, turned them into Lee Kwan Yu’s Poor something Trash!
    Well thought out there, Julie.

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details