Defence Minister Peter Dutton used an Anzac Day appearance on ABC’s Insiders yesterday to warn about the prospect of war with China. Conflict over Taiwan “should not be discounted,” Dutton said. Australians needed to be realistic about China militarising bases across the Asia Pacific, he warned.
“China has been very clear about the reunification and that’s been a long-held objective of theirs. They have been very clear about that goal.”
Dutton’s comments came at the end of another rocky week in Sino-Australian relations, just days after the federal government scrapped Victoria’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) agreements with China. His latest warning could be another sign of how the blunt, hawkish Dutton will manage the China relationship in his new portfolio.
Conflict warnings
Dutton isn’t alone in warning about the prospect of a war over Taiwan. Over the last year, Australia’s political and foreign policy establishment have become a lot more comfortable speaking plainly about potential Chinese aggression in the region.
Just weeks ago, former defence minister Christopher Pyne warned the prospects of a “kinetic war” in the Asia Pacific, most likely over Taiwan, were far higher than during his time in office. Tony Abbott also raised his concerns about Chinese aggression at a speech in Auckland last week.
It isn’t just politicians getting anxious. James Laurenceson, director of the Australia-China Relations Institute, said the government was simply stating a reality by sounding the alarm.
“That’s a reasonable thing for them to do. The risks of conflict have risen from what they were five years ago,” he told Crikey.
But Laurenceson worries the messaging from politicians like Dutton has so far failed to capture the reality of just how devastating such a conflict would be.
“We’re talking millions dead, including Australians. A global economic disaster. We’ve got to raise the entire reality of what a war would actually be like.”
Hard heads prevail
Interestingly, Dutton’s latest intervention doesn’t seem to have caused any major rebuke from Beijing, so far. Still, Australia is hardly in China’s good books right now, with the federal government’s scrapping of Victoria’s BRI deal last week causing more threats and bluster.
The government seems to have picked this fight with China because despite picking several others over the last year — most prominently over an inquiry into the origins of COVID-19 — China’s coercion is yet to really hit. But the fate of the BRI, and the increased talk of potential conflict, are a sign of just how much both Australia and China have changed in the last few years.
Here, attitudes are hardening, and the hawkish national security frame dominates a relationship once viewed primarily through trade and economic opportunity. In 2017, then trade minister Steve Ciobo travelled to China for a Belt and Road forum. Two years later, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade secretary Frances Adamson attended a similar forum. By 2021, the BRI is largely considered too toxic to handle. China, for its part, has doubled down on authoritarianism, and militarised nationalism and repression of minority groups.
Comparing Australia’s position to that of New Zealand is also revealing. Last week, New Zealand’s Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta criticised attempts to pressure China using the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing network, indicating New Zealand will pursue “multilateral opportunities” to raise its concerns with Beijing. In January, Kiwi Trade Minister Damien O’Connor took a swipe at Australia for failing to show respect and act diplomatically towards China.
Australia didn’t need O’Connor’s suggestions — we’re pretty comfortable with hawkishness now. With Dutton in defence, that hawkishness isn’t going away any time soon.
Save this EOFY while you make a difference
Australia has spoken. We want more from the people in power and deserve a media that keeps them on their toes. And thank you, because it’s been made abundantly clear that at Crikey we’re on the right track.
We’ve pushed our journalism as far as we could go. And that’s only been possible with reader support. Thank you. And if you haven’t yet subscribed, this is your time to join tens of thousands of Crikey members to take the plunge.
Editor-in-chief
Leave a comment
Pyne was Minister for Defence Industry, not Defence.
Now officially ensconced in the industry. From poodle to pitbull in one move.
Not really – the poodle yapping at the pit bull safely from behind the fence will be shocked when the gate is opened.
The pitbull is the USA. At this rate Morrison will get his rapture, but it wont be from god, it will be from being in the middle of the dogfight between the Pitbull & the Pekinese.
Whatever – he was & is a Court Jester. An idiot.
Along of course with the incumbent idiot – Payne.
I have three comments to make about the rise in Right Wing Hawks, demanding robust action against China, and military liaisons and response. First they may demand all this built up, but you can bet that none of them will be anywhere near the front line, if action is required or occurs..
Secondly I suggest they get out the world map, which is centred on the Pacific Ocean, not the Atlantic ocean. They may then realize the location and physical relationships between Taiwan, China, Australia, Japan, South Korea, India and the USA. As the Allies found in the Second World War you just cannot project Military Force over that distance, without many intervening bases, and the ability to provide support.
Thirdly a look at Google Earth may show them just how ridiculous, such action as they propose, it is in reality.
And fourth, just a little light reading around the history of the island of Taiwan. Maybe start around 1895 when Japan took it over. Quite a story that should inform a lot of nuance now but sadly won’t. The simple narrative now sounds like poor independent Taiwan is about to be brutally crushed by a powerful China and we may need to throw our considerable weight into that fight. This is beyond ridiculous.
A war with China from a geographical point of view would be unwinnable by the allies, but of course, the hawks fail to realize this. Particularly the Australian hawks, they seem to think Geriatric Uncle Sam has their back, but this may NOT be the case.
I, for one, am very uncomfortable with hawkishness grandstanding. I would suggest that we pay attention to the NZ approach. The Chinese regime is repellent, but our military posturing will certainly not help it change direction.
Most Australians think themselves and their country superior to NZ. Their ‘leaders’ constantly validate this attitude with their actions. I expect Australia will never follow NZ in anything. It’s always the ‘big boys’ like the US and UK that Australia looks up to, eager to receive an approving pat on the head, no matter how wrong their behaviour is. It’s embarrassing and mostly not helpful at all. I don’t expect this attitude to change any time soon. Australia and Australians suffer from deep seated insecurities and need to assert themselves in opposition to a chosen entity that is perceived as in some way inferior. In typical bully manner Australia always chooses smaller and poorer countries and nations for this role. NZ will do just fine.
The independence (that is the correct word) that NZ has achieved could be emulated by Australia but NOT on the current foreign affairs course.
The current Minister may not be writing her speeches or announcements but her utterances are a liability and have no long term value to the USA. She is well on the way to obtaining the worst of both worlds for the country.
Further discussion welcomed!
I couldn’t agree more- China is an enormous power in our region, it is beyond naive to do head to head with them, a diplomatic course is our only option which is also in keeping with Cultural Relations 101- don’t make someone lose face etc. We may be bigger than New Zealand, but we are the second youngest sibling in a family of 15!
Further liaison with the ASIAN region would give Morrison and his nongs some pointers as to how the game can be played. Yet these prats reckon they know it all and therefore won’t be told. Ho hum.
Prats and Know-alls. That sums up our leaders.
Leaders?????
This unimaginative posturing government has no idea what they are doing internationally. They have stuffed us up at home and now are endangering our very existence by their ridiculous grandstanding on the world stage. Not only have they set themselves against the world’s biggest and most powerful nation who is still our biggest trading partner but they are also hell-bent on getting our oldest ally, the USA, off-side.
What do they think they are trying to achieve?
There does not seem to be any coherent Australian game plan and the option for independence (not indifference) is disappearing. Sometime later this year Oz is going to be asked some soul-searching questions by uncle Joe.
Agree, and Australians seem happy to lap up media confected Oz agitprop round Anzackery etc., or attack anything non Anglo/Irish e.g. post white Oz ‘immigrants’; media content is local British or American yet more liberal NZ, Canada and Ireland are ignored?
The antipathy encouraged towards non Anglo/Irish is used to create (inverse) respect or support for nebulous Anglosphere or ‘Anglo Saxon’ values (now emerging within the US GOP) maintaining the status quo and greasy pole of social mobility…. meanwhile enlightened policies from the EU and other first world nations are egregiously ignored or attacked.
Frannie Adamson did a Pyne on the w/e, similarly returning home to Snowtown, err, Adelaide, to talk to the next generation of foreign relations rubes at her old school, about all those terrible Chinamen and women threatening our freedumbs and vayues.
I suggest people pop over to Menadue’s P’s & I’s, and find an offering by Prof Louise Edwards, who has studied and taught in China, Honkers and Taiwan.
A finer lacerating of the local political and foreign relations establishment shockers you will not find anywhere.
This joint’s just about ‘cooked’.
The LNP are nervous. A period without an Expeditionary war is coming up. What will they do with all our troops sitting back home. No front to visit for a photo op announcement. Are the bookies taking bets on how long before we send troops overseas again?
I like Adelaide’s new moniker, Snow Town. With Pyne & Downer trawling the streets, it has that vibe again…
Most of the subscribers have little background in the topics presented and they are her for the easy and single dimensional answers. Analysis causes discomfort in many.
The opportunities for additional LBJ-ism will likely increase with the necessity of placing nuclear warheads into Australia if only for proximity if Dutton is correct.
Yet, once again mate, you have missed the core of the entire issue. That core is that the PRC could be entirely dominant (compared with roughly dominant now) in five years; economically and military for those who need it spelt out.
The options for uncle Sam (Australia to unless it renches itself off the tit) are (1) cooperation and engagement (no silly statements or trade wars) or (2) “containment” which is euphemism for WAR.
China is not going to be contained. China is quite ok with a bilateral or multilateral (Russia) relationship. By contrast, the yanks are NOT ok with such a situation. They want CEO status : end of story.
F.. K. We may have to grow up and stand on our own two feet rather than just yabbering about doing so.
The toxic tit of Uncle Sam. Poison milk.