How times change. In the less than three months since Donald Trump returned to the White House, the old economic and strategic order has been upended.
No longer is the United States seen as the foundation of a rules-based international order (RBIO). Rather, it is seen as its principal enemy. While China may be the principal target of Trump’s tariffs, paradoxically enough, it is the People’s Republic that has seized the opportunity to position itself as globalization’s unlikely champion.
For less powerful, trade-dependent states like Australia, these are especially head-spinning times. They cannot be sure what form Trump’s fluctuating tariffs will take next. Not only is Australia’s economic future hanging in the balance, but the entire rationale of its strategic position is being called into question.
A rethink of Australia’s unquestioning deference to the US is long overdue. But the inability of Australia’s strategic elites to contemplate a world in which the US is not a dominant and reliable force in either economic or strategic affairs is likely to induce panic in Canberra as policymakers are reluctantly forced to think the unthinkable.
The idea that the US was the reliable bulwark of stability was always a myth, albeit a comforting one for generations of Australian politicians reluctant to embrace the idea of intellectual independence or genuine national sovereignty.
In reality, the US has had an unfortunate habit of starting unnecessary wars and undermining the RBIO. The US has never been a member of key international institutions like the International Criminal Court, and the Trump administration is rapidly withdrawing from or defunding climate and aid agencies it doesn’t like.
If policymakers outside the US were still in any doubt about Donald Trump’s attitude to other countries, be they supposed allies or notional foes, he helpfully dispelled any lingering illusions with his usual diplomatic sensitivity when he declared that foreign leaders could “kiss his ass.”
It is not simply that Trump is an economic illiterate surrounded by obsequious flunkies and chancers that make his administration so dangerous and disruptive, however.
On the contrary, the sheer weight of the American economy means that the Trump administration’s policies will have profound consequences for the rest of the world, as the gyrations in international stock and – more ominously – bond markets demonstrate.
There is very little chance that Trump will be concerned about the damage he inflicts on the equally trade-exposed economies of Southeast Asia either, unless, of course, it has implications for the US.
In the long run, an increasingly likely recession will have impact everyone, but Trump is clearly not someone who takes a long view – except about his own longevity and the possibility of a third presidential term.
While this remains an unlikely prospect, not least because of Trump’s age, Australian policymakers shouldn’t comfort themselves by expecting things to return to normal. It’s not even clear if there will even be another election at this stage as America flirts with authoritarianism and the celebrated democratic guardrails are steadily dismantled.
If there is one thing that really ought to be clear, it is that the US is no longer a reliable partner and that Australia’s economic and strategic future is going to be determined by its relationship with the region.
Strategic and economic elites have found it difficult enough to develop deep and productive relations with their immediate, fellow middle-power neighbors. It is even more implausible to imagine Australia accepting China’s offer of “joining hands” in the face of a common threat to the established order from which both countries have benefited.
Predictably enough, Defense Minister Richard Marles immediately rejected the idea. Marles is one of the government’s most enthusiastic champions of the alliance generally and the increasingly unpopular and doubtful AUKUS submarine project in particular.
And yet it is the US that is overturning the old economic order and China that is trying to preserve it. In such unprecedented circumstances, perhaps policy thinking should be equally novel.
It’s not necessary to contemplate some sort of strategic partnership with China to send both the PRC and the US useful signals about Australia’s willingness to adopt the sort of ‘transactional’ approach Trump prefers.
This is especially true when many commentators are concerned about the impact Trump’s policies are having on long-standing and long-suffering allies like Australia, and the intelligence sharing that involves. At this stage, they really needn’t worry.
It seems that no matter how much damage the Trump administration inflicts on a country that has fought alongside the US in all its unnecessary wars of choice, Australian policymakers literally can’t imagine anything different.
Unpalatable as it may be to contemplate, though, it is entirely possible the Trump administration will pull out of the Indo-Pacific region altogether if it is judged to be in America’s “national interest.”
Even if the US maintains a strategic foothold, it will likely expect increasingly demanding contributions from the allies who make up America’s evolving tribute system. All of which begs the question whether the Chinese version could be any worse.
Mark Beeson is adjunct professor at the Australia-China Relations Institute, University of Technology Sydney.
China is not offering an alliance to Australia, what China offered to Australia is to work together to preserve world economic system and globalization. You don’t need to share the same value to work with somebody, sometimes you just need to have the same goal.
Oh yeah like slapping tariffs on Aus wine, Crayfish etc for hurty words.
No me old china plate, we do not trust winnie xi pooh
AUKUS to the rescue, delivery date 2075.
By that time there will not be enough tiddly winks of fighting age
White-white 相衛
Squint-squint 相衛?
There is only one country that can guarantee Australia’s security, the United States. It is not an act of altruism, Australia is too important to the Western world order to be abandoned. That said, Aussie needs to be able to stand alone for a year if necessary, should America slip on a banana skin.
Correct, at the end of the day the 5I’s are too important to each other.
The author should learn a thing or two from Michael Pascoe and Professor Hugh White.
Of course the Chinese hegemony would be worse.
I’d be worried about my cat & dog if they took over.