China reignites debate over Australian interests
SEOUL, South Korea — Soon after Australian officials called in April for a joint international investigation of the origins of the coronavirus pandemic, the Chinese government ratcheted up pressure on Canberra to drop a proposal that it believed would unfairly target China.
In an interview last weekend, Ambassador Cheng Jingye hinted that Beijing held a powerful card: a boycott. Persist with the inquiry, Cheng said, and “ordinary people might ask: ‘Why should we drink Australian wine? Why eat Australian beef?’”
Cheng hoped to squelch the investigation quickly. Instead, he reignited a yearslong debate in Australia over how a self-described “middle power” in China’s shadow should balance its economic and other national interests.
A similar call by the Trump administration and allies for probes into the pandemic’s beginnings has both sides in attack mode.
Senior U.S. officials are exploring proposals for punishing or demanding financial compensation from China. The ideas include stripping China of its “sovereign immunity” to enable the U.S. government or coronavirus victims to sue China for damages, according to senior administration officials with knowledge of the discussions.
At the same time, however, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence knocked back the theories that the virus came from a lab, saying it was “not manmade or genetically modified.” But the statement Thursday noted that intelligence agencies were still evaluating theories linking the outbreak to the lab.
Australian officials told the Sydney Morning Herald this week that their intelligence contained no evidence linking the virus.
In Australia on Monday, Foreign Minister Marise Payne reiterated her call for a global inquiry and denounced China’s attempt at “economic coercion.” Hours later, Penny
Wong, a top figure from the opposition Labor Party, said she hoped China was not threatening Australia, adding that the inquiry was “the right thing to do” for humanity. On Wednesday, Andrew Forrest, a mining tycoon who is Australia’s most prominent advocate of deeper relations with China, said he, too, believed it was “common sense” to conduct an investigation, although he urged Prime Minister Scott Morrison to wait a few months.
By midweek, bilateral relations had scraped their lowest point in years, as a Chinese consul general appeared unexpectedly at the Australian health minister’s news conference to argue China’s case and Australian officials accused the Chinese Embassy of breaking diplomatic protocol by leaking private conversations to the press.
This week, the shrill Chinese response to a proposal that garnered bipartisan support in Australia forced even the country’s influential business sector, a usually reliable advocate from Beijing’s perspective, to tread lightly.
“This ‘Wolf Warrior’ diplomacy hasn’t made it any easier for those hoping to inject some balance into an increasingly febrile debate,” said Michael Clifton, chief executive of China Matters, an Australian policy institute, and a board member of the Australia China Business Council. “If the ambassador’s remarks were intended to sway sentiment and encourage business to call for a reversal of the government’s position, they were poorly chosen. Indeed, they have achieved precisely the opposite effect.”
Commentary from state media, meanwhile, echoed Cheng’s view that Australia should not antagonize a crucial trade partner. Australia “is a bit like chewing gum stuck on the sole of China’s shoes,” influential Global Times editor Hu Xijin wrote on Weibo. “Sometimes you have to find a stone to rub it off.”
The Chinese warnings reflect an economic reality: China buys $87 billion - or 36% - of Australia’s annual exports, more than Japan, South Korea and the United States combined.