A symbolic, stabilising step is one thing – but do Australia and China have enough shared interests for progress?
Six years of silence is detrimental to any relationship. That silence was broken on Tuesday evening when the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, and China’s president, Xi Jinping, met on the sidelines of the G20 in Bali. The highly anticipated meeting, analysed many times over before it even happened, is just the beginning of what will be a very different relationship.
What can we deduce from the 32minute meeting? For all its brevity, it was a symbolic step towards stabilising the relationship, reopening channels of communication at the highest levels and addressing the multitude of challenges that beset the relationship.
The brief statement issued by the prime minister contained nothing of surprise. The issues discussed were items of high concern to Australia and have been for the last few years: trade, human rights and consular issues.
In his opening remarks Albanese acknowledged the differences that have challenged both sides but also indicated that Australia won’t be abandoning core policies and principles. He said both sides had worked to “stabilise the relationship” ahead of the 50th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Australia and China. Interestingly, Albanese again brought up the anniversary in his press conference after the meeting. Markers such as this are significant for the Chinese Communist party-state and mentioning it again suggests it is just as important a milestone for the Australian Labor party as it is for the Chinese.
Neither the meeting nor the 50th anniversary will reset the relationship
per se. Much has happened in the last six years since the leaders of the two countries last met, and the geopolitical dynamics of the region – and the world – have changed too much for a “reset” to occur. Furthermore, an influential segment of Australia’s foreign policy and national security institutions has fundamentally reshaped how China is seen by the political class and the Australian public. That is, China is viewed through the lens of national security threat, and that perception is difficult to undo. While this isn’t a fait accompli and we would not want it to be so, Australian policymakers and the public ought to think about the relationship and take it as a starting point from which each country can move forward. Essentially, we must all acknowledge that Australia and China have different systems of government which, in many ways, shape how each sees the world.
Having different systems of government does not preclude either side from working together, but it does lead to clear differences in how some matters are perceived and what the resolutions ought to be, as in the case of the Uyghurs and Xinjiang.
For China, the closeness of Australia’s alliance with the US is viewed with suspicion. The Chinese party-state and its related institutions see Australia through the lens of the US. This is a fundamental challenge for Australia.
Australia’s foreign minister, Penny Wong, has tried to emphasise that Australia’s foreign policy is articulated and prosecuted along the lines of shared interests rather than values, distinct and separate from the US, as reflected in its recent national security strategy. If China continues to see Australia as being the same as the US, such a misunderstanding will only hamper any future progress.
Beyond trade blockages, future progress in Australia-China relations will only be made when each side can identify shared interests. The challenge is whether there are enough shared interests that are immediately tangible to push beyond the mantra of “complementary economies”.
Dr. Jennifer Y.J. Hsu is a research fellow and the project director of the multiculturalism, identity and influence project at the Lowy Institute
izen, said while negotiations were at an early stage ahead of a scheduled Friday finish the initial signs were “far from promising”. “When will countries actually take responsibility?” she said.
The fragile state of the talks led Bowen to rewrite Australia’s national statement, delivered on the main conference plenary floor, after an initial version had been released to media Monday night. The statement he delivered called out the World Bank and other multilateral development banks for not doing enough to tackle the climate crisis, as flagged in advance.
But the final version added a new section to say Australia remained committed the world aiming to keep global heating as close as possible to 1.5C of warming above pre-industrial levels, as was agreed in Glasgow. Kerry said late last week that a few countries had resisted mentioning the 1.5C target in the Cop27 text.
It also stressed that it was urgent that global leaders “accelerate the renewables transformation this decade”.
“The costs of letting these priorities fall to the wayside are too great,” he said.
The minister later said the speech was updated “to reflect a strong commitment to what was agreed at Glasgow, because we need to. These are not givens, it is not locked in.”
US praise
Bowen’s invitation to play a leadership role followed Kerry praising his Australian counterpart as he introduced him before a panel discussion in the US pavilion. The US special envoy for climate pointedly contrasted Bowen’s performance with that of the Morrison ex-government.
“He is doing an incredible job of demonstrating the difference an election makes,” Kerry said of Bowen. “The government of Australia has stepped up in remarkable ways and we’re pleased with that.”
But Australia’s national statement was criticised by some climate and environment groups for not including new funding or policy commitments.
Greenpeace Australia Pacific said it was a missed opportunity to back up the government’s stated goal of supporting its Pacific neighbours on “the existential issue of loss and damage”.
Shiva Gounden, a Greenpeace Pacific adviser, said Australia was all talk but had delivered little action.
“The Australian government certainly sounds better than the previous government on climate, but a lack of action means they are failing to meet the promise of their talking points,” he said. “Simply being better than their Scott Morrison-led predecessors is not good enough.”
Nicki Hutley, an economist with the Climate Council, said Bowen had side-stepped the need to phase out Australia’s fossil fuels and increase its commitment to global climate finance.
Bowen’s main announcement on Tuesday was that Australia would join a global offshore wind alliance that has a goal of building at least 380 gigawatts of offshore wind capacity being installed by 2030.
The alliance aims to help drive the expansion of the industry by sharing information and plans to cut costs and accelerate construction of giant offshore turbines. Bowen said Australia had 60,000km of coast, but until recently offshore wind energy developments were illegal. “We see this as being a very, very important part of our energy mix” he said.
Australia faces challenger for Cop31
Also on Tuesday, Turkey announced it would challenge Australia and the Pacific for the rights to host the 2026 climate summit.
Australia and the Pacific are the frontrunners to host what will be known as Cop31 after possible contenders Germany and Switzerland opted not to bid.
Responding to Turkey’s announcement, Bowen said Australia was “very encouraged by the strong indications of support” it had received to co-host Cop31. He said the bid “would rightly focus the world’s attention on climate impacts in the Pacific and showcase Australia’s credibility as a future renewable energy superpower”.