Jason Young
Associate Professor Jason Young is director of the New Zealand Contemporary China Research Center at Te Herenga Waka-Victoria University of Wellington.
Foreign Affairs
A recent meeting between the two countries gave both sides the opportunity to present their views on the relationship – but the position China presents shows a disturbing gap in perceptions, writes Jason Young
Remark: Australia’s relations with China have been tense and troubled for some time and have been particularly dysfunctional since 2020 recent meeting between the foreign minister of the new Australian government, Penny Wong, and the long-standing Chinese foreign minister, Wang Yi, was significant.
It showed the commitment of both governments to set aside trade barbs and return to diplomacy and negotiations, and as Wong noted: it was “a first step towards stabilizing the relationship”.
This is important for New Zealand. Australia is our closest diplomatic partner and treaty ally, and China is an important economic partner and a regional superpower. A rift between two New Zealand partners creates many challenges. So it’s a welcome sign to see them talking again.
Other than that it happened, how successful was the meeting and what does it tell us about the challenges of managing relations with China?
China’s read out of the meeting provides some indication and insight into how Beijing sees its bilateral relations with Australia.
Wang Yi stressed the value of getting the relationship back on track for both countries and for regional peace and stability. He reiterated that Australia is a comprehensive strategic partner with close economic ties that benefit people in both countries.
The reading expressed a desire to improve relations, which is a positive sign. But it also showed a gap in perceptions that will be difficult to bridge.
In particular, the reading puts the blame for the breakup especially on the previous Australian government. While this may seem like a nifty way to create a chance to mend the relationship, it completely ignores the concerns that Canberra has expressed in recent years, including those of the new government.
The reading also shows that Australia has gone against the goals of the United Nations, failed to respect international law and standards of international relations, participated in attempts to encircle China and exacerbated the differences between the two sides.
It presents four new statements from Beijing on how it hopes Canberra will seize this opportunity to improve relations that provide useful insight into Beijing’s foreign policy framework.
The first is that Australia should see China as a partner, not an adversary. This seems reasonable, especially considering the aggressive rhetoric of the former Morrison government, but ignores the Chinese aggressive diplomacy and forces a useless dichotomy between friend and foe on countries, while ignoring each country’s legitimate security concerns.
The second is that Australia must “seek common ground while recognizing the existence of differences”. The first part of this oft-used Chinese idiom is true, but the second is problematic. Only acknowledging differences can avoid the harsh and frank exchanges and meaningful negotiations necessary for their resolution. This is dangerously close to expecting Australia not to speak out for its interests publicly.
The third is that Australian policy should not be directed at or controlled by a third party. This is also problematic because Australia has a security alliance with the United States and has security and diplomatic interests in the region, including in the Pacific, as well as a common goal with many countries to work to maintain the rules-based international order. .
The fourth is that Australia must persevere in laying the foundations for positive public sentiment. This ignores the very real problems that have Worried the Australian people and the democratic role of the media reporting freely about China, which seems to suggest that the role of the Australian government is to shape public opinion into a more positive view of China.
These views show Australia’s challenge in managing its relationship with Beijing and unsurprisingly Australia responded cautiously. It also shows a disturbing trend for Beijing to take the initiative to build relationships that Australian . force pronunciations (and media) are reactive.
Viewing the statement in a New Zealand context shows how Australia and New Zealand share the same challenge of bridging an ever-widening gap with Beijing in perceptions of Chinese foreign policy.
Managing relations with what Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern recently described as a country that has “become more assertive and more willing to question international rules and standards” will remain one of the key foreign policy challenges for New Zealand and Australia.
Given all that is at stake, it is challenging to invest in.