Daily Times

Beijing is slowly putting the squeeze on Australia for its acts of omission and commission in its relations with China.

Now that China acts as the superpower in the Indo-Pacific region, Australia is finding it very hard to balance, if it were ever possible, its relations between the US, its major security partner, and China (which is now its biggest trading partner).

And it is all the more difficult when the US regards China as its strategic competitor and Australia is on the US’ side; even though Canberra is still trying to figure out where the US is headed with Trump as its President. But that is a different story.

The fact remains that the US is not happy with China’s policy of claiming sovereignty over South China Sea island groups, and by extension, making the waters around them its own lake. China has dredged up sand dunes and turned these and other islets into military facilities, lately stationing anti-ship and anti-air missiles and bombers here. Some of these bombers might bring Australia’s northern region within their range.

It remains to be seen how Australia will deal with its China problem, considering that there is a basic contradiction between its primary economic relationship with China and its strategic alliance with the United States

Therefore, both Australia and the US are unhappy at the militarisation of the South China islands, on top of China overriding competitive sovereignty claims of other regional countries. The US and Australia contend that China is not following international law in these matters, which is leading to tensions in the region.

China lays claim to these and other islands on historical grounds that are difficult to substantiate. In sum, there is enough contested stuff in these waters to make them a flashing point. In addition,although the regional claimants seem to be adjusting, however much unwillingly, to China’s growing economic and military power.

Australia has continued to uphold the primacy of its strategic alliance with the US, despite its increasingly primary economic relationship with China; hoping that it might be able to strike some sort of a balance between the two. Which is proving increasingly difficult to sustain. Moreover, lately, there has been a lot of reporting in the media suggesting that China and/or Chinese Communist Party aligned interests here might be seeking to subvert Australian institutions through political donations, pouring money into Australian universities, buying into strategic infrastructure and the likes.

Recently, a Chinese-Australian billionaire, who has been doling out money to political parties and university centres, was named in the Australian parliament, under parliamentary privilege, as a co-conspirator in a bribery scandal in the United Nations.

There have been reports of some rich Chinese-Australians mobilising people of Chinese heritage in Australia and other sympathetic political and cultural groups. An opposition Labour Party Senator had to resign when it was found that an Australian-Chinese billionaire was funding some of his expenses  and for espousing China’s position on its sovereignty over South China Sea islands, at variance with his party’s and the government’s critical position.

Duncan Lewis, the head of Australia’s intelligence agency, has reportedly said that Australia was facing a greater threat from espionage today (without naming China) than at any time since the Cold War. And to deal with it, the government is considering passing legislation to curb/outlaw such activities that are designed to take advantage of Australia’s free and democratic system.

There has been a lot of reporting in the media suggesting that China and/or Chinese Communist Party aligned interests here might be seeking to subvert Australian institutions through political donations, pouring money into Australian universities, buying into strategic infrastructure and the likes

The foreign interference, largely from Chinese-aligned interests, works broadly like this, as David Crowe, Sydney Morning Herald’s chief political correspondent, explained in his column: “A politician could easily collect donations from a wealthy patron close to a foreign government [mostly China) in exchange for influence over policy. A foreign government could use its muscle with ethnic [Chinese language media read by Chinese-Australians] to wage vendetta against an elected MP. A donor to a political party could shape its policy while hiding his or her link to a foreign agency.”

China is unhappy, indeed angry, at the way Canberra, it believes, is focusing on its role. So much so, that it put a virtual freeze on Australian ministerial visits to China. The one recent trip by an Australian minister was to watch a China-Australia sporting event. Australia’s foreign minister, Julie Bishop, was only able to have a conversation with China’s foreign minister, Wang Yi, on the sidelines of a G-20 meeting in Argentina. Moreover, media coverage of the meeting only seemed to highlight the frayed relationship between the two countries.

At another level, Beijing is putting the squeeze on some of Australia’s exports, like Australian wines. It seems to be sending a warning to Australia that, if it didn’t mend its ways, there might be more of the same to come. A hint of it was reportedly in an editorial in China’s Global Times newspaper, which said that it was “necessary for China to leave Australia hanging for a while”; even suggesting cutting Australian exports of up to $10 billion that would “send cold chills up and down the spine of Australia.”

It remains to be seen how Australia will deal with its China problem, considering that there is a basic contradiction between its primary economic relationship with China and its strategic alliance with the United States.

The writer is a senior journalist and academic based in Sydney, Australia

Published in Daily Times, June 10^th 2018.