July 16, 2025 • 24 mins
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has been in China this week, a picture of warmth as he shook hands with Chinese president Xi Jinping.
But there’s a lot happening behind these carefully stage-managed moments.
As one commentator put it: “The tightrope along which [Australia’s] been walking between the U.S. and China - just got pulled tighter at both ends.”
Today, international and political editor Peter Hartcher, on how Anthony Albanese is balancing his desire to ink more trade deals with Xi Jinping, while facing pressure from the United States, to fight against China.
Subscribe to The Age & SMH: https://subscribe.smh.com.au/
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
S1 (00:02):
From the newsrooms of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.
This is the morning edition. I'm Samantha Selinger Morris. It's Thursday,
July 17th. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has been in
China this week. A picture of warmth as he shook
hands with Chinese President XI Jinping. But there's a lot
(00:24):
happening behind these carefully staged, managed moments, as one commentator
put it. The tightrope along which Australia's been walking between
the United States and China just got pulled tighter at
both ends today. International and political editor Peter Hartcher on
how Anthony Albanese is balancing his desire to ink more
trade deals with XI Jinping while facing pressure from the
(00:47):
United States to fight against China. So, Peter, we keep
being told just what a massive deal this trip to
China is, and in particular, how much of Anthony Albanese's
focus has been on strengthening our trade ties with China.
So how much trade is he talking about? Is it
really that big a deal?
S2 (01:07):
Yes it is. The trade is big. Yes. It's by
far Australia's biggest trading partner. Our biggest export market. And
it's the potential and the future. That's the real excitement
in this trip, although oddly enough, it's been largely overlooked
by the media covering the story, with an honourable exception
(01:28):
of our own correspondent Paul Chuckle. But that's been a
peculiarity of this trip.
S1 (01:34):
As in, it's been overshadowed by defence questions for Albanese.
S2 (01:37):
It's been overshadowed by the pursuit of a non-story and
a non-issue, actually, it's kind of it's it's a it's
a real oddity. The media coverage, the media travelling party
with Albanese, because each major media outlet has a reporter
on the trip travelling with the prime minister, including our
Apple's iCloud has done an outstanding job, but the general
(02:01):
pack has approached it like little kids walking past a
haunted house, waiting to be scared, waiting to get that
shiver of fear and waiting for something to go badly wrong.
Nothing has gone badly wrong. The big picture, as you know, Samantha,
is that we have the rare privilege to see an
(02:23):
empire collapsing day to day in the news and wilfully,
wantonly Donald Trump handing away, giving away the unique sources
of American strength. XI Jinping sees that XI Jinping has
been saying for a few years now. We are seeing
changes unseen in 100 years and Trump is accelerating that.
So what XI Jinping trying to do? He's trying. He's
(02:46):
taking the opportunity as Trump offends all his allies, including Australia.
Tariffs everywhere. Alliance insults everywhere. He's trying to win over
as many countries as he can to his plan for
global dominance. That is the XI Jinping plan. He sees
Australia as a ripe fruit that's ready to fall, and
(03:07):
he wants to pluck the fruit. And that's what this
trip was about, this trip. I mean, Albanese got double banquets.
S1 (03:14):
Um, yes.
S2 (03:15):
On the same day in Beijing. Yeah. He had the
president give him a lunch banquet, and then he had
the premier give him a dinner banquet. I hope, I
hope Albanese's, um, you know, belt is holding up under
the strain. Yes, that's what this is about. And yet,
the Australian media got itself mightily distracted by a non-issue
that wasn't even mentioned by XI Jinping. And that's the
(03:35):
contention over the port of Darwin. Right. Which is a
detail of a detail of a problem at a moment
when the big picture is the reordering of the entire planet.
That's why I say it's a real peculiarity that most
of our media outlets got carried away by what is
really a non-story.
S1 (03:59):
Okay. And just to remind listeners, we're talking about the
the handing over of the 99 year lease of the
Port of Darwin from a Chinese owned company. That was
an election promise that Albanese has made.
S2 (04:08):
That's right. It's bipartisan Australian policy. Both labor and the
coalition have said we will require the Port of Darwin
to be sold to an Australian owner.
S1 (04:17):
Okay. Well, let's talk about the big picture then, because
you just mentioned there that XI Jinping sees Australia as
like a ripe fruit to pick with regards to, I guess,
economic opportunities. So tell us about this, because we know
that Albanese made a big sort of push, I guess,
for collaboration between our two countries in particular on green iron.
So tell us about this. Like how big a push
(04:38):
is this?
S2 (04:39):
It's it's enormous. Ross Garnaut, who apart from being the
author of the Climate Change Review, the Garnaut Review, was
going back a couple of generations. Bob Hawke's economic adviser
who wrote the report, The Garnaut Report on how Australia
should take advantage of the economic rise of China. And
(05:03):
Ross Garnaut said to me that this trip this week
by Albanese and the positioning to sell China rather than
just raw rocks in the form of iron ore, but
a processed, smelted iron in the form of green iron
was the biggest moment since Bob Hawke, who was Garnaut's employer.
(05:25):
Bob Hawke went to China, went to Beijing in 1984
to set up the trade, which has become the iron
ore trade, Australia's dominant export to our biggest export market.
Garnaut says this is the equivalent of that moment. That's
how big it is.
S1 (05:40):
And I mean, he said something to you. He said
it's the future of the Australian economy. I mean, that's
both massive. And isn't that a little bit scary, though,
in terms of our reliance on China?
S2 (05:50):
Yes it is. You said that XI Jinping sees us
as a fruit, ripe fruit to pick. And he does.
And he sees that. Yes. For the business and climate opportunity,
which is a critical part of this. But he also
sees it as a strategic opportunity. Any country that is
a US ally, that can be somehow split off from
the US and neutralised or better yet, come onto the
(06:12):
Chinese side is a critical win for XI Jinping. And
that's all embodied in the trade. The whole Chinese modus
operandi is to capture countries, to compromise them with investment
and trade, and in countries that are open to corruption,
with personal, large personal emoluments into the bank accounts of
(06:36):
leaders and politicians to use money to compromise countries and
get them into the Chinese camp. That's what it's all about.
So it's all of the above. He's out for not
only country capture, he's out for systems capture. He wants
to capture the the US alliance system and the whole planet.
S1 (06:56):
Well, tell us, I guess, about what sort of pressure
Anthony Albanese has been under then during this trip with
regards to. Well, how is he going to walk this tightrope?
It's been called, you know, strengthening ties with China. Well,
at the same time protecting Australia from an increasingly aggressive China.
Like how much pressure is he under?
S2 (07:12):
Nobody in any of the major political parties is criticising
him for going to China. Nobody's criticising him for trying
to promote Australian trade with China. But the opposition is
very excited about his failure to have a face to
face meeting with Donald Trump since Trump's re-election. They're getting
very anxious about it. They're lecturing him all the time,
(07:32):
urging Albanese to to meet, uh, meet Trump. They were
saying a whole raft of liberals and former liberal prime
ministers came out to say that this is terrible to
be to be going to see Beijing before going to Washington, uh,
which is complete nonsense because a, you know, serried ranks
of former liberal prime ministers did the same thing.
S1 (07:53):
Not to mention the fact that other prime ministers of
other countries have successfully met Trump. I'm thinking, I think
it's South Korea or Japan, and now the relationship's even
worse than before. Their leaders had met so.
S2 (08:03):
Well, there's a wisdom in in in Albanese just taking
it very calmly. The whole Trump phenomenon. Yeah. I mean,
one thing is you've got a very high chance that
you're going to get beaten up somehow. If you turn
up in Washington and go in front of the TV
cameras with Donald Trump, that's the first thing. Second thing
is Donald Trump is really unpopular in Australia and in
(08:25):
most countries around the world at the moment. There's no
political mileage, so there's neither alliance mileage nor political mileage
for Albanese to be rushing, begging on his knees to
Donald Trump. But the opposition, which is in the mindset
where Australia is always wrong and Donald Trump is always right,
can't see that and has it backwards. So that's where
(08:46):
the pressure is on. You ask, how much pressure is there? Well,
it's not pressure that troubles Albanese at all. Freshly reelected,
massive margin going to this great reconciliation trip really with, uh,
with XI Jinping. But the opposition is banging on about it.
S3 (09:06):
And our strong alliance with the United States is fundamental
to making sure we have peace through deterrence and strength
in our region.
S2 (09:13):
And, um, and we heard the shadow defence minister, Angus Taylor,
saying that Australia really needs to commit more and more
explicitly to the defence of Taiwan.
S3 (09:26):
What we can do is jointly commit to peace through
strength and deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. In our region
more generally, that's what we all want to see. And
I think is that a joint.
S2 (09:37):
Which is just a strange, unrealistic and unwise thing for
Australia to do to pre-commit to to any, any armed conflict.
That would be nuts. And the US certainly doesn't do
it and neither neither will Anthony Albanese.
S1 (09:54):
No, but I believe you've written that Elbridge Colby, who's
the US undersecretary for defense, he was pushing, I think,
even before Albanese landed in China for some assurance with
regards to how we would behave should China and Taiwan
come into direct conflict. Right.
S2 (10:10):
Yeah. That's right. He's been asking Australia and Japan for
explicit undertakings that we would get involved militarily, fighting against
China and with the US to protect Taiwan, should China
make an armed grab for it. This is unrealistic. Uh,
(10:32):
it's also insulting to countries like, well, specifically Australia. We
are allies. We have a treaty between us Australia, quite
apart from that, is the only US ally that has
fought alongside the US in every war. Even its most
stupid and ill advised wars of the last century. And
(10:55):
Elbridge Colby knows that very well. He made that point
to me over lunch in Washington, DC late last year.
He said, you guys have been with us in all
our wars, even some of the less well advised ones.
Meaning Vietnam, Iraq, which were just strategic disasters. And he
acknowledges that. So he knows that. So why is he
(11:15):
pressing for these assurances now, Samantha?
S1 (11:19):
Well, why is he?
S2 (11:20):
Well, the reason is because if he thinks that Donald
Trump wants him to recommend dumping Aukus and weakening the alliance,
this could be his pretext. So he's asking a question
that he knows cannot be answered. The Japanese have refused
to answer it. The Japanese cancelled a meeting, cancelled a
(11:40):
canceled a trip to Washington because they were under pressure
on this, and Australia will not answer it. No country, US,
ally or not, will commit publicly to a war that
hasn't occurred in circumstances which we don't yet know. And
Elbridge Colby's willful refusal to acknowledge what he's publicly and
(12:01):
in the Alliance talks going on now, what he's said
to me and I've written at the time, it's on
the record that Australia is a uniquely reliable ally. And
yet now to question that in the alliance consultations tells
you that he's setting up a possible pretext if he
thinks Trump wants it to dump Aukus, to dump the agreement,
(12:23):
and perhaps to weaken the alliance.
S1 (12:25):
And so how's Anthony Albanese feeling about this? Because he
was very careful, right, when he was questioned about this
while he's been in China, in terms of what his
responses were.
S2 (12:34):
He is being very careful. He knows the game. He understands, uh,
very well everything we've we've just been talking about.
S4 (12:41):
We have strategic competition in the region, but we continue
to engage in order to support peace and security in
the region and stability in the region.
S2 (12:54):
We can see this clearly. Uh, Samantha, when other countries
do it, we in general, in terms of the media
debate and coverage at the moment, we seem to have
trouble recognizing it in our own case. And what I'm
talking about is this a country that is in a
position to go to swing either Pro-us, pro-China, let's say Vanuatu.
(13:17):
We can see when the Chinese go there, offer them
big investments, trade, security guarantees, whatever. And the US is
anxious and the US thinks, well, you know, what are
we going to we can see that that country, in
this case, a hypothetical Vanuatu, is adeptly playing the two
great powers off against each other for maximum domestic benefit.
(13:40):
When Australia is in that position, Australia is subtly, um,
not not openly admitting it, but subtly playing the same game,
playing the Chinese and the Americans off against each other.
We seem incapable of understanding that that's what we are doing.
Unless the Prime Minister explicitly says it, we can't see it.
But that's exactly what's why do we have that.
S1 (14:00):
Reluctance to understand this or to admit it to ourselves,
do you think?
S2 (14:04):
I think it's we have an unreasoning fearfulness.
S1 (14:06):
Okay.
S2 (14:07):
It's Australia's historic approach to the world being fearful. Fear
of abandonment, uh, was the title of a book by
Allan Gyngell, actually, that described Australia's strategic history. Allan Gyngell,
former diplomat, um, former head of the Lowy Institute. The
late Allan Gyngell, brilliant thinker, uh, he said that Australia
(14:28):
had this unreasoning fearfulness that we would be abandoned and
living in this sort of, uh, Tremulousness permanently. And although Australia,
I would submit, has become a little more assertive and
a little more confident in recent years, that attitude still
permeates and I think it colours the way our media
(14:50):
approaches these issues as well.
S1 (14:55):
We'll be right back. And all of this brings me
to it would seem left of field, but it's an
incredible piece of reporting that you had over the weekend
because you secured. It was incredible. You secured an in-depth
interview with the president of Finland at his castle, no less.
While you were in the country the other week, you
really are our international editor. You get around hartcher and
(15:17):
the president told you that Australia could learn a lot
from his country in terms of how it's bolstered its
protection against Russia, which of course is its own overbearing
neighbor intent on dominance. So what does he think that
we should perhaps take note of? Because I think many listeners,
you know, like myself would think, oh, Go. Wouldn't have
thought that Finland was some sort of mirror for us
in terms of how we might approach defense, but.
S2 (15:38):
Yeah, that's that's right. It's so far away. Uh, but
it's in fashion at the moment because, uh, for this
exact reason that Finland has turned out to be the
model country to show smaller powers, how they can coexist
with an aggressive and very unpleasant great power. They've got
a more than 1000km of border with Russia. How have
(16:01):
they managed to retain their sovereign independence? And and he himself,
Alexander Stubb, the president of Finland, made the point that
while they have Russia, Australia has China. And both of us,
almost everybody is under some sort of economic threat from
Donald Trump at the moment. So there are analogies and
and he drew those out. Um, but it's also understudy
(16:24):
for exactly that reason in Canberra. Um, and the Anu
Rory Medcalf, head of the National security The college at
the Anu's actually published an entire paper on how Australia
should copy Finland's strategic policy in its approach to keeping
our independence. What Stubb told me was that the first
(16:46):
thing Finland had done right was never to relent in
its suspicion of Russia's intentions. When the rest of the
world stood down after the end of the Cold War
and the Americans, everybody else said, oh, the Cold War
is over. We don't have to spend on defense. We
can relax. Finland didn't. Finland retained its conscription and it
retained its comprehensive security policy, which is a whole of
(17:10):
nation policy, which brings in the private sector citizens where
they are constantly, uh, rehearsing and thinking about what to
do in the event of a crisis, how to keep
their supply lines open, how to have stockpiles ready for
all the vital stuff medicines, food, munitions, all the rest
of it, and keeping conscription running non-stop. The only country
(17:32):
that did never eased up. They have a compulsory conscription
system for young men, national service type training and voluntary
for women. So all of those elements are the elements
that the Finns have prosecuted, and that they explain as
the basis for their ability to deter Russian attack. But
(17:56):
that hasn't stopped Vladimir Putin from promising future attack.
S1 (18:00):
No. And in fact, Putin, I believe, has been building
up defenses just on the border with Finland. Right. So
it's quite an acute issue for the country.
S2 (18:08):
Yeah it is. They're under they're under assault from Russia. Effectively,
the war covert and hybrid war is already underway. So
Russia just briefly three things that Russia is doing to Finland.
And I'll mention them, each of them, because they have
analogues in the way China has been treating Australia. To
(18:28):
one is building military infrastructure along the border. We don't
have Chinese infrastructure on our border, but we have Chinese
military patrols in our increasing in intensity in our region
and off our coasts. And that's not they're not massing troops,
but the Russians are building bases and future positioning for
(18:49):
their forces right. On Finland's border, they're also waging hybrid war,
cutting undersea cables in the Baltic Sea that connect Finland
to the world. Internet, telecommunications, phone. Just as China has
been doing in the Taiwan Strait, cutting undersea cables there.
This is a kind of hybrid warfare. It's designed to
unsettle other countries, and it's a precursor for what happens
(19:13):
in a war. All those things happen. Plus you get
the kinetic attack as well.
S1 (19:19):
And one thing I was really interested in is what
he calls public private sector cooperation. So can you sort
of give us some examples about this, because I was
there was one stat in your piece that sort of
made my jaw drop, and it was that Finland has
civilian shelters that can house 4.4 million people out of
the population's 5.6 million people around the country. I mean,
(19:40):
that's just one of the efforts that they've they've undertaken
to sort of shore up their their sovereignty or their protection.
What else was he talking about when he referred to
public private sector cooperation? Because that's quite distinct, right.
S2 (19:53):
Yeah, yeah. Well, this isn't in the law, but this
is just a habit that has emerged, encouraged by the
government for companies to talk to each other. So the
banking sector talk about how do we keep the system
running if there's a, you know, a massive hacking attack
and an attempt to shut down the banking system? Fuel supplies,
(20:17):
companies talk to the government about how to keep supplies
running if there's a crisis and their supplies are cut off.
All of this stuff. They have 18 different sectors. I
think where there are there are plans, contingencies, companies talk
to government about it. It's a mindset really, knowing that
(20:37):
a crisis could be around the corner because it's happened
to them in the past. And notoriously they were attacked
by Russia. Yeah, but they were plucky enough to manage
to to retain their independence.
S1 (20:50):
It's quite interesting. And you mentioned that Rory Medcalf, who's
the head of National Security College at the Anu, that
he's written this paper sort of pointing out, I guess,
what Finland does with regards to its defences. Do you
have any feeling that these are things that we might
actually our government might adopt? Because you make the point
that this concept of whole of nation security, it was
(21:10):
actually recommended by the Albanese government's Defence strategic review. But
that's where it remains on paper only.
S2 (21:17):
Yes, it's in the review only. Yeah. Well, the Defence
Strategic Review did make that recommendation and said that we
need a whole of nation commitment to preparation and building resilience. Resilience,
I suppose, is the key word here. Yeah. And the
government adopted all of the recommendations in that review. But
implementation is another question. And there's not a single visible
(21:40):
step that the government has done anything about that. But
theoretically it remains government policy.
S1 (21:45):
Any chatter in Parliament House or elsewhere that we should
know about that maybe would suggest that this is going
to leave the realms of the paper?
S2 (21:53):
No, not not not a whisper and even really basic, obvious,
necessary stuff. For example, uh, the Defence Strategic Review said
the government should stop using the Defence forces every time
there's a flood or a fire. Yes. And create a
separate civil service civil defence mechanism to take care of
national emergencies. So the military can concentrate on being the
(22:16):
military and not being an emergency relief mechanism. Yep. Progress
on that.
S1 (22:21):
Crickets. Crickets. And what about conscription? And that's obviously, you know,
because we've we've discussed this on previous episodes that it's
becoming more popular in other countries.
S2 (22:30):
Well, the Germans are introducing it. Last week, the Swedes
started conscription of young women. National service, I should call it,
really for.
S1 (22:38):
Any chatter.
S2 (22:38):
For young.
S1 (22:39):
Women in Canberra that this is something that we might
National service might return.
S2 (22:42):
And it will be a brave prime Minister to implement
that short of an absolute crisis or some obvious provocation.
But there are other ways of there's there's national service
that doesn't involve military training. There's a whole range of
ways to approach this. Um, and, you know, emergency responses
is is a soft way into all of that. We
(23:04):
don't even see them approaching that. So the government's a long,
long way away from being able to implement being prepared
to implement its own policy.
S1 (23:13):
Well, we're lucky you're in Canberra just about every other week.
So we know you're going to keep your ear to
the ground on this. Thank you so much for your time.
S2 (23:20):
Always a pleasure.
S1 (23:27):
Today's episode of The Morning Edition was produced by myself
and Kai Wong. Our executive producer is Tammy Mills. Our
head of audio is Tom McKendrick. The Morning Edition is
a production of The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald.
If you enjoy the show and want more of our journalism,
subscribe to our newspapers today. It's the best way to
(23:47):
support what we do. Search The Age or smh.com.au. Subscribe
and sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter to receive
a comprehensive summary of the day's most important news, analysis
and insights in your inbox every day. Links are in
the show. Notes. I'm Samantha Selinger. Morris. This is the
(24:08):
morning edition. Thanks for listening.
From the newsrooms of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.
This is the morning edition. I'm Samantha Selinger Morris. It's Thursday,
July 17th. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has been in
China this week. A picture of warmth as he shook
hands with Chinese President XI Jinping. But there's a lot
(00:24):
happening behind these carefully staged, managed moments, as one commentator
put it. The tightrope along which Australia's been walking between
the United States and China just got pulled tighter at
both ends today. International and political editor Peter Hartcher on
how Anthony Albanese is balancing his desire to ink more
trade deals with XI Jinping while facing pressure from the
(00:47):
United States to fight against China. So, Peter, we keep
being told just what a massive deal this trip to
China is, and in particular, how much of Anthony Albanese's
focus has been on strengthening our trade ties with China.
So how much trade is he talking about? Is it
really that big a deal?
S2 (01:07):
Yes it is. The trade is big. Yes. It's by
far Australia's biggest trading partner. Our biggest export market. And
it's the potential and the future. That's the real excitement
in this trip, although oddly enough, it's been largely overlooked
by the media covering the story, with an honourable exception
(01:28):
of our own correspondent Paul Chuckle. But that's been a
peculiarity of this trip.
S1 (01:34):
As in, it's been overshadowed by defence questions for Albanese.
S2 (01:37):
It's been overshadowed by the pursuit of a non-story and
a non-issue, actually, it's kind of it's it's a it's
a real oddity. The media coverage, the media travelling party
with Albanese, because each major media outlet has a reporter
on the trip travelling with the prime minister, including our
Apple's iCloud has done an outstanding job, but the general
(02:01):
pack has approached it like little kids walking past a
haunted house, waiting to be scared, waiting to get that
shiver of fear and waiting for something to go badly wrong.
Nothing has gone badly wrong. The big picture, as you know, Samantha,
is that we have the rare privilege to see an
(02:23):
empire collapsing day to day in the news and wilfully,
wantonly Donald Trump handing away, giving away the unique sources
of American strength. XI Jinping sees that XI Jinping has
been saying for a few years now. We are seeing
changes unseen in 100 years and Trump is accelerating that.
So what XI Jinping trying to do? He's trying. He's
(02:46):
taking the opportunity as Trump offends all his allies, including Australia.
Tariffs everywhere. Alliance insults everywhere. He's trying to win over
as many countries as he can to his plan for
global dominance. That is the XI Jinping plan. He sees
Australia as a ripe fruit that's ready to fall, and
(03:07):
he wants to pluck the fruit. And that's what this
trip was about, this trip. I mean, Albanese got double banquets.
S1 (03:14):
Um, yes.
S2 (03:15):
On the same day in Beijing. Yeah. He had the
president give him a lunch banquet, and then he had
the premier give him a dinner banquet. I hope, I
hope Albanese's, um, you know, belt is holding up under
the strain. Yes, that's what this is about. And yet,
the Australian media got itself mightily distracted by a non-issue
that wasn't even mentioned by XI Jinping. And that's the
(03:35):
contention over the port of Darwin. Right. Which is a
detail of a detail of a problem at a moment
when the big picture is the reordering of the entire planet.
That's why I say it's a real peculiarity that most
of our media outlets got carried away by what is
really a non-story.
S1 (03:59):
Okay. And just to remind listeners, we're talking about the
the handing over of the 99 year lease of the
Port of Darwin from a Chinese owned company. That was
an election promise that Albanese has made.
S2 (04:08):
That's right. It's bipartisan Australian policy. Both labor and the
coalition have said we will require the Port of Darwin
to be sold to an Australian owner.
S1 (04:17):
Okay. Well, let's talk about the big picture then, because
you just mentioned there that XI Jinping sees Australia as
like a ripe fruit to pick with regards to, I guess,
economic opportunities. So tell us about this, because we know
that Albanese made a big sort of push, I guess,
for collaboration between our two countries in particular on green iron.
So tell us about this. Like how big a push
(04:38):
is this?
S2 (04:39):
It's it's enormous. Ross Garnaut, who apart from being the
author of the Climate Change Review, the Garnaut Review, was
going back a couple of generations. Bob Hawke's economic adviser
who wrote the report, The Garnaut Report on how Australia
should take advantage of the economic rise of China. And
(05:03):
Ross Garnaut said to me that this trip this week
by Albanese and the positioning to sell China rather than
just raw rocks in the form of iron ore, but
a processed, smelted iron in the form of green iron
was the biggest moment since Bob Hawke, who was Garnaut's employer.
(05:25):
Bob Hawke went to China, went to Beijing in 1984
to set up the trade, which has become the iron
ore trade, Australia's dominant export to our biggest export market.
Garnaut says this is the equivalent of that moment. That's
how big it is.
S1 (05:40):
And I mean, he said something to you. He said
it's the future of the Australian economy. I mean, that's
both massive. And isn't that a little bit scary, though,
in terms of our reliance on China?
S2 (05:50):
Yes it is. You said that XI Jinping sees us
as a fruit, ripe fruit to pick. And he does.
And he sees that. Yes. For the business and climate opportunity,
which is a critical part of this. But he also
sees it as a strategic opportunity. Any country that is
a US ally, that can be somehow split off from
the US and neutralised or better yet, come onto the
(06:12):
Chinese side is a critical win for XI Jinping. And
that's all embodied in the trade. The whole Chinese modus
operandi is to capture countries, to compromise them with investment
and trade, and in countries that are open to corruption,
with personal, large personal emoluments into the bank accounts of
(06:36):
leaders and politicians to use money to compromise countries and
get them into the Chinese camp. That's what it's all about.
So it's all of the above. He's out for not
only country capture, he's out for systems capture. He wants
to capture the the US alliance system and the whole planet.
S1 (06:56):
Well, tell us, I guess, about what sort of pressure
Anthony Albanese has been under then during this trip with
regards to. Well, how is he going to walk this tightrope?
It's been called, you know, strengthening ties with China. Well,
at the same time protecting Australia from an increasingly aggressive China.
Like how much pressure is he under?
S2 (07:12):
Nobody in any of the major political parties is criticising
him for going to China. Nobody's criticising him for trying
to promote Australian trade with China. But the opposition is
very excited about his failure to have a face to
face meeting with Donald Trump since Trump's re-election. They're getting
very anxious about it. They're lecturing him all the time,
(07:32):
urging Albanese to to meet, uh, meet Trump. They were
saying a whole raft of liberals and former liberal prime
ministers came out to say that this is terrible to
be to be going to see Beijing before going to Washington, uh,
which is complete nonsense because a, you know, serried ranks
of former liberal prime ministers did the same thing.
S1 (07:53):
Not to mention the fact that other prime ministers of
other countries have successfully met Trump. I'm thinking, I think
it's South Korea or Japan, and now the relationship's even
worse than before. Their leaders had met so.
S2 (08:03):
Well, there's a wisdom in in in Albanese just taking
it very calmly. The whole Trump phenomenon. Yeah. I mean,
one thing is you've got a very high chance that
you're going to get beaten up somehow. If you turn
up in Washington and go in front of the TV
cameras with Donald Trump, that's the first thing. Second thing
is Donald Trump is really unpopular in Australia and in
(08:25):
most countries around the world at the moment. There's no
political mileage, so there's neither alliance mileage nor political mileage
for Albanese to be rushing, begging on his knees to
Donald Trump. But the opposition, which is in the mindset
where Australia is always wrong and Donald Trump is always right,
can't see that and has it backwards. So that's where
(08:46):
the pressure is on. You ask, how much pressure is there? Well,
it's not pressure that troubles Albanese at all. Freshly reelected,
massive margin going to this great reconciliation trip really with, uh,
with XI Jinping. But the opposition is banging on about it.
S3 (09:06):
And our strong alliance with the United States is fundamental
to making sure we have peace through deterrence and strength
in our region.
S2 (09:13):
And, um, and we heard the shadow defence minister, Angus Taylor,
saying that Australia really needs to commit more and more
explicitly to the defence of Taiwan.
S3 (09:26):
What we can do is jointly commit to peace through
strength and deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. In our region
more generally, that's what we all want to see. And
I think is that a joint.
S2 (09:37):
Which is just a strange, unrealistic and unwise thing for
Australia to do to pre-commit to to any, any armed conflict.
That would be nuts. And the US certainly doesn't do
it and neither neither will Anthony Albanese.
S1 (09:54):
No, but I believe you've written that Elbridge Colby, who's
the US undersecretary for defense, he was pushing, I think,
even before Albanese landed in China for some assurance with
regards to how we would behave should China and Taiwan
come into direct conflict. Right.
S2 (10:10):
Yeah. That's right. He's been asking Australia and Japan for
explicit undertakings that we would get involved militarily, fighting against
China and with the US to protect Taiwan, should China
make an armed grab for it. This is unrealistic. Uh,
(10:32):
it's also insulting to countries like, well, specifically Australia. We
are allies. We have a treaty between us Australia, quite
apart from that, is the only US ally that has
fought alongside the US in every war. Even its most
stupid and ill advised wars of the last century. And
(10:55):
Elbridge Colby knows that very well. He made that point
to me over lunch in Washington, DC late last year.
He said, you guys have been with us in all
our wars, even some of the less well advised ones.
Meaning Vietnam, Iraq, which were just strategic disasters. And he
acknowledges that. So he knows that. So why is he
(11:15):
pressing for these assurances now, Samantha?
S1 (11:19):
Well, why is he?
S2 (11:20):
Well, the reason is because if he thinks that Donald
Trump wants him to recommend dumping Aukus and weakening the alliance,
this could be his pretext. So he's asking a question
that he knows cannot be answered. The Japanese have refused
to answer it. The Japanese cancelled a meeting, cancelled a
(11:40):
canceled a trip to Washington because they were under pressure
on this, and Australia will not answer it. No country, US,
ally or not, will commit publicly to a war that
hasn't occurred in circumstances which we don't yet know. And
Elbridge Colby's willful refusal to acknowledge what he's publicly and
(12:01):
in the Alliance talks going on now, what he's said
to me and I've written at the time, it's on
the record that Australia is a uniquely reliable ally. And
yet now to question that in the alliance consultations tells
you that he's setting up a possible pretext if he
thinks Trump wants it to dump Aukus, to dump the agreement,
(12:23):
and perhaps to weaken the alliance.
S1 (12:25):
And so how's Anthony Albanese feeling about this? Because he
was very careful, right, when he was questioned about this
while he's been in China, in terms of what his
responses were.
S2 (12:34):
He is being very careful. He knows the game. He understands, uh,
very well everything we've we've just been talking about.
S4 (12:41):
We have strategic competition in the region, but we continue
to engage in order to support peace and security in
the region and stability in the region.
S2 (12:54):
We can see this clearly. Uh, Samantha, when other countries
do it, we in general, in terms of the media
debate and coverage at the moment, we seem to have
trouble recognizing it in our own case. And what I'm
talking about is this a country that is in a
position to go to swing either Pro-us, pro-China, let's say Vanuatu.
(13:17):
We can see when the Chinese go there, offer them
big investments, trade, security guarantees, whatever. And the US is
anxious and the US thinks, well, you know, what are
we going to we can see that that country, in
this case, a hypothetical Vanuatu, is adeptly playing the two
great powers off against each other for maximum domestic benefit.
(13:40):
When Australia is in that position, Australia is subtly, um,
not not openly admitting it, but subtly playing the same game,
playing the Chinese and the Americans off against each other.
We seem incapable of understanding that that's what we are doing.
Unless the Prime Minister explicitly says it, we can't see it.
But that's exactly what's why do we have that.
S1 (14:00):
Reluctance to understand this or to admit it to ourselves,
do you think?
S2 (14:04):
I think it's we have an unreasoning fearfulness.
S1 (14:06):
Okay.
S2 (14:07):
It's Australia's historic approach to the world being fearful. Fear
of abandonment, uh, was the title of a book by
Allan Gyngell, actually, that described Australia's strategic history. Allan Gyngell,
former diplomat, um, former head of the Lowy Institute. The
late Allan Gyngell, brilliant thinker, uh, he said that Australia
(14:28):
had this unreasoning fearfulness that we would be abandoned and
living in this sort of, uh, Tremulousness permanently. And although Australia,
I would submit, has become a little more assertive and
a little more confident in recent years, that attitude still
permeates and I think it colours the way our media
(14:50):
approaches these issues as well.
S1 (14:55):
We'll be right back. And all of this brings me
to it would seem left of field, but it's an
incredible piece of reporting that you had over the weekend
because you secured. It was incredible. You secured an in-depth
interview with the president of Finland at his castle, no less.
While you were in the country the other week, you
really are our international editor. You get around hartcher and
(15:17):
the president told you that Australia could learn a lot
from his country in terms of how it's bolstered its
protection against Russia, which of course is its own overbearing
neighbor intent on dominance. So what does he think that
we should perhaps take note of? Because I think many listeners,
you know, like myself would think, oh, Go. Wouldn't have
thought that Finland was some sort of mirror for us
in terms of how we might approach defense, but.
S2 (15:38):
Yeah, that's that's right. It's so far away. Uh, but
it's in fashion at the moment because, uh, for this
exact reason that Finland has turned out to be the
model country to show smaller powers, how they can coexist
with an aggressive and very unpleasant great power. They've got
a more than 1000km of border with Russia. How have
(16:01):
they managed to retain their sovereign independence? And and he himself,
Alexander Stubb, the president of Finland, made the point that
while they have Russia, Australia has China. And both of us,
almost everybody is under some sort of economic threat from
Donald Trump at the moment. So there are analogies and
and he drew those out. Um, but it's also understudy
(16:24):
for exactly that reason in Canberra. Um, and the Anu
Rory Medcalf, head of the National security The college at
the Anu's actually published an entire paper on how Australia
should copy Finland's strategic policy in its approach to keeping
our independence. What Stubb told me was that the first
(16:46):
thing Finland had done right was never to relent in
its suspicion of Russia's intentions. When the rest of the
world stood down after the end of the Cold War
and the Americans, everybody else said, oh, the Cold War
is over. We don't have to spend on defense. We
can relax. Finland didn't. Finland retained its conscription and it
retained its comprehensive security policy, which is a whole of
(17:10):
nation policy, which brings in the private sector citizens where
they are constantly, uh, rehearsing and thinking about what to
do in the event of a crisis, how to keep
their supply lines open, how to have stockpiles ready for
all the vital stuff medicines, food, munitions, all the rest
of it, and keeping conscription running non-stop. The only country
(17:32):
that did never eased up. They have a compulsory conscription
system for young men, national service type training and voluntary
for women. So all of those elements are the elements
that the Finns have prosecuted, and that they explain as
the basis for their ability to deter Russian attack. But
(17:56):
that hasn't stopped Vladimir Putin from promising future attack.
S1 (18:00):
No. And in fact, Putin, I believe, has been building
up defenses just on the border with Finland. Right. So
it's quite an acute issue for the country.
S2 (18:08):
Yeah it is. They're under they're under assault from Russia. Effectively,
the war covert and hybrid war is already underway. So
Russia just briefly three things that Russia is doing to Finland.
And I'll mention them, each of them, because they have
analogues in the way China has been treating Australia. To
(18:28):
one is building military infrastructure along the border. We don't
have Chinese infrastructure on our border, but we have Chinese
military patrols in our increasing in intensity in our region
and off our coasts. And that's not they're not massing troops,
but the Russians are building bases and future positioning for
(18:49):
their forces right. On Finland's border, they're also waging hybrid war,
cutting undersea cables in the Baltic Sea that connect Finland
to the world. Internet, telecommunications, phone. Just as China has
been doing in the Taiwan Strait, cutting undersea cables there.
This is a kind of hybrid warfare. It's designed to
unsettle other countries, and it's a precursor for what happens
(19:13):
in a war. All those things happen. Plus you get
the kinetic attack as well.
S1 (19:19):
And one thing I was really interested in is what
he calls public private sector cooperation. So can you sort
of give us some examples about this, because I was
there was one stat in your piece that sort of
made my jaw drop, and it was that Finland has
civilian shelters that can house 4.4 million people out of
the population's 5.6 million people around the country. I mean,
(19:40):
that's just one of the efforts that they've they've undertaken
to sort of shore up their their sovereignty or their protection.
What else was he talking about when he referred to
public private sector cooperation? Because that's quite distinct, right.
S2 (19:53):
Yeah, yeah. Well, this isn't in the law, but this
is just a habit that has emerged, encouraged by the
government for companies to talk to each other. So the
banking sector talk about how do we keep the system
running if there's a, you know, a massive hacking attack
and an attempt to shut down the banking system? Fuel supplies,
(20:17):
companies talk to the government about how to keep supplies
running if there's a crisis and their supplies are cut off.
All of this stuff. They have 18 different sectors. I
think where there are there are plans, contingencies, companies talk
to government about it. It's a mindset really, knowing that
(20:37):
a crisis could be around the corner because it's happened
to them in the past. And notoriously they were attacked
by Russia. Yeah, but they were plucky enough to manage
to to retain their independence.
S1 (20:50):
It's quite interesting. And you mentioned that Rory Medcalf, who's
the head of National Security College at the Anu, that
he's written this paper sort of pointing out, I guess,
what Finland does with regards to its defences. Do you
have any feeling that these are things that we might
actually our government might adopt? Because you make the point
that this concept of whole of nation security, it was
(21:10):
actually recommended by the Albanese government's Defence strategic review. But
that's where it remains on paper only.
S2 (21:17):
Yes, it's in the review only. Yeah. Well, the Defence
Strategic Review did make that recommendation and said that we
need a whole of nation commitment to preparation and building resilience. Resilience,
I suppose, is the key word here. Yeah. And the
government adopted all of the recommendations in that review. But
implementation is another question. And there's not a single visible
(21:40):
step that the government has done anything about that. But
theoretically it remains government policy.
S1 (21:45):
Any chatter in Parliament House or elsewhere that we should
know about that maybe would suggest that this is going
to leave the realms of the paper?
S2 (21:53):
No, not not not a whisper and even really basic, obvious,
necessary stuff. For example, uh, the Defence Strategic Review said
the government should stop using the Defence forces every time
there's a flood or a fire. Yes. And create a
separate civil service civil defence mechanism to take care of
national emergencies. So the military can concentrate on being the
(22:16):
military and not being an emergency relief mechanism. Yep. Progress
on that.
S1 (22:21):
Crickets. Crickets. And what about conscription? And that's obviously, you know,
because we've we've discussed this on previous episodes that it's
becoming more popular in other countries.
S2 (22:30):
Well, the Germans are introducing it. Last week, the Swedes
started conscription of young women. National service, I should call it,
really for.
S1 (22:38):
Any chatter.
S2 (22:38):
For young.
S1 (22:39):
Women in Canberra that this is something that we might
National service might return.
S2 (22:42):
And it will be a brave prime Minister to implement
that short of an absolute crisis or some obvious provocation.
But there are other ways of there's there's national service
that doesn't involve military training. There's a whole range of
ways to approach this. Um, and, you know, emergency responses
is is a soft way into all of that. We
(23:04):
don't even see them approaching that. So the government's a long,
long way away from being able to implement being prepared
to implement its own policy.
S1 (23:13):
Well, we're lucky you're in Canberra just about every other week.
So we know you're going to keep your ear to
the ground on this. Thank you so much for your time.
S2 (23:20):
Always a pleasure.
S1 (23:27):
Today's episode of The Morning Edition was produced by myself
and Kai Wong. Our executive producer is Tammy Mills. Our
head of audio is Tom McKendrick. The Morning Edition is
a production of The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald.
If you enjoy the show and want more of our journalism,
subscribe to our newspapers today. It's the best way to
(23:47):
support what we do. Search The Age or smh.com.au. Subscribe
and sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter to receive
a comprehensive summary of the day's most important news, analysis
and insights in your inbox every day. Links are in
the show. Notes. I'm Samantha Selinger. Morris. This is the
(24:08):
morning edition. Thanks for listening.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com