Clarity is key as Australia treads a fine line on Taiwan

In April, a poll for The Age found that 65 per cent of Australians regarded Taiwan as a sovereign state, and that if China were to invade the island, 67 per cent would want us to do “something” about it – though of that group, only 15 per cent believed that “something” should be military action.

There was talk that same month of Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the US House of Representatives, visiting Taiwan, prompting Beijing to warn that “all possible consequences that arise from this will completely be borne by the US side”. Pelosi contracted COVID-19 and was forced to cancel that trip, but as her visit to Asia began on Monday the expectation of a stop in Taipei was strong.

Since Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine – which China has refused to condemn – and the gross human rights violations Beijing has inflicted on its citizens in Xinjiang and Hong Kong, it is perhaps understandable that many Australians find the decades-old diplomatic formulas that surround Western relations with Taiwan dishonest, distasteful and no longer fit for purpose. They might cheer Pelosi in standing up for the weaker party.

However, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese made it clear during an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper that he would not be breaking new diplomatic ground on Taiwan, reiterating Canberra’s commitment to the “One China” policy and to “the status quo … the existing structures which are there”.

Albanese was responding to a question on whether Australia would defend Taiwan militarily, a scenario he labelled “hypothetical”. Yet governments are obliged to consider hypotheticals all the time, and the question will continue to be asked. In May, US President Joe Biden again committed Washington to using force to resist any attempt by Beijing to take over the island, which the United States officially regards as part of China, prompting a debate over whether policy had shifted (the White House insisted it hadn’t) or the president was confused.

In our domestic politics, both Home Affairs Department secretary Michael Pezzullo and his former boss and current opposition leader Peter Dutton have been accused by Labor of talking up confrontation. During his time as defence minister, Dutton insisted “it would be inconceivable that we wouldn’t support the US in an action [over Taiwan] if the US chose to take that action”.

To say that Australia ought always to follow Washington’s lead requires us to reckon with other occasions when this argument has been made, most notably with reference to Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Loading

While US officials have been at pains to point out that Pelosi does not represent the Biden administration and that her trip is about trade, not political recognition, its timing means it is inevitably viewed through that lens. But for Canberra and other US allies it also revives the question of how much they can rely upon Washington to underwrite national security, one that has clouded our politics since Richard Nixon’s July 1969 speech in Guam – in which he emphasised allies taking primary responsibility for their defence – and his decision to open relations with the People’s Republic of China two years later, effectively giving birth to the Taiwan question.

Source link

Denial of responsibility! insideheadline is an automatic aggregator around the global media. All the content are available free on Internet. We have just arranged it in one platform for educational purpose only. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, all materials to their authors. If you are the owner of the content and do not want us to publish your materials on our website, please contact us by email – admin@insideheadline.com. The content will be deleted within 24 hours.

Source: News