When Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd took office in December, there was widespread speculation that his foreign and defense policies would favor loosening ties with the US and tilting toward China.
Commentators pointed to his major in Chinese history and language, further study of Chinese in Taiwan and service as a diplomat in Beijing. Chinese press and TV news were close to ecstatic that he had come to power.
However, Australian Defense Minister Joel Fitzgibbon asserted that such speculation showed “poor judgment.” He said his prime minister was “well-versed in Chinese politics” and saw his experience in China as an opportunity “to promote trust.” He insisted, however, “that should not be read as a pro-China tilt.”
Fitzgibbon met the leader of the US Pacific Command, Admiral Timothy Keating, and visited Australian ships at Pearl Harbor for the biennial maritime Rim of the Pacific or RimPac exercise. He is scheduled to arrive in Washington today to meet with US Vice President Dick Cheney, US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
Fitzgibbon said his ministry was drafting a new white paper on defense that would stress Australia’s commitment to its US alliance. Australia’s reliance on the US for security “certainly hasn’t changed” with the new government, he said.
He applauded a budding concept at the Pacific Command, which holds that the US need not take the lead in every contingency in Asia and the Pacific. Rather, others should be encouraged to lead while the US takes a supporting role. US officers call it “leading from the middle,” “leading from within,” or “leading from behind.”
Despite its relatively small population of 22 million, Australia has been integrated into the US security posture in Asia because of its strategic location. A senior US officer said: “If they are there, we don’t have to be there.”
Fitzgibbon said Australia hoped to improve the multilateral security architecture in Southeast Asia and that the Rudd government wanted to see all nations within the region or with interests there included. Some past proposals, notably those from former Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad, have sought to exclude the US.
Fitzgibbon said he hoped to widen the current focus on economic issues to include strategic foreign and security issues.
He said he was encouraged by Japan’s increasing engagement in security issues, and met Japanese Defense Minister Shigeru Ishiba at a conference of defense ministers in Singapore in May. Fitzgibbon said, however, he saw no need to formalize the emerging security partnership between Australia, Japan and the US.
Richard Halloran is a writer based in Hawaii.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS