Keeping the politics of fear at a distance

Editor's note: Timothy Kerswell is a research fellow at the Chinese University of Hong Kong (Shenzhen). He lived in Macao for seven years, working as an assistant professor at the University of Macao. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese visit to China has been seen as a significant development in the bilateral relations between China and Australia. His visit is the first by an Australian leader since Malcolm Turnbull in 2016. While some commentators have argued that this marks a new dawn in relations, it's better to see these recent developments as a stabilization rather than an improvement. With Albanese at pains to describe how Australia has different values and a different political system to China, these exchanges are ones of naked self-interest, and thus they are fragile.

Economically, China is an indispensable partner for Australia. Try as it might to diversify its economic relations, Australia has faced nothing but obstacles. A proposed free trade agreement between Australia and the European Union is continuously stalled as European leaders prefer trade barriers over cooperation. Much fanfare was made of former Prime Minister Tony Abbott becoming the special trade envoy to India, but years later, economic relations with India remain a modest part of Australia's economic picture, with limited prospects for growth and little to no investment. With these points in mind, economic issues will likely dominate Albanese's talks with China this week. 

Albanese comes to China suffering recent political embarrassment and strong political headwinds. A national referendum guaranteeing constitutional recognition and an advisory voice to parliament for Indigenous Australians was overwhelmingly rejected in every Australian state. This happened despite the government's active campaign in favor of the referendum, a campaign for which Albanese was the unmistakable face.

The Albanese government is facing several setbacks at the moment. Australia is going through a national cost of living crisis. Even before the summer has begun, Australia is already beset with bushfires causing pain among its eastern states. Albanese's Treasurer, Jim Chalmers, recently conceded that Australia is struggling to meet its climate change mitigation targets.

The economic relationship between China and Australia is an obvious and mutually beneficial one. China's continued economic expansion means a demand for Australian iron ore. China's status as the world leader in electric vehicles and other green products lends itself to a demand for Australian lithium. It's the area of climate change mitigation that perhaps China and Australia can cooperate on the most. While it is perverse to describe coal as a "green" export, the quality of Australian coal compared to other sources of supply means lower carbon emissions while China has paid more attention to environmental protection.

While in China, Albanese will also be looking over his shoulder. As a former cabinet minister, he was at the very least a first-hand witness as machinations from within his Australian Labor Party caused the downfall of former Prime Ministers Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard. Rudd was perhaps the last Australian prime minister to attempt a more balanced relationship between China and the United States, and his political fate probably sets the boundary of how far an Australian political leader can push to improve ties with China before meeting political resistance, whether from their party, the opposition or from certain powerful allies. It's not by accident that Albanese visited U.S. President Joe Biden for consultations before boarding his flight to Shanghai in east China.

It is often said that disappointment results from our expectations being unrealistic. It follows that setting realistic expectations for the future of the China-Australia relationship is the key to their stability. China-Australia relations are certainly not "warming" and there's no reason to believe that they will any time soon. Instead, relations have simply stopped getting worse for the time being, and normal diplomatic engagement has resumed.

But the sobering reality is that Australian foreign policy revolves around a psychology of anxiety around perceived abandonment by allies, creating an eagerness to impress them at all costs. This makes Australia subservient to U.S. hegemonic designs, and as long as China maintains its sovereignty in the face of this hegemony, there will be certain major issues on which Australia and China will likely never agree. It also suggests that any time there's a choice to be made between politics and economics, the politics of fear might prevail.

The assumption that one side can change the other's mind on controversial issues without an underlying change in the structure of the world system just makes things worse. In talking about China, Albanese is famous for saying that "we need to co-operate with China where we can, disagree where we must, and engage in our national interest." Arguably, it's best for everyone involved to adopt this position and limit the discussion to areas where progress can be made. For now, the relationship between China and Australia is at least stabilizing. China and Australia can benefit from these exchanges for as long as the politics of fear can be kept at bay.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on Twitter to discover the latest commentaries in the CGTN Opinion Section.)