China’s ‘noose around’ Australia: Is Albanese more concerned about trade than our sovereignty

Anthony Albanese slammed Scott Morrison over China’s security pact with the Solomon Islands. Now, with Beijing flexing its muscles again Albanese is downplaying tensions, raising concerns he prioritises trade over our sovereignty, writes James Morrow.

It’s funny how different it is campaigning from office than it is campaigning from Opposition.

Just ask Anthony Albanese.

Back in April 2022, as Labor was working hard to unhorse Scott Morrison’s government, news came down that China had signed a security pact with the Solomon Islands.

This was, then-Opposition leader Anthony Albanese said, “a massive foreign policy failure.”

He went on, thundering that “this isn’t something that has just arisen”.

“This is something that has been in the planning for a period of time and quite clearly the relationships have broken down,” he said.

Fast forward nearly three years, it’s Albanese who’s on the nose with voters, and – surprise! – China is testing the boundaries again.

Australia's Foreign Minister Penny Wong has voiced concerns over live fire drills conducted by three Chinese warships sailing off the country's east coast. Picture: The Australian Defence Force

Earlier this week the People’s Liberation Army Navy parked three ships off our coast.

Then on Friday the Chinese Navy engaged in a series of dangerous surprise live fire exercises in the Tasman which caused several flights between Australia and New Zealand to be diverted.

These were only the latest moves by China, which regularly parks intelligence-gathering ships offshore to monitor our most sensitive facilities and is reportedly gathering a mass of data about our coastlines and seabeds that could one day help mount a total blockade of Australia.

To follow the Albanese rule, does this too represent a foreign policy failure?

Not on your life, as the Prime Minister told reporters in Tasmania Saturday.

Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese said China did comply with international law. Picture: NewsWire/Scott Gelston

Albanese – who often acts at media doorstops like he’s a sovereign citizen who’s just been pulled over for running a stop sign – fell back on legalistic explanations that seemed designed to absolve China of guilt.

“China did comply with international law,” the prime minister said, seemingly defending Beijing.

And then Albanese suggested that perhaps we were making too big a deal about all this.

“This activity took place outside of our exclusive economic zone, notification did occur of this event,” he said.

Well, quite. With that attitude is it any wonder that China went ahead and conducted a second live fire drill on Saturday?

Finally, the Prime Minister came to the heart of the matter.

“You do know that most of the trade goes from here to there, not the other way around?”, he snapped at a reporter.

“I’ve worked pretty hard to make sure that products, including seafood products, can get into China. It’s worth something like $20 billion. One in four Australian jobs are dependent upon trade and China is our major trading partner.”

Signalling he was sick of the whole subject, the PM declared finally: “I’ve answered the – with respect, I have answered the questions”.

There’s a lot to parse here.

Cynics might suggest the PM is more concerned about trade than maintaining our sovereignty, or generally stopping China from acting in weird, irresponsible and threatening ways in our neighbourhood.

But while it is great that CCP princelings can wash down succulent Australian crayfish with fine Australian chardonnay, it’s a lot less than ideal that China is quite clearly, slowly but surely, drawing a noose around the continent.

China wants Australia to be supine, to roll over and sell us our stuff (or not, they don’t really care) while not protesting their threatening and reckless behaviour.

And that is, by the actions and inactions of the Albanese government, precisely what we are doing.

Indeed it might be, as Mr Albanese once said under different circumstances, “a massive foreign policy failure.”