ASPI cuts a further stain on foreign policy legacy

It is difficult to see the proposed federal government changes to the oversight and funding arrangements for security think tanks as anything other than a bid to stifle debate and placate the concerns of bureaucratic insiders and communist foreign powers. Of most concern is the decision to withdraw funding for the Australian Strategic Policy Institute’s Washington office and put a government observer on its board. The government has agreed in principle to “reconstitute” ASPI’s council, with its chair and two of its members appointed by the defence minister, a further two members appointed by the opposition leader and up to three members appointed by the council itself “based on a skills matrix”. The government will give a list of areas for research. There is no commitment either to long-term funding or the granting of gift recipient status for donations.

A statement issued by the Prime Minister’s Office said the changes would promote a stronger and more sustainable sector into the future. It says this includes improving sector and national security policy outcomes and ensuring continued value for money for the Australian government. These claims are difficult to comprehend.

The closure of ASPI’s Washington office at a time of great upheaval with the return of Donald Trump as president can only be seen as a crimping of our strategic flexibility. Opposition home affairs spokesman James Paterson and opposition defence spokesman Andrew Hastie are correct to say the changes would “neuter” ASPI and silence an influential voice in Australia’s national security debate. ASPI says the changes were an “an effort to clamp down on ASPI”, which had been singled out by Beijing for its hawkish views on China.

As Peter Jennings writes on Friday, ASPI had raised the alarm when the Port of Darwin was leased for 99 years to a Chinese company in 2015. ASPI successfully made the case for why Chinese companies should be kept out of bidding for the 5G network rollout. The think tank exposed the extent of the Communist Party’s United Front influence work in Australia and wrote on human rights violations of the Uighur people, and on China’s cyber espionage.

The institute was included on Beijing’s 14-point “grievance list” in November 2021 – calling for the end of public funding of an “anti-China think tank”. The fact that Beijing appears to have got its way is another stinging indictment of the Albanese government’s foreign policy approach, credibility and legacy. Tightening supervision of supposedly independent think tanks undermines the whole purpose of their being, which is to improve policymaking by challenging orthodoxies and the status quo.

The review underscores the danger of relying on government, which currently pays a combined $40m a year in public funding to organisations including ASPI, the Lowy Institute, the Australian National University’s ­National Security College, the US Studies Centre and the ­Australian American Leadership Dialogue. ASPI receives about $8m a year in government funding, including $4m in core support that would be at risk, and an additional $5m over two years to set up a Washington office that could now be cut.

It proves the age-old point that he who pays the piper calls the tune. Think tanks must work hard to distance themselves from government funding and control. Just as the Albanese government must do the same from the influence and dictates of the CCP.