NewsBite

commentary
Paul Kelly

Paul Keating and experts dish out a series of brutal truths

Paul Kelly
Former Prime Minister Paul Keating speaking at The Australian’s Strategic Forum. Picture: Nikki Short
Former Prime Minister Paul Keating speaking at The Australian’s Strategic Forum. Picture: Nikki Short

This was a forum dominated by contentious, brutal realism. Paul Keating began with the most ­brutal warning of all — that Don­ald Trump and his “America First” selfishness is the future, not an ­aberration, and his “intuitive stance” is where successor presidents will take the US anyway.

Keating said Trump’s instincts were to avoid military confron­tations and, above all, any military showdown with China. While this was good and contrary to the outlook of the US east coast foreign policy establishment, Trump lacked the ability to construct a strategic model for a new world now “fundamentally anarchic”.

READ MORE: Paul Keating’s blast: foreign policy on China ‘lacks realism’ | Get tough on China: Bannon | Media ‘up to its ears in fanning fears’ | ‘Savour’ chance of doing deals | Labor ‘more hawkish’ against Beijing | MPs’ ban a ‘public relations failure’ | Pressure to put patrionism first | ‘Nothing to fear’ from communist influence

Josh Frydenberg had a different perspective but went half-way with Keating. The Treasurer ­lamented Trump’s trade war with China, declaring there were “no winners, just losers” — a lethal criticism — and defended the rules-based trade system now under assault.

But Frydenberg believes the US remains strategically committed to the region and refused to subscribe to Keating’s declaration that Pax Americana was passing into history.

Former head of foreign affairs, defence and ASIO Dennis Richardson. Picture: Nikki Short
Former head of foreign affairs, defence and ASIO Dennis Richardson. Picture: Nikki Short
Treasurer Josh Frydenberg. Picture: Nikki Short
Treasurer Josh Frydenberg. Picture: Nikki Short

The Australian’s Strategic Forum yesterday on relations with China was filled with a blend of ­bipartisanship amid sharp differences. While Keating said Australian government policy was failing on China — with ministers lacking “strategic realism”, security agencies hijacking policy and the media abandoning any sense of balance — former foreign and defence policy chief Dennis Richardson ­offered a dissenting realism.

Richardson said that a “few missteps” aside, the government had China policy pretty right. He said there was consistency between the major parties on China. Had Labor won the last election, he doubted China policy would be significantly different. Speaking as a former practitioner, he said criticism was “easy” and his real point was obvious: the critics were weak in explaining exactly how China policy should be reset.

Opposition defence spokesman Richard Marles. Picture: Nikki Short
Opposition defence spokesman Richard Marles. Picture: Nikki Short
Former secretary of the department of prime minister and cabinet Martin Parkinson. Picture: Nikki Short
Former secretary of the department of prime minister and cabinet Martin Parkinson. Picture: Nikki Short

When ALP defence spokesman Richard Marles called for a “guiding philosophy” to govern relations with China, Richardson’s retort was “grand plans don’t exist in the world” and challenged Marles to explain what he meant.

Former Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet head Martin Parkinson offered his own ­brutal realism when he defined the core issue: Australia was engaged in a negotiation with China about our future sovereignty.

He said the economic growth of China was the best thing for the world since World War II but China, as a rising power, was trying to hive off Australia from its US alliance partner.

Parkinson disputed conventional wisdom that “China has us over a barrel”, pointing out that China was also a beneficiary from its economic partnership with Australia.

Frydenberg said Australia must be clear and consistent when dealing with China. Disagreement over foreign investment, human rights and other questions was inevitable but Australian consistency and a broad view of the relationship was the key to ­advancing the national interest short of upending bilateral ties.

'A lot to disagree with' in Keating's speech on China

There was wide agreement that China’s ban on the entry of two federal Liberal backbenchers was immature and counter-­productive. Keating said the challenge for Australian policy was fixing “a set of arrangements which engages China but which also prevents China from domin­ating the region”. He said a prudent policy would be to encourage the US to stay in the region but give China “the space to participate”. Australia should be actively involved in creating a web of co-operative regional ties but steer clear of any US assumption that China’s rise was incompatible with American interests.

Paul Kelly
Paul KellyEditor-At-Large

Paul Kelly is Editor-at-Large on The Australian. He was previously Editor-in-Chief of the paper and he writes on Australian politics, public policy and international affairs. Paul has covered Australian governments from Gough Whitlam to Anthony Albanese. He is a regular television commentator and the author and co-author of twelve books books including The End of Certainty on the politics and economics of the 1980s. His recent books include Triumph and Demise on the Rudd-Gillard era and The March of Patriots which offers a re-interpretation of Paul Keating and John Howard in office.

Add your comment to this story

To join the conversation, please Don't have an account? Register

Join the conversation, you are commenting as Logout

Original URL: https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/keating-and-experts-dish-out-a-series-of-brutal-truths/news-story/911af9d21b81d6063461815b413f6ebb