A cautious welcome for ambassador Harris, whose tough line is not popular in Beijing
Former foreign minister Bob Carr has some advice for a new plenipotentiary, The Australian, yesterday:
Carr has cautiously welcomed the nomination of Admiral Harry Harris as US ambassador but noted that diplomacy was fundamentally different to being a military commander and that no US ally wants to see increased tensions with China. Mr Carr, who heads the Australia-China Relations Institute at University of Technology Sydney, (said) it would be unwise for Australia to join US freedom-of-navigation operations in the South China Sea. (He) said it was imperative Australia not be pressured into antagonising China.
Is Carr’s ACRI pro-Beijing? The Australian, December 13 last year:
Australian Strategic Policy Institute executive director Peter Jennings has taken aim at Bob Carr and his China-Australia think tank, saying the former NSW premier has questions to answer after new details emerged relating to a $1.8 million donation from billionaire Chinese businessman Huang Xiangmo. The Australia-China Relations Institute’s 2016-17 annual report reveals that 36 per cent of the centre’s 2016 funding came from Mr Huang, the controversial donor at the centre of the allegations that yesterday prompted Labor senator Sam Dastyari’s resignation.
SMH, November 30 last year:
(In 2016) Dastyari delivered a scripted, deliberate and detailed defence of the Chinese government’s aggressive land grab in the South China Sea.
ACRI website:
The ACRI is an independent, nonpartisan, research think tank.
The Australian, July 13, last year:
Former foreign minister Bob Carr has defended his think tank’s academic independence, saying it is no longer funded by a Chinese businessman and comparing it with US-aligned think tanks which he says “happily” receive money from US corporations.
The Guardian Australia, Tuesday:
(Former PM Kevin) Rudd said that his government took the role of Chinese organisations in Australian society seriously and was sometimes “in conflict with the interests of Beijing” over Tibet, the South China Sea and Chinese investment in Australian resource firms. “But we did not see that as, therefore, the basis upon which to launch some anti-Chinese jihad of the type I have seen in the current political discourse by the government.”
Peter Hartcher on racial profiling by Beijing, SMH, Tuesday:
So what’s Beijing’s problem with (ambassador Harris)? First is that he was outspoken in opposing China’s territory-grabbing and island-building in the South China Sea. But it wasn’t enough for Beijing to denounce Harris for his views. The Chinese regime imputed motive. And the motive it ascribed to Harris was racial … based on the fact that his mother was Japanese. Chinese references to his “blood” and “background” infer that he is prosecuting a historic Japanese race feud against the Chinese. He carries the poison of Sinophobia in his very genes, they’re insinuating, never mind his US nationality, citizenship, oath or lifetime of service.
The Royal Navy is on the way, The Australian, Tuesday:
A British warship will next month sail from Australia through the South China Sea, almost all of which is claimed as sovereign waters by China, (to demonstrate) that the sea is international waters and to assert freedom-of-navigation rights, British Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson says. (He) suggested it was important the US, Britain, Australia and other countries “assert our values”.