Leading Democratic contender Rahm Emanuel lauds Australia in anti-coercion proposal to counter China

Appearing alongside Scott Morrison, Rahm Emanuel made the case for the US to lead a strong ‘anti-coercion coalition’ along with allies like Australia to counter Beijing’s growing influence.

Former US ambassador to Japan Rahm Emanuel. Picture: Getty Images

You can now listen to The Australian's articles. Give us your feedback.

You can now listen to The Australian's articles.

Rahm Emanuel, one of the Democratic contenders contemplating a run for President in 2028, has made the case for the US to lead a strong “anti-coercion coalition” along with allies like Australia to counter Beijing’s growing influence.

Mr Emanuel, a former mayor of Chicago who also served as the US ambassador to Japan from 2022 to 2025 and worked as Barack Obama’s chief of staff in 2009-10, took a firm stand against Beijing’s most “pernicious and persistent tool” – identifying it as economic coercion.

He called out Beijing’s treatment of Australia during the global pandemic, but held out Canberra’s response to the campaign of economic coercion against it as the “best example” for the US in how to respond to China’s intimidation tactics moving forward.

“Australia is the best kind of blueprint of what you want to replicate worldwide. They did it on their own,” he said. “And China realised they couldn’t isolate Australia.”

Speaking at a hearing of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party alongside former Australian prime minister Scott Morrison, Mr Emanuel proposed an economic equivalent of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation’s Article Five.

Scott Morrison speaks during a House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party hearing on Capitol Hill.

He said this should be properly codified and based on mutual commitments that were public and reciprocal.

“An attack one is an attack on all at its core,” he said. “Countries should support allies under economic assault with a unified response. Resilience requires a willingness to retaliate, recognising China’s weaknesses.”

Under this proposal, he argued that nations would “insulate themselves from China’s pressure through collective resilience. That requires leveraging alliances.”

“Article five … basically goes to the exact vulnerability of China’s strategy. Their strategy is to take an Australia or take a Japan and make an example out of them.”

“If everybody got together and had a collective self defence (which) is what Article Five would basically indicate, the basic premise of China’s coercion unfolds.”

Mr Emanuel said it was a false choice for the US to choose between free markets and government intervention, but argued that economic sovereignty could be preserved by investing in areas of strength. He added that like-minded nations should band together to develop their own tools of economic co-operation.

Warning that the world had been too slow in properly responding to Beijing’s tactics of coercion, Mr Emanuel said that collective action would also help to firm-up supply chains and ensure that victims of Chinese coercion were offered “real relief in real time.”

Responding to Mr Emanuel’s proposal, Mr Morrison told The Australian that “increased coalition activity to resist coercion is welcome and is the way forward.”

But he also made clear that the perfect should not be the enemy of the good, and that efforts to resist coercion should continue regardless of whether a new coalition was formed.

“The form of that coalition must be appropriate to the region in the Indo Pacific and existing forums such as the Quad provide a good guide as to how that can be best accomplished,” he said. “We wouldn’t want the formality of what’s been proposed to become an obstacle to achieving the coalition effort.”

“Increasing the level of coalition effort in the Indo Pacific to support one another to resist coercion by the PRC would be very welcome and it’s important that we find the best format to achieve that that will work within the Indo Pacific region.”

Mounting a major critique of Beijing, Mr Emanuel said that China had made “coercion its currency of economic statecraft” and that retaliation had become a “replacement for negotiation.”

“Where it cannot conquer through division it chips away through corruption and control,” he said. “To secure our standing in the 21st century America and its allies need an anti-coercion coalition to counter China’s aggression.”

China lifted its punitive tariffs on Australia's wine exports last year. Picture: Bloomberg

“Beijing’s bullying is not a foreign policy, but an example of the failure of one,” he said. “Nevertheless, the word’s response has been scattered, slow and too often silent.”

“Continuing on the current course is a recipe for continued coercion,” he said. “The United States cannot afford to be alone, passive or partisan in this strategic competition … We must lead a resilient anti-coercion coalition to resist economic intimidation and respond with strength when deterrence fails.”

He listed examples of Beijing’s coercion including the decision in 2010 to cut off critical rare earth minerals exports to Japan; the 2012 decision to quarantine fruit exports to the Philippines; the 2016 boycotts against South Korean consumers and tourists; the banning of bilateral trade with Lithuania in 2021 and the import restrictions Beijing slapped on key Australian exports during the global pandemic.

He also took aim at Beijing’s recent refusal to export rare earth magnets essential for industrial manufacturers in the US, causing Ford to halt production of advanced vehicles in their oldest plant located in Chicago.

Mr Emanuel also argued that it was deeply problematic that China maintained a near monopoly on the processing of rare earth minerals.

“Regardless of the method, the message from China is the same,” he said. “Submit or suffer. Beijing exerts economic pressure to achieve its political goals and bend nations to its political will. Their goal is clear. Isolate one to intimidate all.”

“Ours must be to isolate the isolator through an alliance to counter China’s coercion.”

Addressing the hearing, Mr Morrison warned that China’s objective was the “subordination of a rule of law based on universal human rights to one arbitrarily defined by the state and to draw an equivalence between their regimes and freedom based societies.”

“This will not change. Nor can it be negotiated away,” he said. “Rather than opening up their society, during post-cold war globalisation the CCP used China’s newly granted access to global trade, capital markets and legitimacy in international forums to build the economic, diplomatic, technological, and military capacity to one day challenge the global order in an attempt to make it more favourable to their regime security. That day is now.”

Mr Morrison said he was “pleased that our government provided the example of resistance and resilience” by standing firm against Beijing’s coercion “rather than acquiescence and appeasement.”

“Throughout this period, we moved to work with our allies and partners in the region to deepen our ties and strengthen our co-operation,” he said.

Mr Morrison also sounded the alarm on the recent change in tactics from Beijing.

“The PRC took advantage of the change in Government following the 2022 Federal Election to affect a reset and adopt a different tactics,” he said. “This included abandoning their economic and diplomatic bullying and coercion for more inductive engagement, laced with charm and flattery.”

“That said the PRC still continues to engage in intimidatory behaviour by their military against Australia when it suits them without remorse.”