Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Australia Publishing Institution Australian National University Department of International Relations

1. Australia and the Korean Crisis: Confronting the limits of influence

Author:
Andrew O'Neil, Brendan Taylor, and William T. Tow
Publication Date:
04-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Australian National University Department of International Relations
Abstract:
In this Centre of Gravity paper, Professors O’Neil, Taylor and Tow argued that the apparent optimism surrounding the upcoming ‘season of summitry’ on the Korean Peninsula should be tempered by the fact that there are potential risks attached to engaging the North Korean leadership without preconditions. They argue these include legitimising its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs, alliance decoupling, and a serious deterioration in Asia’s strategic climate if the Trump-Kim summit fails to deliver concrete results. Building on a series of important policy roundtables in Australia, along with decades of experience, these three senior figures argue that Australian policy makers should look to develop a more integrated national approach to the Korean Peninsula. Policymakers should anticipate and prepare for a full range of possible outcomes. A clear definition and articulation of Australia’s considerable national interests in Northeast Asia—independent from those of the US—should be derived. Initially, the Turnbull Government should begin a whole-of-government review, managed by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. This process would identify and implement policy initiatives where Australia can pursue a distinctly national approach to safeguarding its long-term interests on the Korean Peninsula, including future bilateral relations with North Korea.
Topic:
Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons, United Nations, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, North Korea, Australia, and Pyongyang

2. Debating the Quad

Author:
Euan Graham, Chengxin Pan, Ian Hall, Rikki Kersten, Benjamin Zala, and Sarah Percy
Publication Date:
03-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Australian National University Department of International Relations
Abstract:
In this Centre of Gravity paper, six of Australia’s leading scholars and policy experts debate Australian participation in the ‘Australia-India-Japan-United States consultations on the Indo-Pacific’ - known universally as the ‘Quad’. A decade since its first iteration, the revival of the Quad presents significant questions for Australia and the regional order. Is the Quad a constructive partnership of the region’s major powers to safeguard regional stability, uphold the rules-based order and promote security cooperation? Is it a concert of democracies seeking to contain China? Or is it an emerging strategic alignment that risks precipitating the very confrontation with China it seeks to avoid? Or is it something else entirely? Euan Graham opens the debate by arguing that the Quad represents a rare second chance for Australia to cooperate with regional powers who have a shared interest is the maintenance of stability in Asia through the preservation of a balance of power. In addition to constraining China’s strategic choices beyond its maritime periphery, Dr. Graham argues that the Quad’s revival aims to send a concerted strategic signal to China along the four compass points of the Indo-Pacific region, but sufficiently restrained to avoid significant blowback from Beijing. Chengxin Pan responds that instead of forcing China to change tack, the Quad, by exacerbating China’s strategic vulnerability, will achieve precisely the opposite: prompting it to further strengthen its military capabilities. Dr. Pan argues that the nature of China’s challenge to the existing regional order is actually geoeconomic in design, as evidenced by the Belt and Road Initiative. To meet this challenge, however, the Quad’s military response is far from the right answer or an effective alternative. Ian Hall next argues that the Quad is neither a proto-alliance nor an instrument for containing China. Given that these states have so far failed to advance a coherent and coordinated line on Chinese initiatives to transform the region, Dr. Hall notes that the Quad offers something more prosaic and evolutionary: a forum for discussion and information exchange intended to lead to better policy coordination between like-minded states with a stake in the rules-based order. Rikki Kersten notes that the Japanese government wants Quad 2.0 to be seen as a Japanese initiative because it aspires to lead an ethical endeavour that reaches beyond the Asia-Pacific region. This represents a stepchange in post-war Japanese foreign and security policy thinking. Japan under Abe is seeking to harness rising insecurity to underpin its own regional leadership credentials and enhance the geographical scope of its security policy ambition. Benjamin Zala responds that the potential risks associated with sending containment-like signals to Beijing in the short-term and the potential for misperceptions over ambiguous commitments during a future crisis in the longer-term clearly outweigh the benefits of the current vague aspiration to cooperation with no clear purpose. Dr. Zala also warns against blurring the lines between formal military alliances and strategic partnerships like the Quad which increase the odds of miscalculation during times of power transition. Finally, Sarah Percy rounds out the debate by arguing that discussions of the Quad’s high politics have thus far obscured the more practical and interesting questions about how it might function and contribute to maritime security. Dr. Percy notes that that the day-to-day operations of most navies are focused on the more proximate security challenges posed by maritime crime. The Quad would yield tangible and possibly lasting benefits from such cooperation.
Topic:
Conflict Prevention, Diplomacy, Military Affairs, and Maritime
Political Geography:
United States, Japan, China, India, Asia, and Australia

3. 100 Days of Trump: What Should Asia Do?

Author:
Brendan Taylor, Greg Fealy, David envall, Bates Gill, Feng Zhang, Benjamin Zala, Michael Wesley, Shiro Armstrong, Anthony Bergin, David Brewster, Robin Davies, Jane Golley, Stephen Howes, Llewelyn Hughes, Frank Jotzo, Warwick McKibbin, Rory Medcalf, Tessa Morris-Suzuki, Steven Rood, and Matthew Sussex
Publication Date:
01-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Australian National University Department of International Relations
Abstract:
Once again, Trump has broken the mould. The 100-day mark is traditionally used to assess a new administration’s progress in advancing its policy agenda. With Trump, that’s impossible. In foreign policy at least, it’s more appropriate to ask whether at the 100-day mark the Trump administration is any closer to actually having a policy agenda. In no region is this question more pressing than in the Asia Pacific. The Asia Pacific is home to two-thirds of the world’s population, two-thirds of the global economy, and provides two-thirds of all global economic growth. It is the arena for the most serious challenge to America’s international role since it emerged as a global power a century ago. It is also the region that hosts six of the world’s nine nuclear states, and four of those have the fastest growing stockpiles and the most unpredictable nuclear doctrines. Few would dispute that for over 70 years, the United States has both stabilised the Asia Pacific’s fractious strategic affairs and underpinned its rapid economic development. And so the possibility of a radically different American role in the region instituted by the least conventional President in living memory is of vital interest not only to the residents of the region, but to the world as a whole. We asked experts from across the ANU College of Asia and the Pacific to watch and assess the impact of Trump on the Asia Pacific during the first hundred days of his Presidency – and how the region, and Australia should respond. It’s the sort of exercise that the largest and most comprehensive collection of expertise on the Asia Pacific on the planet can do with relish – and with a customary policy eye. The result is a fascinating and varied portrait of how the new administration has affected the world’s most dynamic region, and how the region is likely to react. When viewed together, these essays allow us to reflect on three questions that will be crucial for this region and the world over the next four years and perhaps beyond. What have we learned about Trump and his administration? What do the region’s reactions to Trump tell us about the regional role of the United States in the future? And what do these responses tell us about the Asia Pacific, and its likely trajectory in the near- and mid-term future?
Topic:
International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:
United States, Japan, Indonesia, Asia, South Korea, North Korea, and Australia

4. International Relations in Australia: Michael Lindsay, Martin Wight, and the first Department at the Australian National University

Author:
James Cotton
Publication Date:
08-2010
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Australian National University Department of International Relations
Abstract:
Although he was an original member from 1951 of the Department of International Relations at the Australian National University (ANU), Michael Lindsay's contribution to the discipline and to the ANU is rarely acknowledged. He is probably best known from the brief account given in the official ANU history of the second appointment to the chair. The candidate in question was Martin Wight, then reader at the London School of Economics. Having accepted the position, Wight later withdrew in controversial circumstances. In the official history it is claimed that Lindsay 'wrote to him in terms that scared him away'. In the contemporary international relations discipline, Wight, by contrast, is regarded as one of the most influential figures of his generation. For those with any awareness of this episode, Lindsay's role as, apparently, the person responsible for this path not taken is generally regarded as negative. The account offered in the official history has obscured two important points. First, setting aside issues of personality, it can be shown that Lindsay's correspondence with Wight and any differences they might have had were based upon a coherent view on Lindsay's part of the discipline and also of the work that was most appropriate to the new institution. Second, the record shows that, as he was the acting head of the Department for much of the 1950s, Lindsay played a large role in establishing its character, and was indeed immensely active, despite his junior status, in fostering interest in the discipline in the ANU and the wider community. This paper shows Lindsay to have played a strong and creative role in the discipline, one which should be more remembered and celebrated today.
Topic:
International Relations, Economics, International Political Economy, Politics, and Political Theory
Political Geography:
Australia

5. Australia as a supplier of uranium to the Asian region: Implications

Author:
Stuart Harris
Publication Date:
07-2009
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Australian National University Department of International Relations
Abstract:
Significant interest in Australia's uranium export industry has re-emerged in the face of increased energy demand, fears of eventual reduced supplies of traditional energy sources, further evidence of global climate change and prospective higher electricity prices. This paper examines how Australia will respond to that renewed interest and how it seeks to balance its economic and environmental interests with its traditional nuclear non- proliferation activism.
Topic:
Economics, Energy Policy, Environment, and International Trade and Finance
Political Geography:
Australia

6. Regional energy security: An elusive objective?

Author:
Stuart Harris
Publication Date:
08-2008
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Australian National University Department of International Relations
Abstract:
Energy issues are a central feature of economic and political debate. The debate focuses not only on the growing regional energy demands from China and India, but also on the cyclical and structural factors in the international energy market that are significant and that lead to considerable uncertainties about energy accessibility, prices and supply reliability. For the Asian region, considerations of supply security are increasingly part of global energy security concerns. The global debate about long-term resource availability and supply, particularly of oil and gas, centres on the questions of whether adequate resources will exist to meet growing global demands in the next twenty-plus years, or whether the resources are adequate but will not be brought to market because of underinvestment and related higher costs in the oil and gas industry. Options for alternative supply sources and alternative fuels are, at the same time, becoming constrained by concerns about the impacts on climate change and, in the case of biofuels, on food and feed supplies. Adjustments to the expected continuing increases in energy trend prices will be generally difficult for developed countries, including Australia, but especially so for developing countries including those in Asia.
Topic:
Energy Policy, Markets, and Oil
Political Geography:
China, India, Asia, Australia, and Australia/Pacific

7. APEC and the search for relevance: 2007 and beyond

Author:
John Ravenhill, Lorraine Elliott, Helen E.S. Nesadurai, and Nick Bisley
Publication Date:
11-2006
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Australian National University Department of International Relations
Abstract:
In September 2007, Australia will host the annual Economic Leaders' Meeting of the Asia–Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum. This will be the culmination of over 100 days of ministerial, official and business group meetings, working groups and dialogues that will be held in various Australian cities from January to August. Fifteen federal government departments will be involved along with a range of other interested actors, predominantly in the private sector. The Australian government will spend considerable sums of money on the leaders' meeting itself, not least to ensure the security of those attending. This will include, if all goes according to plan, the heads of government of 21 countries—member economies in APEC-speak—including the United States, Russia, Japan and China. Security may well be the least of the government's worries. Few would argue that APEC is 'going strong' as a regional economic forum and recent reviews have suggested that at best it faces an uncertain future and that at worst it could be in a state of terminal decline. The forum is argued to have lost its relevance and to have generally been unsuccessful in attaining any of its more ambitious goals such as regional trade liberalisation.
Topic:
Security, Development, Economics, and International Trade and Finance
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Japan, China, Australia, and Australia/Pacific