Ahead of 2021, learn the lessons: improvise, adapt and overcome

At the end of the Cold War, Australia like much of the victorious, US-led "free world" bought into two comforting myths, first the triumph of the US over the Soviet Union meant the "end of history", that is the era of great power competition had forever been relegated to the pages of antiquity, and, as China's population continued to develop and expand its wealth, the people and government would shake off authoritarianism and become more liberal. 

Far from the idealistic and optimistic "end of history" promised by the likes of Francis Fukuyama and Samuel Huntington, across the globe the US-led liberal-democratic and capitalist economic, political and strategic order is under siege, driven by mounting waves of civil unrest, the impact of sustained economic stagnation across the West, concerns about climate change and the increasing geostrategic competition between the world’s great powers. 

Adding further fuel to the fire is the global and more localised impacts of COVID-19, which range from recognising the impact of vulnerable, global supply chains upon national security as many leading nations, particularly those across Europe, long advocates of 'closer collaboration and economic integration', once again grasp at the lifeboats of the nation-state to secure their national interests.

Despite its relative isolation, Australia’s position as a global trading nation, entrenched in the maintenance and expansion of the post-Second World War order, has left the nation at a unique and troubling crossroads, particularly as it’s two largest and most influential “great and powerful” friends: the US and the UK appear to be floundering against the tide of history. 

Furthermore, the fragility of these two nations has prompted many global dictators to take advantage of the absence – as the old saying states, “When the cat is away, the mice will play”, leaving Australia and many other allies, including Taiwan, Japan and South Korea, exposed to the whims of nations dedicated to the end of post-war order. 

While the nation's geographic isolation, encapsulated by the 'tyranny of distance', has provided Australia with a degree of protection from the major, epoch-defining and empire ending conflagrations of the 20th century, the economic, political, societal and strategic challenges of the 21st century hit far closer to home. 

Nowhere is this more evident than across the Indo-Pacific as an emboldened Beijing continues to punish Australia for pursuing a global inquiry into the origins and China’s handling of COVID-19, while also leveraging the comparatively diminished presence of the US military in the region to project power and intimidate both Japan and, critically, Taiwan. 

VIEW ALL

Further compounding this is the growing antagonism and attempted economic, political and strategic coercion policies, including those increasingly targeting Australian exports, many would rightfully claim that Australia's dream economic run with the "China bubble" has come to an abrupt end. 

Explaining this dawning realisation, Paul Kelly, in a piece for The Australian entitled, 'Coronavirus has exposed the weakness of the West'  in which he discusses the reality that while the ongoing tensions between Canberra and Beijing may be a taste of things to come for the foreseeable future, the nation must learn the lessons of 2020 and prepare accordingly. 

Kelly details this realisation, stating, "The year 2020 has changed history, or perhaps turbocharged its trends. The pandemic has exposed the weakness of the Western model, it has unleashed China in its permanent challenge to liberal democracy — and for Australia, it has posed anew the challenge of reconciling its identity with its geography.

"Lenin said: “There are decades where nothing happens, and there are weeks where decades happen”."

Adding to these statements, Kelly looking abroad asks an increasingly important question for Australia's policy makers, "A lot happened in 2020, but the humbling before COVID-19 of the great Western icons — the United States, the United Kingdom and much of the European Union — constitutes a story that was decades in the making. Such failures don’t happen overnight. Historical trends build over many years but are realised in a dramatic event. It is tempting to see the 2020 global pandemic as such an event. By any measure, the East has weathered the challenge far more successfully than the West. Might this constitute a ­bigger turning point?" 

Undermining the foundations? 

For Kelly, the impact of the COVID pandemic has shed light on a startling reality, namely that the West's major powers, namely the United States, United Kingdom and Western European nations are tantamount to castles of glass in comparison to the likes of China, Japan and South Korea, each of whom have performed remarkably well, both in terms of containing the pandemic and the ensuing economic recovery, Beijing in particular a stand out performer, despite questions remaining over the validity of their infection numbers.  

"While there are doubts about China’s figures, there are no doubts about China’s economic recovery, ironic since the coronavirus originated in Wuhan. Japan and South Korea are models of Asian achievement — Japan has recorded 2,688 deaths, or 21 per million of population, while South Korea has recorded 630 deaths, or just 12 per million.

"This compares with the dismal record of the West, with the United Kingdom showing 65,000 deaths, or 963 per million, close to the US figure of 948 per million. The West prides itself on the values of life and liberty, but actual delivery depends upon government competence, public trust and efficient health administration."

Adding to this, Kelly speaking to John Micklethwait, editor-in-chief of Bloomberg, and Adrian Wooldridge, political editor of The Economist details just how the West was beaten at its own game, with the pair stating, "In terms of geopolitics, the crisis has left the West weaker and Asia stronger. What made the region so successful? Is it its Confucian tradition? Or its experience of SARS? Or its technological successes? Or is it just much better at running a modern state?

"There is less global admiration for China, given its role in the virus’s origins. Yet all but the most Trumpian observers concluded that the Middle Kingdom did a much better job in terms of protecting its citizens than the other superpower, the United States. Given where the two countries stood a quarter of a century ago, that is no small achievement.

"Even if a few European countries performed well, the European Union turned in on itself — and will probably be stuck in debates that will be incomprehensible to outsiders for years to come. Shrinking (thanks to Britain’s departure), divided (thanks to profound economic strains), and compromised (thanks to Viktor Orban and co), the EU can no longer claim, as it did in the 1990s, to be advancing liberal values.

"The East’s success with coronavirus is not a lucky accident: it is the result of a change that has been several decades in the making. Asia had the technology to deal with the disease — especially in its ‘intelligent cities’ that use smart infrastructure to manage urban life better. And it had the trust of its citizens," Micklethwait and Wooldrige state. 

This combination of factors spells an interesting challenge for Australia, as the nation which has historically been dependent upon both the United States and United Kingdom to provide tactical and strategic freedom of mobility and legitimacy of the post-Second World War global order faces the reality of having to go it alone, at least in some way. 

Kelly states, "Yet Australia is moving towards an existential dilemma. Amid its domestic success, 2020 has seen old fears resurrected in a new form. An emboldened China is conducting a punitive campaign against Australia for getting above its station and hurting Beijing on issues of global import, and it is making an example of Australia before the world.

"This is a spotlight we wanted to avoid. China’s intimidation will not succeed in turning this country from its core values and policies. While the public is hostile towards Beijing’s bullying, the potential magnitude of the challenge is not fully grasped — it may continue for years, with the price being a ­significant loss of national income and prosperity in order to retain sovereignty and autonomy."

A taste of things to come? 

It is becoming abundantly clear to the Australian public that the nation is struggling to respond to the myriad economic, political, strategic, environmental and infrastructural challenges that are currently arrayed against it.

The internal squabbling is also dramatically impacting the public conversation. Accordingly, it is time for an honest conversation with the Australian public, with the nation's leaders setting aside their individual interests and taking a direct role in designing, communicating and implementing a coherent national response.

For Australia, the combination of these factors couldn't have come at a worse time. Following the disastrous impact of summer bushfires impacting various sectors of the economy, combined with a decade of drought, the advent of coronavirus serves to undermine Australia's economic miracle, while highlighting a critical factor: Australia is too dependent on China. 

In particular, the economic dependence of Australia upon China, which has since the end of the 1980s been described as the "world's manufacturing hub", has been buoyed by unfettered access to cheap Australian raw resources, energy and agricultural goods, leaving the nation dangerously exposed to a downturn in the world's second largest economy. 

Indeed, recently amid growing concern about the impact of the coronavirus outbreak on the Chinese economy, which has sent shockwaves throughout the global economy; Australia, South Korea and Brazil have been recognised as the most exposed to Chinese volatility. 

Expanding on this, Kelly states, "How will that [Beijing's antagonism] trade-off play? It will raise, inevitably, the deeper question always at the heart of our national existence: reconciling our liberal values with an Asian region shaped by Chinese ambition. What is stunning is the sheer rapidity of China’s change towards Australia — its charm offensive, once conducted by Xi Jinping, is now replaced by crass retaliation.

This poses an increasingly convoluted, challenging and dynamic environment for Australia's policy makers to navigate, to plan and respond to in order to ensure the continuing national security, prosperity and sovereignty of Australia despite the relative demise of its major strategic benefactors. 

Kelly states, "Australia now faces a strategic outlook riddled with contradictions — it cannot appease China but, as Scott Morrison publicly announces, he wants to re-set relations; in this era of no meaningful communication, however, Australia is flying blind, unsure of whether or at what price Beijing might consider any re-set; and while Beijing’s hostile behaviour inclines Australia more towards the US alliance, the national security apparatus in Canberra is more worried than ever about the reliability of the US as a security partner."

Your thoughts 

Australia is defined by its economic, political and strategic relationships with the Indo-Pacific and the access to the growing economies and to strategic sea lines of communication supporting over 90 per cent of global trade, a result of the cost-effective and reliable nature of sea transport.

Indo-Pacific Asia is at the epicentre of the 21st century’s era of great power competition and global maritime trade, with about US$5 trillion worth of trade flowing through the South China Sea and the strategic waterways and chokepoints of south-east Asia annually.

Enhancing Australia’s capacity to act as an independent power, incorporating great power-style strategic economic, diplomatic and military capability serves as a powerful symbol of Australia’s sovereignty and evolving responsibilities in supporting and enhancing the security and prosperity of Indo-Pacific Asia. 

Australia is consistently told that as a nation we are torn between our economic relationship with China and the longstanding strategic partnership with the US, placing the country at the epicentre of a great power rivalry – but what if it didn’t have to be that way?

Get involved with the discussion and let us know your thoughts on Australia’s future role and position in the Indo-Pacific and what you would like to see from Australia’s political leaders in terms of shaking up the nation’s approach to our regional partners.

We would also like to hear your thoughts on the avenues Australia should pursue to support long-term economic growth and development in support of national security in the comments section below, or get in touch with This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..