The passing of the Queen brings Australia to a crossroads in more ways than one. First, it marks the pivotal turning of an imperial chapter with all the fading glory that it entails, and the consequent accession of a new king who is now our head of state. Republicans may stir and exclaim, “Alas, the time is ripe for constitutional change.” The symbolism of having our own head of state rather than a foreign king is reaffirming to Australia as a sovereign country, but not as pressing as this existential challenge: Is it also time for Australia to make its own way in the world, geopolitically speaking.
Since the end of World War II, Australia has manifestly tethered its destiny to the United States following the emasculation of Britain by the war. Fair go. The near Japanese invasion of Australia had shocked the country into realising that it could perhaps never be able to defend itself on its own. So the pivot towards the United States began in earnest. But that was ages ago. Fast forward 2022. Its embrace of Uncle Sam has never been tighter – and is still tightening by the day. One has to ask why. Should this embrace not be loosened? Of course, one might say that it is counter-intuitive to do so as the global security situation becomes more fraught. But to remain tethered to the US, especially in a military sense, also brings its own risks – chiefly being embroiled in a war between China and the US over Taiwan should it eventuate.
The prospect of Australia being dragooned into such a war is not inconceivable. This is borne out by Canberra’s inability in recent decades to pursue an independent stance or to summon enough courage to say no to Washington in all the wars that US has prosecuted or led so far. For example, Canada rejected US request to participate in the Vietnam War; Germany and France refused to join the invasion of Iraq (not sanctioned by the UN) led by the US, ostensibly to rid the country of so-called weapons of mass destruction. Only Britain and Australia saw it fit to join the US. That it did so although Iraq seemed a world away from us is a moot question. However, the reason proffered for our involvement was to defend the values we hold dear, but cynics would rather postulate that we swung behind the US because of our special ties. Are we then at the beck and call of Washington? This brings us to the inevitable question: Will Australia join the US should a right royal war break out between US and China over Taiwan?
Unfortunately, Australia truly is in an unenviable position in the event of a Taiwan conflict in the light of its special military ties with Washington. The days ahead would only see Australia further enmeshing itself with the US militarily and geopolitically as Washington is bent on checking China’s expansion, not only in the Indo-Pacific region, but also further afield. In fact, it could be Hobson’s choice for Canberra should China and the US square off. Witness what former defence minister Peter Dutton declared in November 2021: “It would be inconceivable that we wouldn’t support the US in an action (military conflict over Taiwan) if the US chose to take the action.” Though he later damped down what he said, it was nonetheless a harbinger of things to come.
The AUKUS agreement between the US, Britain and Australia to equip Australia with nuclear-powered submarines further points to a scenario of Canberra throwing its weight willy-nilly behind the US should war break out. Australia’s interest in acquiring the nuclear submarines centres on the fact (as Canberra puts it) that they can remain submerged for a long time and have a much longer range without any need to refuel. Observers have questioned the need for such submarines if their role is only for the defence of Australia. The implication, then, is quite obvious: the nuclear subs, with all its capabilities, will play an important support role in a China-US conflict over Taiwan. Should this eventuate, Beijing would have no choice but to declare Australia as an enemy. The prospect of Chinese missiles raining on Australia then becomes very real. The collateral damage to Australia would be nightmarish, if not apocalyptic. This is because China is no longer a pushover in military terms, and even if it were ultimately vanquished, the damage it can inflict on its enemies would be horrendous. Is Australia ready to sustain such devastation? China has made it patently clear to Washington that those “who choose to play with fire will perish in it” should the West thwart its ambition to bring Taiwan into its fold, which Beijing regards as an internal matter. So there. The battle lines are becoming increasingly defined with President Joe Biden saying for the fourth time (wittingly or unwittingly) in recent days that his country would go to the defence of Taiwan in the event of the island coming under Chinese attack. This is a clear departure from its “strategic ambiguity” policy over the Taiwan issue although each time the White House was quick to deny any change in its one-China policy. Be that as it may, there will be no victors in such a coming conflict with each party going for broke, unless one of them can be sufficiently neutralised at the start before enough damage is done. President Biden sagely warned that the US decision not to supply Ukraine with long-range guided missiles is predicated on the fact that “we’re trying to avoid World War III.” Well, it is not hard to fathom that a conflict with China is certain to unleash World War III+.
In the event of an open US-China military conflict, Australia, perforce, would become embroiled going by all the inextricable linkages with Washington. However, the relationship is lop-sided like two riders on a tandem bicycle: The US in the front sets the pace and direction, while the back rider, Australia, simply takes orders. Have we hocked our sovereignty to the US? Is there a way out for Australia? The exit door needs some serious jimmying to pry it open to enable Australia to strike out on its own, and to be its own master. However, this calls for immense political courage from future Australian leaders. As a middle power, a possible route is to forge stronger ties with the region, and to lead from the front in its own right, rather than to hitch its wagon to Washington’s. It is all very well for Australia to claim that it needs US protection, hence the military ties. If this holds any water, what about countries such as Vietnam, the Philippines and Malaysia which have competing claims with China over some islands in the South China Sea. Even though the Chinese spectre looms larger over these countries because of their proximity to China, they do not seem as paranoid about the Chinese as Australia is when it is more than comfortably ensconced in the antipodes. To date, Australia has no known enemy which threatens its territorial integrity. There is no evidence – not in the open anyway – to date that any regional country has sought the protection of the US in fending off China even though they are not militarily the equal of Australia. Former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said recently that Australia has itself to blame for its estrangement with China. “What is happening now is, of course, people regard Australia almost as an extension of America,” he told The Age newspaper in a recent interview. “Your policies are seldom different from America. And America is aggressive because it thinks it is safe. But Australia is not so safe… you are not as safe and as powerful as America.” Yet, by default or otherwise, Australia seems to have manoeuvred itself into the vanguard in the new theatre of war that is shaping up quickly in north-east Asia.
Indeed, Dr Mahathir, long the nemesis of Australia, offers timely food for thought for our leaders. For Australia, it is decision time at the crossroads. The Republican issue can wait – new king or no new king – but the question of Australia joining the US in a war over Taiwan has to be seriously weighed up. And that means recognising that we have to be master of our own destiny in the first instance, not the “deputy sheriff” of the United States in the Asia-Pacific.