Australia's protracted ASEAN teething problems<\/p>\n
By Dewi Anggraeni<\/p>\n
MELBOURNE (JP): Australia, it seems, will have long and
\nprotracted teething problems in its integration into the region.
\nThe occasional race debate is only one manifestation of a number
\nof problems dormant (or seething, as the race case may be) under
\nthe glossy wallpaper. Persistent, albeit gradually decreasing,
\nracist sentiment in Australia is often compounded by the
\ndifferent ways countries of the region read a political
\nsituation. The current race debate, initiated by offensive
\nutterances of federal independent member of Oxley, Pauline
\nHanson, clearly illustrates this picture of cross-purpose
\ninterpretations.<\/p>\n
After Australia's long honeymoon with Asian countries under
\nthe Keating government, the race debate must have jolted and
\nreminded many Asians, in the government as well as in the
\ncommunity at large, that racist views in Australia are still
\nalive and well. These Asians followed with incredulity the
\nreports of Pauline Hanson's maiden speech in parliament last
\nmonth, accusing the government of pouring unproportionately large
\nfunds into Aboriginal communities, and calling on the government
\nto stop Asian migration. Hanson claimed that the country was
\ngoing to be swamped by Asians, which she tagged with unflattering
\nadjectives, using data so inaccurate it would be embarrassing to
\nquote in this article.<\/p>\n
As if that were not bad enough, there was no immediate rebuke
\nor repudiation from Prime Minister John Howard. Cries of outrage
\ncame from Aboriginal and Asian communities. The only official
\nrebuke, and a mild one at that, was from Deputy Prime Minister,
\nwho is also minister for trade, Tim Fisher. Fisher warned that
\nHanson's inflammatory comments could damage trade relations with
\nAsian countries. However Fisher did not receive support from
\nHoward, who even said that his government was for freedom of
\nspeech, and would discourage accusing those who spoke their
\nopinions of being \"racist bigots\".<\/p>\n
It is also a fact that repudiation did not come immediately
\nfrom Labour opposition leader, Kim Beazley, either. It is
\npossible that both Howard and Beazley realized that racism was
\nnot as insignificant an issue in the political arena as many had
\nbegun to believe. Rather, it is a boil under the skin waiting to
\nsurface, which could become a festering sore growing out of
\ncontrol. So they waited, foolishly it seems, hoping that the
\nHanson outburst would quickly blow away and be forgotten. When it
\ninstead grew into a series of debates, more emotional than
\nrational, they began to assess and try to control the damage, not
\nvery successfully.<\/p>\n
Another factor that may have caused this reluctance on
\nHoward's part is his own record. Ten years ago Howard publicly
\nsupported Professor Geoffrey Blainey's views that Australia's
\nAsianisation should be checked, and that there should be a major
\nreduction in Asian migration. He has tried to redeem himself
\nsince then. In his pre-campaign campaign late last year, Howard
\nadmitted that he had been wrong, and that he now had different
\nviews about the contribution of Asian migrants to Australia.
\nHowever, being basically a conservative and honest man, Howard
\nwould feel uncomfortable affecting a complete U-turn. He still
\nmaintains that Australia does not have to downgrade its relations
\nwith Europe while engaging with Asia. This unfortunately projects
\nto Asians a leader reluctant to commit his government to full
\nengagement with Asia.<\/p>\n
So Howard's belated repudiation of Hanson's parliamentary
\nremarks has not helped rectify this image. While individual
\ncountries in Asia show differing degrees of disappointment, they
\nhave one thing in common. They all believe that if the government
\nwere genuine about valuing its relations with Asian countries,
\nHanson's remarks would have been repudiated immediately by the
\nperson holding the highest political power, namely John Howard.
\nIn the meantime Hanson, while being isolated in the parliamentary
\ncircles, gathered support in the populace. She has tapped the
\nfear and insecurity of disenfranchised people in Australia. The
\nfact that what we are seeing is the consequence of the world
\neconomic restructuring, too complicated and generally too distant
\nto grasp. The politics of scapegoating is not the monopoly of any
\nparticular nation. It is easy and instantly gratifying. There are
\nparticular groups to blame, targeting especially visible ones in
\nthe community.<\/p>\n
The damage to trade relations may not have been serious,
\nbecause business entrepreneurs are pragmatists. They have no
\ndoubt included racist attitudes in their risk assessments. Few
\nthings surprise them. The same cannot be said about Australia's
\nexport in education services. For parents thinking of spending
\nlarge sums of money sending their children to Australian schools
\nand universities, these racist elements in the country are much
\nmore immediate and relevant. Who would want to pay to send their
\nteenage children to a place where they may be exposed to stress
\ncaused by racist attitudes? Why send them to this place when
\nthere are other places competing for their money?<\/p>\n
Foreign Minister Alexander Downer and Trade Minister Tim
\nFisher may have a difficult task in their damage control trips to
\nAsia, but Education Minister Amanda Vansione's job is certainly
\ntougher.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/australias-protracted-asean-teething-problems-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}