Paper envisages Australia into next century

By Richard Woolcott

CANBERRA: The Australian government's first ever white paper on foreign and trade policy, tabled in the Federal Parliament in August, signposts the direction of Australian policies into the 21st century. It was a timely and useful, if somewhat cautious, road map for Australia's future.

Grown as a result of an election commitment, the white paper has been in gestation for over a year. Following the last election, a 17-person advisory panel was formed to move it along.

The paper was redrafted a number of times and finally approved by Prime Minister Howard and the cabinet earlier this month. So, at the end of the process, it represented the government's reference point for the conduct of Australian foreign and trade policy.

It gave the Howard government a welcome opportunity to reassert to East Asian nations that it is in this region where it sees Australia's future (given a perception in some countries that the Howard government was retreating from engagement with Asia).

The paper argues that while Australia has global interests, it must set priorities. It reasserts that the Asia-Pacific region is the "region of highest foreign and trade policy priority". Within this region the key relationships are identified as those with Japan, China, Indonesia and the United States. The paper notes that "significant Australian interests are also engaged" in our relationship with Korea, the other ASEAN countries and, in the South Pacific, with New Zealand and Papua New Guinea.

India which will be among the world's 10 largest economies by 2010, is also seen as a rising influence in regional and global affairs to which Australia should pay more attention.

Australia should also forge ahead with trade liberalization through APEC and the World Trade Organization, within a broad framework in the pursuit of a secure and more prosperous Australia.

Cynics may ask, so what? There is nothing new in this. It is true that Australian foreign and trade policy has been largely bipartisan for some years and that makes it harder for an incoming government to differentiate its policies from its predecessor. Australia's national interests, however, do not change when there is a change of government. Continuity of sound policies is therefore important; but there are also changes.

The Howard government is placing more emphasis on what it regards as Australia's national interests (indeed the title of the paper is In the National Interest) and on bilateral realism, rather than on multilateral idealism. This shift is reflected in the lessening of interest in the United Nations (accelerated by Australia's failure to gain a seat in the Security Council last year), a different -- and in my opinion -- a more productive approach to human rights issues, and the present policy on global warming and CO emissions.

The paper correctly identifies the two most profound influences on Australia over the next 15 years as the impact of the changing relativities of power and influence (which flow from the economic upsurge of East Asia), and the globalization of the international economy.

The white paper does not enter the sterile debate on whether or not Australia is an Asian country or part of Asia. Instead, it focuses on what is the real issue, namely that Australia is increasingly and comprehensively engaged with East Asia in security, economic, political and cultural terms and that this engagement will grow.

In the wake of the Pauline Hanson aberration and the publicity the small One Nation movement has attracted overseas, the white paper has provided the government with a timely opportunity to state categorically that "an unqualified commitment to racial equality and to the elimination of racial discrimination" is a "non-negotiable tenet of Australia's national cohesion" which "must remain a guiding principle of Australia's international behavior".

This is important. For many years our links with Asia were inhibited by the discredited and discarded White Australia Policy. It would be tragic if some recrudescence of bigotry and racism, even in a small section of our community, were to lead to Australia being less than fully welcomed and involved in the institutions of the region.

Some critics will say the paper is a little short on vision. It is always difficult to look 15 years ahead and prediction is often a hostage to fortune. The paper envisions a unified and more influential Korea by 2012, Islam as a greater force in the world (including in our own region), and Australia as a republic.

Momentum toward a republic may have slowed, but I believe Australia will be a republic within the time frame of the white paper. The republic issue is not simply a constitutional issue. Like the Sydney 2000 Olympics, the declaration of a republic would provide a unique opportunity to reposition Australia in terms of international perceptions and it is regrettable that not even a passing reference is made to it in the paper.

The republic has important practical and symbolic foreign and trade policy advantages for Australia and it would have been forward looking to acknowledge this. Our own head of state would not only remove lingering confusion about our identity and constitutional status in Asia, it would also provide a much more authentic representative for Australian businesses and exporters than the governor general, who is the representative of the queen.

While she is also Queen of Australia, there can be no doubt that it is the policy of the British government to use the royal family to promote British and not Australian business and exports when they are competing for markets.

The white paper recognizes that, although situated in the Southeast Asian and the Southwest Pacific region, Australia, as a trading nation, has global interests. Turning our faces to the East does not mean turning our backs to the West. Our close relationships with the United States and the strengthening of our relationships with the main countries of East Asia are not seen as contradictory objectives. Rather, they are regarded as mutually reinforcing.

The paper suggests the government will focus on its core policies toward China and Indonesia -- namely the one-China policy and the promotion of a stable, united and prosperous Indonesia. It is unambiguous about the overriding importance of these relationships to Australia and will, presumably, be less likely to allow itself to be distracted by peripheral issues generated by the anti-China and anti-Indonesia lobbies than it was during the government's early months in office.

There is a confident tone about the paper. This is appropriate. While we readily extol the achievements of our sporting heroes and heroines we are often reticent about our economic, strategic and cultural strengths and our capacity to influence events in the Asia-Pacific region. At the same time, the paper recognizes the danger of complacency and inertia in the face of an increasingly competitive global trading and investment climate. As the countries of East Asia grow, our relative standing could decline unless we work hard to avoid this.

Following Australia's recent US$1 billion contribution to the IMF Thailand rescue package, the white paper's strong reaffirmation of engagement with East Asia as the government's highest priority is clearly more than rhetoric. We cannot now be said to be retreating from Asian engagement. East Asia is not just a marketplace for us but a neighborhood.

The main message Australians and leaders in Asia should draw from the white paper is that, far from retreating from Asia, Australia's engagement will continue to grow. The case for Australia's involvement with East Asian institutions, including the Asia-Europe Meetings, has been reinforced.

The foreign policy of Australia should be focused on Australian interests -- namely, developments that can affect the lives and jobs of Australian citizens. The paper asserts this clearly.

The paper argues that Australia's trade strategies should focus on a mix of bilateral efforts, the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation and the WTO. It also foreshadows closer links between Australia's economic relations agreement with New Zealand and the ASEAN Free Trade Area. By implication, the idea of joining the North American Free Trade Area -- not mentioned in the paper -- has been rejected, as it should be.

It is important that more Australians understand the critical choices they face in securing our future in the world of the 21st century. The white paper outlines the course Australia must follow and, if widely disseminated and accepted in the community, it will make a necessary contribution to the public support on which, in a democracy, foreign and trade policies ultimately depend.

The writer, a former secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and at present director of the Austral Asia Center of the Asia Society, was a member of the White Paper Advisory Panel. He is also a former ambassador to Indonesia.

-- The Australian

Window: The paper argues that while Australia has global interests, it must set priorities. It reasserts that the Asia-Pacific region is the "region of highest foreign and trade policy priority".