GeoPod: The Geopolitics Podcast by Tenjin Consulting

This week on GeoPod, Tenjin Consulting's Alexander and Georgina Downer discuss the Quad or Quadrilateral Strategic Dialogue of Australia, India, Japan and the United States. 

The Quad leaders - Prime Ministers Scott Morrison, Narendra Modi and Yoshihide Suga and President Joe Biden - met for the first time on 12 March. This meeting is the single biggest foreign policy step that the US Administration has taken since it was inaugurated in January this year. And it's quite clear the meeting happened in response to China's aggressive and destabilising behavior over the last year.

But where did the Quad come from? It's an idea that has been brewing for years, and its precursor is the Trilateral Strategic Dialogue of Australia, Japan and the United States for which Alexander Downer claims paternity. 

Australia has a good record when it comes to developing regional architecture - Bob Hawke and the Koreans successfully proposed APEC in the 1980s, and the Howard Government made sure Australia was an inaugural member of the East Asia Summit. The Rudd Government's Asia Pacific Community fell flat, however.

So back to the Quad. The initiative rose and then fell in 2009 as Australia and India got cold feet in the face of Chinese criticism that it was an anti-China grouping. 

But now it seems, the Quad's time has come. The Quad leaders issued a Joint Statement which you can read here. The big takeout was the Quad Vaccine Partnership which will deliver Covid-19 vaccines to Southeast Asia and the Pacific as a counter to Beijing's vaccine diplomacy. The leaders also agreed to establish a Climate Working Group, and a Critical and Emerging Technologies Working Group to deal with supply chain issues. 

The fact that this meeting happened is significant enough, but watch this space for the momentum it will create and the coordinated actions of the members and other likemindeds over coming months and years to counter China's rise and aggression. 

This week on GeoPod, Tenjin Consulting's Alexander and Georgina Downer talk to former Australian Prime Minister the Hon John Howard AC. John Howard is Australia's second longest serving Prime Minister. Last week marked 25 years since the election of the Howard Government on 2 March 1996. The Howard Government oversaw significant changes in Australia - from responsible fiscal management, the introduction of the Goods and Services Tax, the move to a more modern workplace relations system, and the negotiation of a National Firearms Agreement in response to the Port Arthur massacre.

On foreign policy and defence, the Howard Government managed a strong US alliance which met the challenges following September 11 and the Bali bombings, while Australia's defence and security personnel brought peace and independence to East Timor and delivered greater stability within our region.

In this episode of GeoPod, we talk to Mr Howard about his observations of the type of people who choose a career in politics - a career he still feels is a noble profession. Labor has less MPs coming from the shop floor of trade unions, while the Liberal Party has more staffers. This isn't always a bad thing, but a mixture is important.  

We also talk to Mr Howard about his views on the media and its influence on government, the impact of social media (sadly, he's not on Twitter!) and cancel culture on society.

Finally, we discuss Mr Howard's views on the new Biden Administration and the Australian Government's handling of its bilateral relationship with China. 

This week on GeoPod, Tenjin Consulting's Alexander and Georgina Downer talk to Bridi Rice, the Director of Policy and Advocacy at the Australian Council for International Development, about the geopolitics of international development. 

Australia is a generous donor country. In the 2020-21 budget, Australia committed $4 billion to overseas development assistance. This funding was particularly focused on the Pacific and Southeast Asia, reflecting Australia's geography and areas of strategic interest. Another $408 million was earmarked for the Covid-19 response to help Pacific nations, Timor Leste and Southeast Asian nations vaccinate their populations and rebuild their economics.

Aid is an essential tool of statecraft for donor countries like Australia. Aid contributes to the soft power of the donor country but it also delivers economic, human and political development, as well as resilience to internal and external shocks.

The geopolitics of aid has never been more important for Australia. We have witnessed "chequebook diplomacy" in the Pacific where China and Taiwan trade aid for recognition. But Australia is not an innocent bystander when it comes to chequebook diplomacy. One only needs to look at the increase in Australian aid delivered to Latin America, the Caribbean and Africa during the period Australia was campaigning to secure a seat on the United Nations Security Council to understand this.

We ask Bridi to reflect on the 2014 merger of the former Australian aid agency, AusAid, with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and Australian attitudes to aid spending. Australian Government spending on aid has fallen to just 0.22% of Gross National Income at the same time as defence and intelligence budgets have increased. This has seen a securitisation of our international engagement at a time when international relations are more and more contested. Public sentiment is still in favour of aid and even more so now that the globe is dealing with the fallout of Covid-19.

This week on GeoPod Tenjin Consulting's Alexander and Georgina Downer discuss the recent military coup in Myanmar with Professor Nicholas Farrelly.

Nich is currently the Head of Social Sciences at the University of Tasmania and is one of Australia's leading experts on Myanmar. 

The military coup in Myanmar is a setback on the road to democracy for Myanmar. The country's de facto leader and national hero Aung San Suu Kyi has been arrested by the military, along with her cabinet and party members and advisors. 

But how did we get here? The military claimed last November's elections at which Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy party won in a landslide were fraudulent. There is no evidence of fraud but the hope is that the military will hold fresh elections within the next year to reestablish democracy once more in this country. 

The challenge for the military will be to counter the popularity of Aung San Suu Kyi, who is seen by many as a the mother of the nation. Her record as a leading democracy campaigner saw her awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991, although her defence of the Burmese military's genocidal campaign against the minority Rohingya people shocked the international community. She is an incredibly complicated international figure. 

How Western governments, ASEAN, and the international community handle the Myanmar issue will be key. It will also be an early test for the Biden Administration of its diplomatic skills. Alienating and sanctioning the Tatmadaw (Myanmar's military) comes with the risk of China's influence rising, although historical enmities mean that Burmese are naturally suspicious of China's intentions. ASEAN's role will be significant in shaping the military's pathway out of this crisis.

You can also read Alexander's view on Myanmar in his latest column for the Australian Financial Review.

This week on GeoPod, Tenjin Consulting's Alexander and Georgina Downer talk to the Centre for Independent Studies' Executive Director Tom Switzer about US politics and China.

Tom has been an observer of US politics and foreign policy for some 30 years so he knows his stuff. 

We discuss Tom's views on the new Biden Administration's  foreign policy team (pretty good) and the challenge for the US in overcoming many great obstacles: the Covid-19 pandemic which has killed 450,000 Americans, an economic crisis unparalleled since the Great Depression, racial and cultural tensions, and extreme political polarisation. Tom isn't optimistic that Biden can unite America, but Biden will be a lot more predictable than Trump. And that, in Tom's opinion, is a very good thing.

Are we experiencing the end of Pax Americana? Tom thinks its now on the "ash heap of history". China is exerting more and more influence in the Indo-Pacific region and many countries are skeptical that the US has what it takes to resume its global leadership position. 

China's President Xi Jinping gave an extraordinary speech at the virtual Davos summit in late January, calling for an open world economy where "differences" should be overcome "through dialogue".  Australian exporters of coal, barley, wine, beef, wood and lobsters can only wonder why this approach doesn't seem to apply to them.

On Trump's legacy, Tom observes that conservative leaders across the western world (Trump, Boris Johnson in the UK and Scott Morrison in Australia) have uniquely tapped into working class values, while shirking their usual economic conservative responsibilities. Trump's problem was that he never gave up his role as a political disruptor, and the Republicans, as a result, became a party of protest, not suited to government. Look out for another outsider to take over from Trump. 

This week on GeoPod, Tenjin Consulting's Alexander and Georgina Downer talk to Executive Director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute Peter Jennings PSM about Australian strategic policy, China and what to expect from the new Biden Administration. 

Peter is one of Australia's most influential voices when it comes to national and international security policy. He has served as a Deputy Secretary for Strategy in the Australian Defence Department and as Chief of Staff to the Minister for Defence in the 1990s. 

It is clear that Australia is dealing with a much more complex strategic environment than ever before. A rising and assertive China coupled with a more introverted United States means Australia's strategic decisions are much harder. 

According to Peter, the new Biden administration will be a welcome change from the previous four years. President Biden will seek and take advice from a group of smart and experienced foreign and defence policy professionals, who all served in the Obama Adminstrations. But the concern is the Biden team may not be as creative as they need to be to meet the demands of this new strategic situation and fall back into old habits and ideas. It will also take time for the US to convince the region that it is once again capable of real leadership.

Australia will need to do what it can to shape American thinking about how it engages with its allies. It is incumbent on the Australian bureaucracy to furnish the Government with ideas about how to approach the US, but unfortunately there is so far not much new policy thinking. The 70th anniversary of ANZUS presents a unique opportunity to recast and rejuvenate the Alliance. So we need new thinking, fast. 

Xi Jinping's China is much more confident in its capacity to seek strategic advantage and has over the past decade operated effectively in an opportunistic way. Its successes in the South China Sea and convincing some in the developing world that its model of authoritarian government is preferable to a liberal democratic one has given rise to overconfidence. This overconfidence may lead to extra risk taking (eg, on Taiwan) and the continuation of wolf warrior diplomacy which plays well to a domestic audience. 

While the Australian Government's approach to China has largely been correct when its made the hard decisions on 5G, foreign influence laws, foreign donations to political parties, and FIRB requirements, these decisions have come only after it had tried every other stupid approach first. What the Government must do, however, is bring the Australian public into its confidence on China, and clearly explain the strategic fundamentals behind these tough decisions.  

The Australian Government's decision to procure the shortfin barracuda submarines has been fraught with controversy. It was a mistake for the Government to pitch this decision as industry policy designed to boost the South Australian economy rather than as one of strategic benefit to the defence of the nation. Regardless, the Australian Government has no option but to make the current submarine plan work because to do anything else will add years and years to the project. 

This week on GeoPod, Tenjin Consulting's Alexander and Georgina Downer discuss the decision by Australia's Treasurer Josh Frydenberg to reject the sale of South African construction firm Probuild to Chinese investors. Is this "justified discrimination" as the US Studies Centre's John Lee argues? Or is China right that the Australian Government is "weaponising" national security to block Chinese investment into Australia? Regardless of who is right or wrong, it is becoming more and more difficult for Chinese investors in Australia to get a positive response from Australia's Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB). 

US President-elect Joe Biden's new Asia Tsar (aka Indo-Pacific Coordinator of the National Security Council) Kurt Campbell is a welcome appointment to the Biden Administration. He is well-known to Australia, is a fan of the Alliance, and wants to see balance in the region. China has called Campbell "Dr Containment" but he is no fan of a containment strategy against China. Before his post was announced he argued for an Indo-Pacific of balance and twenty-first century openness, not hegemony and nineteenth-century spheres of influence. Let's hope he's up to the task of delivering it.

After the attacks on the US Capitol and US President Donald Trump's role in inciting the violence, the Democrats in the US House used their numbers to impeach Trump. Things will now move to the Senate where a two thirds' majority is needed to convict Trump and prevent him from running for President again. Is this petty politics? What does this mean for Biden's pitch to be a healer of the nation, and building bridges with the more than 70 million Americans who voted for Trump? Might a conviction make a martyr out of Trump, and condemn the US to more years of political division. Let's hope partisanship can take a back seat in the US Capitol. Unlikely as that may seem.

In an effort to shore up relations in Southeast Asia prior to Biden's inauguration, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi visited Myanmar, Indonesia, Brunei and the Philippines. The visit was seen as an effort to boost China's soft power through vaccine diplomacy. Indonesia's President Joko Widodo was the first recipient in his country of China's Sinovac Covid-19 vaccine which was caught on live TV.  

But it is Israel who is leading the global vaccination race. So far the tiny country of 9 million people has vaccinated 25% of its population, with ambition to finish the job by March. Israel is keen to show the world the way out of Covid-19 through this vaccination drive. Let's hope it works. 

In this second season of GeoPod, Tenjin Consulting's Alexander and Georgina Downer discuss the crazy world of US politics and its impact on US soft power. 

US President Donald Trump's behaviour since the Presidential election on 4 November 2020 has been abysmal. Behaving like a spoilt child, he cruelled the Republican Party's chances of holding the two Senate seats in Georgia, thereby denying the Republicans control of the Senate. His incitement to violence of his supporters to prevent the US Congress certifying the electoral college nomination of Joe Biden as the next US President was the final nail in the coffin for this historically controversial US President.

But will US soft power throughout the world suffer a fatal blow? Arguably, the US has weathered worse or similar bouts of behaviour and still is the country with the most significant amount of soft power. And this is likely to continue irrespective of Trump and his legacy. 

For China, 2020 was an annus horribilis: its Covid-19 response saw China's soft power plunge dramatically. But things could have been so very different if China had used Covid-19 as an opportunity to take up the mantle of global leader in this health emergency. Small trends are emerging that China is recalibrating its approach but we need to see much more to call it a change in strategy. 

The only certainty for 2021 is that this will be a year of uncertainty. But Covid-19 vaccines will be rolled out and help deal with the global pandemic, albeit slower and less dramatically than we would all like. 

Germany's Chancellor Angela Merkel will step down this year after 16 years in office. Perhaps her Health Minister will take over but if so he will have big big shoes to fill. 

Scotland will hold legislative elections which are likely to put First Minister Nicola Sturgeon in an even stronger position but it's unlikely UK PM Boris Johnson will allow her a second independence referendum for Scotland. She might find another way though through the courts.

Iran will hold presidential elections but the US will likely not renegotiate the deal with Iran that Trump tore up four years ago. This will be a tough decision for the incoming Biden Administration.

And China. China might recalibrate and tone down its wolf warrior diplomats. If not, 2021 will be another rocky ride for the world.

This week on GeoPod, Tenjin Consulting's Alexander Downer and Georgina Downer talk to Grain Growers Chair Brett Hosking about the Australia-China barley dispute. 

While the story of 2020 will undoubtedly be the the Covid-19 pandemic, for Australia it's also a story of the deteriorating relationship with China and its economic fallout. China has targeted a range of imports from Australia in retaliation for the Australian Government's decisions relating to foreign interference, Huawei, an independent inquiry into Covid-19, the US alliance, statements on Hong Kong, the South China Sea and human rights to name but a few.

Australian exporters of beef, wine, lobster, sugar, timber, copper, coal, and barley have born the brunt of the biggest geopolitical story of our generation. The rise of an increasingly assertive Xi Jinping-led China. China is trying to make Australia the salutary tale for other countries who may seek to challenge China's interests. 

For barley, the story begins in 2018 when China launched an investigation into allegations that Australia was dumping barley into the Chinese market and that Australia farmers were being subsidised in violation of WTO rules. China then placed a 80.5 per cent tariff on Australian barley, effectively blocking $500 million per annum in barley exports. This decision took place at the same time as Australia decided to ban Huawei from supplying equipment to Australia's 5G network.

On 16 December 2020, Australia's Trade Minister Simon Birmingham announced Australia would take action in the World Trade Organization (WTO) over China's imposition of anti-dumping and countervailing duties on barley.

The WTO process is not quick. There is no doubt that this dispute will take several years to settle. In the meantime, barley growers will need to find other markets or plant different crops or both. But, the future is still bright. As Brett says, the dispute with China is nothing compared to dealing with a crippling drought. Australian grain growers are used to working in the world's toughest conditions. When one market closes, others will open. And maybe, just maybe, the China market will open back up sooner rather than later. 

Finally, Merry Christmas from the team at Tenjin Consulting!

With negotiations between the UK and the EU for a trade agreement in the final (yes really final this time) stages, Tenjin Consulting's Alexander Downer and Georgina Downer look back at the history of the EU and Britain's entry to and now exit from it. 

In the aftermath of WWII, Britain was victorious with its centuries old institutions still intact. The situation for continental Europe couldn't have been more different. All countries bar Sweden had to rewrite their constitutions and rebuild their systems of governance.

This context provided the inspiration to create a United States of Europe. The aspiration was to prevent future wars through European economic integration. Frenchmen Jean Monnet and Robert Schuman (a former French Prime Minister and Christian Democrat) developed the Schuman Plan out of which came the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). Their view was that giving control over coal and steel production in Europe to a ‘common High Authority’ would prevent any one European power from developing armaments and the Continent descending once again into war.

In 1951, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Italy and Luxembourg signed the Treaty of Paris which established the ECSC, the precursor to the Common Market. However, Britain’s Labour Prime Minister, Clement Attlee, firmly declined to join stating that ‘we should not commit ourselves irrevocably to Europe, either in the political or in the economic sphere’.

The break up of British Empire and the decline of UK manufacturing of 1950s heralded a lengthy period of economic suffering for the UK. Looking over to a much more prosperous Europe, in 1961 UK Prime Minister Harold McMillan made a request for the UK to join the EEC. He was rebuffed. French President General De Gaulle led the charge against Britain's EEC membership reasoning:

England in effect is insular, she is maritime, she is linked through her interactions, her markets and her supply lines to the most diverse and often the most distant countries; she pursues essentially industrial and commercial activities, and only slight agricultural ones. She has, in all her doings, very marked and very original habits and traditions. In short, the nature, structure and economic context of [Britain] differ profoundly from those of the other States of the Continent.

By 1971, the UK was still in the economic doldrums. France and Germany had overtaken the UK economy, and the UK's per capita GDP was half that of its EEC counterparts. As then-Prime Minister Ted Heath put it in 1971, ‘For 25 years we’ve been looking for something to get us going again. Now here it is.’

It was the promise of economic prosperity – not political union – that formed the basis of Heath’s sell to Britons to join Europe. And so, with a change in French President to the more UK-friendly Georges Pompidou, in 1973 Heath led Britain into the EEC. 

Joining EEC was the death knell for the UK’s cheap tariff free imports from the Commonwealth, including Australia. The UK-Australia Trade Agreement was cancelled in 1973 and Australia’s exports of beef, sheep meat and dairy particularly suffered. Australian exporters had to look to new markets such as the United States and Asia as the EEC closed the way to British consumers. Britain’s Commonwealth ties were truly frayed.

Over the years, the EU morphed into a supranational government, a federation of EU members states, each giving up more and more of their sovereignty to EU officials. 2009 marked a resurgence of Eurosceptism in UK with the twin crises of immigration and the Eurozone hitting the bloc.

By 2013, UK Prime Minister David Cameron pledged to renegotiate the UK's relationship with the EU and hold referendum to settle question of membership once and for all as he identified that Britons ‘feel that the EU is heading in a direction that they never signed up to”.

The result on the 23 June 2016 was clear: the UK would leave the EU. The UK did this on 1 January 2020, with a 1 year transition period during which it has been negotiating a trade deal with the EU.

While it looks like both sides will negotiate the trade deal until 30 December, the issues that remain (power over fishing waters and the setting of domestic standards) cut to the very core of the UK's sovereignty and the two sides remain far apart. No deal Brexit is still very much a possibility.