The Australian government regularly expresses concern about territorial disputes in the South China Sea and China’s militarisation of disputed features there. But what is the Australian government doing about it, and has it been effective?

Andrew Chubb, Postdoctoral Fellow in the Columbia-Harvard China and the World Program, and Fellow of the Perth USAsia Centre, joins Simone van Nieuwenhuizen, Project and Research Officer at the Australia-China Relations Institute (ACRI) at the University of Technology Sydney, to discuss his recent policy brief for China Matters, 'Is there a problem with Australia’s South China Sea policy?'

When Australia talks about China, the China Opportunity and the China Challenge forms part of the discourse. The China Opportunity reflects the enormous economic benefits that Australia already derives from its $184 billion trade relationship with China. The China Challenge reflects the reality that as China has risen in wealth and power, some of its behaviour has conflicted with Australia’s interests. These narratives are grounded in facts and evidence. However, in the last 18 months the discourses of China Threat, China Angst and China Panic – which are less evidence-based – have become more prevalent.

James Laurenceson, Deputy Director of the Australia-China Relations Institute (ACRI) at the University of Technology Sydney, joins host Bob Carr, Director of ACRI, to discuss the key findings of his new ACRI research report, ‘Do the claims stack up? Australia talks China’. The report examines recent Australian media discourse about China and assesses the evidence base for various claims made about China and Chinese influence and interference in Australia.

When Australia talks about China, the China Opportunity and the China Challenge forms part of the discourse. The China Opportunity reflects the enormous economic benefits that Australia already derives from its $184 billion trade relationship with China. The China Challenge reflects the reality that as China has risen in wealth and power, some of its behaviour has conflicted with Australia’s interests. These narratives are grounded in facts and evidence. However, in the last 18 months the discourses of China Threat, China Angst and China Panic – which are less evidence-based – have become more prevalent.

James Laurenceson, Deputy Director of the Australia-China Relations Institute (ACRI) at the University of Technology Sydney, joins host Bob Carr, Director of ACRI, to discuss the key findings of his new ACRI research report, ‘Do the claims stack up? Australia talks China’. The report examines recent Australian media discourse about China and assesses the evidence base for various claims made about China and Chinese influence and interference in Australia.

Russia-China relations have a complex history. Recently, with the Trump administration’s hardening China policy, often contradictory Russia policy, and perceived abandonment of US allies and partners, Russia and China appear closer than ever.

Where do their interests converge and diverge? Is their relationship characterised by ‘strategic intimacy’, ‘soft competition’, or both?

Alexey Muraviev, Associate Professor of National Security and Strategic Studies at Curtin University, joins Bob Carr, Director of the Australia-China Relations Institute (ACRI) at the University of Technology Sydney to discuss the development of Russia-China relations and the implications for the Indo-Pacific region.

Russia-China relations have a complex history. Recently, with the Trump administration’s hardening China policy, often contradictory Russia policy, and perceived abandonment of US allies and partners, Russia and China appear closer than ever.

Where do their interests converge and diverge? Is their relationship characterised by ‘strategic intimacy’, ‘soft competition’, or both?

Alexey Muraviev, Associate Professor of National Security and Strategic Studies at Curtin University, joins Bob Carr, Director of the Australia-China Relations Institute (ACRI) at the University of Technology Sydney to discuss the development of Russia-China relations and the implications for the Indo-Pacific region.

In Australia, discussion of the current state and future of the international order is thriving. This discussion has been precipitated by the People’s Republic of China (PRC)’s growing economic and political importance, as well as questions surrounding US commitment to the existing order.

How do the Australian and PRC governments understand the international order? What terms do they use to describe and explain it? How do they view their own roles and the roles of other actors within the international order?

Simone van Nieuwenhuizen, Project and Research Officer at the Australia-China Relations Institute (ACRI) at the University of Technology Sydney, discusses her latest research into Australian and PRC government conceptions of the international order, with Elena Collinson, Senior Project and Research Officer at ACRI.

In Australia, discussion of the current state and future of the international order is thriving. This discussion has been precipitated by the People’s Republic of China (PRC)’s growing economic and political importance, as well as questions surrounding US commitment to the existing order.

How do the Australian and PRC governments understand the international order? What terms do they use to describe and explain it? How do they view their own roles and the roles of other actors within the international order?

Simone van Nieuwenhuizen, Project and Research Officer at the Australia-China Relations Institute (ACRI) at the University of Technology Sydney, discusses her latest research into Australian and PRC government conceptions of the international order, with Elena Collinson, Senior Project and Research Officer at ACRI.

While the Asia-Pacific region has well-developed institutional infrastructure, its physical infrastructure lags behind. This constrains economic integration and undermines development efforts. China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), as well as infrastructure initiatives introduced by other countries, seek to fill these gaps.

How has the Australian government approached regional infrastructure initiatives? How have Australia’s partners responded to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)? How might Australia engage with the BRI coherently and in the national interest? How could the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) facilitate this engagement?

Jeffrey Wilson, an academic, policy analyst and consultant and the Head of Research at the Perth USAsia Centre, joins James Laurenceson, Deputy Director of the Australia-China Relations Institute (ACRI) at the University of Technology Sydney to discuss the key findings of his recent ACRI research report, ‘Connecting the Asia-Pacific: Australian participation in China’s regional infrastructure activities’.

While the Asia-Pacific region has well-developed institutional infrastructure, its physical infrastructure lags behind. This constrains economic integration and undermines development efforts. China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), as well as infrastructure initiatives introduced by other countries, seek to fill these gaps.

How has the Australian government approached regional infrastructure initiatives? How have Australia’s partners responded to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)? How might Australia engage with the BRI coherently and in the national interest? How could the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) facilitate this engagement?

Jeffrey Wilson, an academic, policy analyst and consultant and the Head of Research at the Perth USAsia Centre, joins James Laurenceson, Deputy Director of the Australia-China Relations Institute (ACRI) at the University of Technology Sydney to discuss the key findings of his recent ACRI research report, ‘Connecting the Asia-Pacific: Australian participation in China’s regional infrastructure activities’.

Australia faces an international environment unlike any it has faced since becoming an independent foreign policy player in the 1940s. The economic and political rise of China, uncertainty about US leadership and power, and concerns regarding the sustainability of existing institutions have resulted in a sense of anxiety.

Have Australia’s responses to the changing world order been effective? Is it possible for these changes to be turned into opportunities? What are the dominant discourses on Australia’s foreign policy orientation?

Nick Bisley, head of Humanities and Social Sciences and Professor of International Relations at La Trobe University, joins Simone van Nieuwenhuizen, researcher at the Australia-China Relations Institute (ACRI) at the University of Technology Sydney to discuss how Australian policymakers and scholars are responding to the changing world order.