The paradigm shift of Australian foreign policy from reliance on security through ‘‘great and powerful friends’’ towards the formation and strengthening of diplomatic and cultural relations with the Asia-Pacific region began arguably under the Whitlam government and has since become the predominant focus of foreign policy for both major parties. As a result, there exists a latent similarity in the foreign policy of successive Australian governments across the last 40 years that becomes more pronounced when comparing them within their respective partisan delineations. Thus, the apparent similarity in the foreign policy of the Hawke-Keating and Rudd-Gillard governments is hardly surprising. However, the extent of this similarity is undermined by the significant differences in policy outcomes and domestic and international reception of both governments. This essay will characterize the approaches to foreign policy under the Hawke-Keating and Rudd-Gillard governments, then illustrate the extent to which the comparison of these governments is informed by an understanding of their respective contexts and thus ascertain what their comparative similarities and differences can be attributed to. It will conclude that the similarities between the foreign policy of Hawke-Keating and Rudd-Gillard are largely a result of the Labor preference towards middle power diplomacy as well as the Labor traditions underpinning the development of policy, whereas the disparities in both international security architecture and the domestic and international prominence of policy issues during both governments may explain the differences between them.
The foreign policy of the Hawke-Keating government was defined by an explicit cultivation of a regional ...
... middle of paper ...
...comes apparent again when considering the Government’s willingness to continue to deal with the issue of nuclear disarmament through the US-led deterrence model instead of adopting the more direct, activist response to nuclear disarmament advocated by the International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation. This conflict between ‘’pillars’’ is emblematic of a fundamental inconsistency within the foreign policy of the Rudd-Gillard government, exacerbated by an obstinate faith in an often-suboptimal multilateral approach.
The similarities between the foreign policy of the Hawke-Keating and the Rudd-Gillard governments stem primarily from the middle-power tradition that informs them both. However the promotion of Asian regionalism and the maintenance of Australia’s alliance with the US also feature prominently in the foreign policy doctrine of both governments.
Australia's federation came about through a process of deliberation, consultation and debate. Before 1901 Australia did not exist as a nation. It was six British colonies, which were self-governed, but under the power of the British Parliament. The colonies were almost like six separate countries. In the 1880s there was so much disorganisation within this system, which caused a belief that a national government was, needed to deal with issues such as trade, defence and immigration saw popular support for federation grow.
They have juggled power between them and Australia has emerged a powerful and intelligent nation under their leadership.
John Curtin, Prime Minister of Australia from 1941 – 1945, significantly supported the movement towards an Australian-American relationship. In his speech the Task Ahead, he states “Without any inhibitions of any kind, I make it quite clear that Australia looks to America, free of any pangs as to our traditional links or kinship with the United Kingdom.” This speech was supported by newspapers around the country, possibly showing bias, but it is unlikely that Curtin's statement had a major influence on the US military strategy. A close alliance between the two countries was inevitable, as they both shared the same goal - to defeat the Japanese (John.curtin.edu.au, n.d.; Australian Geographic, 2012) and control the Pacific. However, the effect of this statement on the Australian people can be seen in the newspapers from the time period. H.R Knickerbocker, states “It is the bounden duty of the U.S. to strain every nerve and every effort to ship to Australia today and tomorrow, every available fighter bomber and masses of army marines and navy” (Fall of Singapore: What it Means to Us, 1942, from nla.gov.au). This statement is a clear example of Australia’s new found reliance on the United States, showing how Australia has become dependent on the U.S providing it with resources and
After evaluating the above factors, it is clear that the partnership between Australia and Japan is of significant importance to both countries. With reference to the Centre for Study of Australian-Asian Relations (1997:152) the future prosperity of Australia will to an increasing extent, be dependent on that of her neighbours in the Asia-Pacific area. Currently the Australia-Japan relationship could be described as “comfortable and relaxed”. However both Australia and Japan need to be alert to the changing environment and must ensure that the right frameworks and policy settings are in place in order for the two countries to prosper.
Shadowing World War II, there was an amplified fear of communism in Australia. The influence of the threat of Communism in Australian local politics from 1945 to the 1950’s was very strong as you can see through Robert Menzies, the Petrov Affair, The fear of Ussr spies, the royal commission and the Alp split show relevant threats to the Australian Domestic politics by saying they are spies, traitors and liars.
Australia is a monarchy of the United Kingdom. It always has been, and yet this does not seem to have significantly and adversely affected our development and growth towards our country. Thus, there seems no legitimate purpose to change this; since a republican Australia displays a lack of conclusive benefits towards our economy and ‘way of life.’ An Australian republic would cost billions to undertake and is simply unnecessary as there are more important issues facing Australia; and if the Australian citizens are not calling for a referendum, then any serious discussions from politicians or other related public figures are irrelevant and meaningless.
MacDermott, D. (1993). As we see you. In D. Grant & G. Seal (Eds.), Australia in the world (pp. 86-91). Perth: Black Swan Press
...The fact that Australia publically sought America’s help angered Britain, but it was all that Australia could do seen as Britain let Singapore fall to the Japanese and did not given Australia suitable reinforcements to help with the growing pressure from the Japanese. It is shown throughout the war that the fall of Singapore damaged Australia’s relations with Britain, there are even cable grams of John Curtain telling Elsie Curtain how badly the relations with Britain and that he has a fight with Churchill almost every day (National Archives of Australia). Australia had always felt the threat of invasion in WWII but when Singapore fell it was almost certain. Australia moved further away from Britain when they publicly sought Americas help with the growing threat of a Japanese attack. None of this would have happened if Singapore had remained in British control.
House of Representatives. (1965, April 29). Retrieved March 16, 2014, from Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates: http://www.dva.gov.au/commems_oawg/commemorations/education/Documents/avw_topic1.pdf
A political debate derived from 1990’s that held the British colonists culpable for the beginning of the ‘history wars’ that many protagonists became involved in. ‘History wars’ is divided into two views, one being a conservative view that considered the European settlement to be an achievement of taming hostile land. The progressive view on the other hand, perceives the history to be a reminder of the invasion of their land, frontier violence and dispossession of Indigenous owners. John Howard who represented the liberal party was one of the main protagonists within this controversy, representing the conservative view. Paul Keating, the labor party representative became a legacy, a Keating legacy that began reconciliation evolving in practical and symbolic ways (Ke...
The labour party is the federal party which was run by Paul Keating at the time. The first Labour government originated in the 1890’s, they are currently the biggest party in Australia.
Pat Weller "Prime ministers" The Oxford Companion to Australian Politics. Ed Brian Galligan and Winsome Roberts. Oxford University Press 2008. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. Hillsborough CommunityCollege. 23June 2011 http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t250.e290
Wilkinson, Paul. 2007. International relations: A very short introduction. Oxford, GBR: Oxford University Press, UK.
Weber, Smith, Allan, Collins, Morgan and Entshami.2002. Foreign Policy in a transformed world. United Kingdom: Pearson Education Limited.
This essay analyses the Australian-China bilateral relationship since 1945 and in particular its political significance to Australia. Many global factors have influenced this relationship, including the advent of the Cold War, the Korean War, the Vietnam War and the collapse of the Soviet bloc European nations. In addition, internal political changes in Australia and China have both affected and been affected by the global changes. It will be analysed that Australia’s bilateral relationship with China has always had a sharp political edge but that approaching the new millenium economics and trade considerations are shaping Australias and for that matter Chinese politics.