President Trump and Australia’s National Security
Jan 18, 2025
Australia needs to try and persuade the Trump Administration that no country can expect to dominate our region and the benefits of cooperation. But if, as is likely, Trump refuses to accept a multipolar region then Australia must be prepared to act on its own and seek its security within Asia.
Australia’s strategic dilemma
For a very long time Australia has depended upon China for its economic security and the US for its international security.
China is our most important export market, accounting for 32.3 per cent of our total exports of goods and service in 2023-24; that is more than the combined value of the four next most important markets. Indeed, our exports to a relatively buoyant Chinese market was a major reason why Australia was one of the few countries to avoid a recession at the time of the global financial crisis back in 2008.
But equally important, ever since the fall of Singapore during the Second World War, Australia has turned to America for its international protection. As the late Allan Gyngell, eloquently put it, as a European settlement on the fringe of Asia, Australia has a long-standing fear of abandonment and having to stand on its own.
During the years of the Hawke-Keating governments, Australia did try to develop an independent defence capability, while still maintaining the American alliance through ANZUS. Furthermore, John Howard when he was Prime Minister, memorably said that we should avoid having to choose between China and America, the two major powers in our region.
From the early 1980s onwards, following the reforms to the Chinese economy initiated by Deng Xiaoping, the developed capitalist economies generally welcomed the advance of China, assisting its membership of key international organisations, such as the WTO. But that changed after the Chinese economy grew to the point where by 2016 it was as big as the American economy. Early on in his first Presidency Trump increased tariffs in an attempt to limit Chinese economic growth and power.
Later Australia’s Prime Minister, Morrison, presumably trying to ingratiate himself with the first Trump Administration, needlessly called China out alleging that the initiation and spread of the Covid virus was all China’s fault. In effect, Australia did then choose between America and China, and not surprisingly China retaliated and cut its imports from Australia substantially.
While the Albanese Government can claim considerable credit for restoring our relations and thus our exports to China, the Government has yet to face up to the contradiction between our foreign policy and our defence policy. The Foreign Minister, Penny Wong, clearly recognises that we are living in a multipolar world where no country dominates, but the defence policy ties us to an alliance partner that doesn’t and instead is seeking to resist a multipolar world.
As the former Secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Peter Varghese, has observed our defence policy “is increasingly fixed around doing what we can to ensure the retention of US strategic primacy. That includes, it would seem, aligning our force posture to fit into the overarching US strategic objective, which is to deny China primacy by doubling down on US primacy.”
This is the antithesis of Paul Keating’s dictum that we should seek to find our security in Asia rather than from Asia. But how best can we secure Australia’s future in Asia?
A secure future for Australia within Asia
There is widespread agreement among the member states of the Indo-Pacific region that both the future economic security and strategic security of all members will depend upon acceptance that while China and the US will be the most powerful countries, neither should be able to dominate.
That in turn means that we want the US to remain and not withdraw back into its own hemisphere. There is general acceptance by all the countries in the region that we need US leadership to help balance China’s power and assertiveness. As Varghese puts it: “Without the US there can be no effective balancing of China”, but as Varghese also points out “There is a difference between US leadership and US primacy”.
In this context, Australia can play a positive role in securing the necessary future regional architecture.
First, we should not try to form any alliance against China, not least because our Asian neighbours will not agree, and we would further damage our credibility. Australia (and the US) needs to understand that attempts to contain China are likely to be rejected by China and produce a negative reaction, just like the US would equally react negatively if it were subject to hostile containment measures. In addition, it is likely that any such containment initiative would come at considerable economic cost to Australia in particular.
Instead, we should work with other neighbouring countries to try and secure a new set of protocols governing how all countries in the region can live together in the region in future. Australia should support and try to influence, in its own interests, the rules and norms that will determine the standards of behaviour that states generally find acceptable.
This is critical if we are to secure our future in Asia and not from it. Furthermore, Australia is quite well positioned and has the ability to make a significant contribution. In particular, Australia is best placed to engage with the US and seek its acceptance of this rules-based order for our region.
Furthermore, if we do not take the lead in improving the protocols governing future relations in the region and their supporting institutions we may find that they occur anyway and that we are by-passed. For example, at present, both the IMF and the World Bank do not reflect China’s importance in their governance and decision making. Now China is encouraging the development of alternative arrangements, such as BRICS and our neighbours are starting to join these alternatives.
Our ambition must be to preserve a multipolar system of international governance for the region. Our best chance is to influence America’s approach to the region. But as Hugh White has said, “we cannot do that so long as our unconditional support sends the unmistakable message that we are perfectly happy as it is.”
The return of Donald Trump
But of course, achieving acceptance of a set of protocols to support a multipolar region where no country dominates, and no country is dominated, will not be easy, especially getting the agreement of the US now that Trump is President.
Trump was elected on the promise that he will pursue the primacy of the US more than ever. Indeed, he has recently asserted the right of the US to take over by force if necessary the Panama Canal and Greenland and suggested that Canada should become the 51st state of the US; all in the pursuit of US supremacy.
In addition, Trump’s instincts are to be confrontational in dealing with the rest of the world, and consistent with MAGA, he is determined to maintain America’s primacy, and tariffs are the most beautiful word in the dictionary.
But if necessary, Australia must stand up to Trump in the interests of its own security which cannot be fundamentally dependent on America anymore. Australia should do its best to persuade the Trump Administration that it is in America’s interests to accept that China is an equally powerful neighbour that isn’t going to go away, and that there are major benefits from restoring the necessary protocols that allow peaceful cooperation in our region and where America would continue to have a major leadership role.
However, while the region is better served by America’s engagement, if it proves impossible to get Trump’s support, then really Australia has no choice but to pursue its own security by cooperation with our Asian neighbours. Fortunately, Albanese seems inclined to agree. He recently made it clear that he will not change Australia’s policy on China and that “we believe in free trade, not protectionism.”
Nevertheless, some will no doubt argue that Australia cannot afford to detach itself from America because of our dependence on the US for our future defence capability, and especially the AUKUS nuclear submarines. While I agree that Australia does need its own nuclear submarine capability, as the former commander of Australia’s submarine fleet, Peter Briggs, has pointed out in an article in The Strategist (5 Dec 2024), the difficulties that are emerging with the present AUKUS SSN plan are such that Australia would be better off commencing “a joint Franco-Australian construction program for a greater number of submarines of the Suffren class, a design that is already in service with the French navy.”
Furthermore, we need to recognise that if Trump refuses to agree to a cooperative regional architecture, then the most probable outcome would be American withdrawal back into its own region, and Australia’s alliance with America would be of dubious value anyway.
In sum, Australia should engage with all countries in the region with a view go improving the governing architecture and relationships. However, if America refuses to thus engage under Trump then Australia’s priority must be to engage positively with our region.