Asia fears Rudd's China fixation

[1947]

KEVIN Rudd's China obsession has alarmed strategic leaders in India, Japan and Southeast Asia, who believe Australian foreign policy is becoming unbalanced and Sino-centric.

The Mandarin-speaking Prime Minister says foreign policy, especially on Asia, is his strength.

However, many regional figures indicate he faces a problem with the rest of Asia in the perception that he is focused on China and as a result has an unbalanced view of Asia.

Some US strategic thinkers privately criticise the way the Rudd Government unilaterally cancelled the Quadrilateral Dialogue involving the US, Japan, India and China.

Mike Green, former Asia director at the US National Security Council in George W.Bush's first administration, told The Weekend Australian this caused the Japanese to "lose face".

Mr Green said he believed the talks were cancelled to please China and that in opposing the dialogue, Beijing "pounded on the smallest power, Australia, the hardest". But Mr Green said the Prime Minister "knows China and is solidly committed to a strong US-Australia alliance".

US criticism of Mr Rudd is tempered by his support of the US-Australia alliance and by the courage he demonstrated in criticising Beijing during last month's visit to China, over human rights abuses in Tibet.

But retired Indian diplomat G. Partharasathy, now an author and foreign affairs commentator, said: "We get the impression that Australian policy is becoming increasingly Sino-centric".

"It is a feature of Chinese policy to keep India and America out and Australia seems to endorse this policy," he added.

He questioned Canberra's decision to announce the end of the Quadrilateral Dialogue process: "Firstly, this was an initiative of the Japanese. Nobody forced Australia to join.

"Australia joined. Surely a process of dialogue should have been followed with the dialogue partners. Just to kowtow to the Chinese and pander to their sentiment, the Australian Government unilaterally announced its withdrawal. But where is the harm in a dialogue, a dialogue of democracies?"

B. Raman, a former secretary of the Indian cabinet secretariat, accused Mr Rudd of wanting to keep India as a second-tier power that could never aspire to equal status with China.

Writing in Outlook magazine, he contrasted Mr Rudd's desire to expand the six-party talks - which involve the US, China, Japan, Russia and North and South Korea - to include Australia, with his determination to shut down the Quads process.

He characterised Mr Rudd's speeches on his tour as: "China, China, China, China and more of China was the recurring theme."

This widespread Indian perception will be a significant obstacle to the stated desire of Mr Rudd and Foreign Minister Stephen Smith to enhance ties with New Delhi.

And as he prepares for his first trip as Prime Minister to Japan next month, Mr Rudd faces a more polite but similar perception problem in Tokyo, traditionally Australia's closest Asian partner.
Asia fears Rudd's China fixation | The Australian

[1947]

is australia or the fed govt at least getting to cosy with beijing?
i personally believe aust could use the resource export to guide china to achieve democracy and cut down on the rhetoric

[Ray]

By getting cosy with China, it will enhance the trade and thus the boost the economy.

It may appear that it will neutralise China's "Look South" strategy, but then the Chinese are known to keep economy and her strategic interest separate and Rudd maybe in for a big shock!

[1947]

By getting cosy with China, it will enhance the trade and thus the boost the economy.

It may appear that it will neutralise China's "Look South" strategy, but then the Chinese are known to keep economy and her strategic interest separate and Rudd maybe in for a big shock!

i meant too cosy

[1947]

our beloved PM left japan out of his international tour last month and refuses to supply india with uranium until the NPT is signed.
Given his qualifications as a diplomat and spending a lot of time in china as one people are a bit scared of his pro china behavior recently not that its wrong but that we might me getting a bit too close to be comfortable

[xunil]

How close can be. He just visited China.

[Bigfella]

I made the mistake of reading this article before I checked the source. Should have saved myself the time.

The article appeared in 'The Australian', a newspaper whose slide from respected conservative daily to second rate conservative propaganda rag has been one of the saddest features of the Australian media over the past decade.

The author, Greg Sheridan, shed all pretence of balanced analysis some time ago. He is best know as Australia's most vocal apologist for the murderous & brutal Soeharto Regime. Indeed, his biggest break with his conservative political patrons was when John Howard intervened to help save East Timorese from rampaging Indonesian-backed militias. Since then Greg has kissed (and kissed and kissed - mostly arse) and made up. He is an experienced foreign affairs commentator, but not one with a shred of credibility.

As for Rudd & China, the man criticised China's behaviour in Tibet while IN BEIJING. How many world leaders have managed this? When China kept insisting their tracksuited thugs surround the Olympic Torch, Rudd backed our police to take care of security, unlike some other nations. He is meeting with Japan's PM twice this year. The issue of selling uranium to India is a Uranium issue, not an India issue. As for multilateral meetings, lets wait a bit more than 6 months before we decide where Rudd is going with this. Indeed, for all this flak, nothing Rudd has done is remotely as craven a kowtow to Beijing as the previous government's abandonment of the 'no comment' posture on the issue of a Chinese attack on Taiwan, yet the likes of Sheridan were hardly shouting the odds about this.

In addition to improving relations with China while simultaneously calling it on human rights, Rudd has: kept the US alliance strong despite pulling our troops out of Iraq; been the first Australian leader to address NATO; brought Australia into line with the world on the Kyoto Protocol; restored battered relations our Pacific neighbours. He even made the top 10 in Time's 100 most influential people.

It is little wonder that conservatives like Sheridan are livid - their departed hero crippled our international credibility at a vital time by expressing a desire to be America's 'Deputy Sherrif' in the region, and then spending years acting as if he meant it. Rudd has achieved more overseas in 6 months than Howard did in a decade. The region should worry less & have a little faith. Greg Sheridan should stop pretending he is conducting 'analysis' and just admit it is propaganda.

[Oscar]

In any case no more "assistant sheriff". The relations with the US will be more balanced and the concerns about Rudd's apparent sinophilia is just another sign of China's growing influence in the Pacific area.

[nebula82]

In any case no more "assistant sheriff". The relations with the US will be more balanced and the concerns about Rudd's apparent sinophilia is just another sign of China's growing influence in the Pacific area.

Australia’s foreign policy will always be US-centric, that’s not going to change.

China’s growing influence in Asia and the Pacific does balance things, & I think that can only be a good thing (ditto India).

When Shinzo Abe came to power his first overseas visit was to China & not customarily to the US. Why? Probably has something to do with the fact that China is Japan’s largest trading partner & various other similar reasons.

There’s no reason to worry about closer Australia-China ties & besides the relationship is purely economical in nature.

Regards,
Nebula82.

[UnderSpin]

I made the mistake of reading this article before I checked the source. Should have saved myself the time.

The article appeared in 'The Australian', a newspaper whose slide from respected conservative daily to second rate conservative propaganda rag has been one of the saddest features of the Australian media over the past decade.

The author, Greg Sheridan, shed all pretence of balanced analysis some time ago. He is best know as Australia's most vocal apologist for the murderous & brutal Soeharto Regime. Indeed, his biggest break with his conservative political patrons was when John Howard intervened to help save East Timorese from rampaging Indonesian-backed militias. Since then Greg has kissed (and kissed and kissed - mostly arse) and made up. He is an experienced foreign affairs commentator, but not one with a shred of credibility.

As for Rudd & China, the man criticised China's behaviour in Tibet while IN BEIJING. How many world leaders have managed this? When China kept insisting their tracksuited thugs surround the Olympic Torch, Rudd backed our police to take care of security, unlike some other nations. He is meeting with Japan's PM twice this year. The issue of selling uranium to India is a Uranium issue, not an India issue. As for multilateral meetings, lets wait a bit more than 6 months before we decide where Rudd is going with this. Indeed, for all this flak, nothing Rudd has done is remotely as craven a kowtow to Beijing as the previous government's abandonment of the 'no comment' posture on the issue of a Chinese attack on Taiwan, yet the likes of Sheridan were hardly shouting the odds about this.

In addition to improving relations with China while simultaneously calling it on human rights, Rudd has: kept the US alliance strong despite pulling our troops out of Iraq; been the first Australian leader to address NATO; brought Australia into line with the world on the Kyoto Protocol; restored battered relations our Pacific neighbours. He even made the top 10 in Time's 100 most influential people.

It is little wonder that conservatives like Sheridan are livid - their departed hero crippled our international credibility at a vital time by expressing a desire to be America's 'Deputy Sherrif' in the region, and then spending years acting as if he meant it. Rudd has achieved more overseas in 6 months than Howard did in a decade. The region should worry less & have a little faith. Greg Sheridan should stop pretending he is conducting 'analysis' and just admit it is propaganda.

Great comments, Bigfella.

I find Greg Sheridan’s view of international relationship very childish. Kindergarteners’ typical behavior is to play with the kids they like. So his whining “you don’t like me … you play with him all day and you don’t play with me” is appropriate for kindergarteners.

Grownups should not behavior like that. A matured adult’s behavior should be appropriate to his/her role in the community. Rudd is playing a leader role in Asia. He leverages his Mandarin skills and his knowledge of Chinese culture to calm down China, stabilize the region and push for human rights inside China. There is simply no other leader in the world that can play this critical role. In doing so, Rudd not only benefits Austrian and Chinese, he also reduces tension for all people in the world. He has earned his place on the Time 100 list.

The kindergarten’s view has a win-lose mentality: If Rudd pays that much attention to China then he can’t play enough attention to me. We need a win-win mentality for international relationship: Rudd is helping Australia, China and the rest of the world at the same time.

[Everyan]

As for Rudd & China, the man criticised China's behaviour in Tibet while IN BEIJING. How many world leaders have managed this? When China kept insisting their tracksuited thugs surround the Olympic Torch, Rudd backed our police to take care of security, unlike some other nations.

As a side note, Rudd is widely respected among Chinese despite his criticise on China. I, as a Chinese, find his opinion much easier to swallow than some other westerns. His mandarin certainly helped, but it is his acquaintance and respect of Chinese culture has made the difference.

Chinese do accept criticises, but much willingly and seriously if you give them the "face" first. Thus the classic "fist praise, then condemn" pattern of Chinese political assay.

It is amazing how different it can be when same words are spoken by different mouths. "Goons and thugs" is certainly not gonna help anything.

[troung]

Chinese do accept criticises, but much willingly and seriously if you give them the "face" first. Thus the classic "fist praise, then condemn" pattern of Chinese political assay.

The average wife beater in a civilized society doesn't like to be called on it. Robert Mugabe doesn't like people to call him out on his actions either.

[Oscar]

The average wife beater in a civilized society doesn't like to be called on it. Robert Mugabe doesn't like people to call him out on his actions either.

Just like "uncle Joe" stalin?

[Oscar]

Name callings are completely useless in this debate. We should get off of our high horses a little bit because we accomodated with far worst evils in the past.

And sometimes we westerners fail to acknowledge China's spectacular accomplishments, if we look back to the last 20 years . Rantings and gratuitous insults like everyan said, won't help.

That's right they waged a boycott of French products. So what? We saw the same on tv conducted by far closer friends, didn't we?

[Everyan]

The average wife beater in a civilized society doesn't like to be called on it. Robert Mugabe doesn't like people to call him out on his actions either.

You should, for the sake of the wife/people. But if you go, "this man is so brutal that only the stupidest women would have ever married him!" I am sure the wife would no longer be on your side, well at least in China. That was exactly what happened recently.

After opened up to the world for 30 years, neither showing compassion nor praising CCP would automatically win respect from an ordinary Chinese. Saying "uncle Joe" Stalin? Probably, since it sounds like a good joke.

Communist is nothing but yet another foreign idea that has been assimilated into the Chinese culture, and which in turn has been largely "Americanized". Most Chinese people are just convinced by CCP's "social stability" propaganda (much like Bush's "war on terror"), working hard for their "American Dream" while tolerating its pragmatic rule. But as the Chinese history has shown, the tolerant has a limit. CCP knows it well, and is trying desperately to keep itself up with the booming economics and democracy awareness.

What will the future be like? Most believe democracy is unavoidable. However, the way to democracy is still not clear. Would CCP follow its recent trajectory all the way to step down, and evolve into a democratic party? Or there has to be a bloody uprising? The former has happened in South Korea and Taiwan. With similar culture, China is following a strikingly similar trajectory. But China is much bigger and complicated, so no one can really tell. Surely another bloody civil war is the worst China can offer. To avoid it, constant pressure from people should be cast on CCP, forcing a gradual change.

Western influence is playing a role as well. Some respect Chinese as an free minded individuals from a different culture, enlighten us with their long practised democracy ideas, encourage our gradual and peaceful struggle for a better life. Some helps pressuring CCP or suggesting the right direction for this somewhat lost authority.

However, some just showed ignorance and even hostility to this grand social shrift. Not only it doesn't help, it gives CCP a good chance to distract its domestic issues outside, giving it time to breath. When the wife joins the brutal husband to fight a hostile visitor, the visitor has just lost a good opportunity to end the family violence.