A journey, not a destination: the Antipodes and China’s rise

China’s ascendance on the global stage is hardly a matter of contention anymore. But the multiple economic, strategic, security and socio-political implications of this ascendance for the Asian region as a whole, and for Australia and New Zealand in particular, are subject to ongoing debate. And the strategies with which our countries are to address those implications are far from clear or universally agreed.

A prolific debate on this momentous topic brought together some of the most influential Asia scholars along with government officials, and public and private sector experts from both sides of the Tasman to discuss the emerging strategic, diplomatic, domestic and foreign policy priorities for our two countries and for the region.

One of these experts was Dr Michael Wesley, Lowy Institute executive director, who was in New Zealand in early April 2011 as a guest of Asia:NZ.

The strategic dimension

Exploring the strategic significance of China’s rise for Australia and New Zealand, ANU head of Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Professor Hugh White, talked about the “stark new choices and unsettling options” ahead. “The way in which we make those choices will redefine the strategic relationship between Australia and New Zealand,” he said.

The re-convergence of productivity levels we are witnessing means that once again the size of a country’s population will determine its economic and strategic weight. Add to that the decline in Western naval supremacy, and, in Professor White’s view, uncontested US primacy is unlikely to continue. If such primacy indeed remained a US goal, then a contest would definitely occur.

Australian and New Zealand security strategy, therefore, should be tailored to avoid a primacy contest that would compel us to choose between the US and China. “To what extent are we prepared to accommodate China in order to avoid a contest of primacy, without raising fears of appeasement?” The US should be encouraged to treat China as an equal and be prepared to share power and space with it fast.

Even though it sees itself as a middle power, Australia may not be able to rise to the challenge of functioning like one and would therefore need New Zealand in order to strengthen its own strategic weight. In a more contested Asia, despite traditionally different strategic perceptions, Australia and New Zealand may find they need each other to make the right decisions.”

Coming from a policy rather than academic perspective, Defence Secretary John McKinnon put current strategic challenges in the context of what increased military spending in Asia might mean for New Zealand and stressed the benefits of evolving interaction between military forces through regional dialogue.

China’s defence budget is now second only to that of the US. Capability build-up, combined with a strong traditional emphasis on national sovereignty and national security in Asia, can lead to more tensions.

Our two countries’ defence papers, published within a year of each other, offer a glimpse of the ways in which Australia and New Zealand perceive regional tensions and plan to deal with them. While strategic threats borne out of national tensions in the region may not loom as large on New Zealand’s horizon as on Australia’s, neither country can deny that its security will very much depend on that of the region as a whole.

Regional dialogue is important for Asia-Pacific stability. One example is our participation in the ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting Plus – the first formal gathering of which was in Hanoi in October 2010 – which gives an opportunity for a conversation between heads of defence forces with little past contact with each other. It is through such regional dialogues that a country the size of New Zealand can hope to make worthwhile contributions.

Professor Robert Ayson put forward the suggestion that Australia might have more to lose from a changing balance of power in favour of China than New Zealand. Quoting from both the Australian and New Zealand Defence White Papers, Professor Ayson argued that there is a gap in Australian and New Zealand perceptions of China in a security sense. While both our countries depend on Chinese economic growth for our future prosperity, considerations of economic survival are right at the top in New Zealand, while in Australia economic and security concerns are more balanced - potentially giving rise to a difficult partnership preference over the US or China if circumstances ever were to dictate that one be made.

In the New Zealand White Paper, there is an emphasis on traditional relationships with the US, the Commonwealth partners among which, in Asia, Malaysia and Singapore, and how relationships with these “like-minded” states can help reinforce shared international norms.

Domestic views and interests

This session was a look at the public and private views and interests that form the domestic context in which Australia and New Zealand formulate their respective response to the rise of China.

Asia:NZ executive director Dr Richard Grant used the foundation’s research on New Zealand’s population to show how China and Asia are an intrinsic part of our evolving national identity. Chinese people have been part of New Zealand society since the 1860s gold rush.

In the three decades since the foundation’s inception in 1994, the proportion of New Zealanders of Asian ethnicity is projected to grow from three to 16 percent. Importantly, the bulk of the Asian segment of New Zealand’s population is now made not of migrants, but New Zealand-born citizens of this country.

These numbers, amplified by the youthfulness of Asian New Zealanders compared to other population groups, give a sense of urgency to the need for New Zealand to engage more actively and more competently with Asia.

Highlights and full results of the 2010 Perceptions of Asia Tracking Study are published by Asia:NZ next week but Dr Grant revealed that compared to the US and fellow Commonwealth countries, New Zealanders displayed the warmest attitude to China and recognised the importance of Asia, even though the recent recession and economic hardship have led, somewhat disappointingly, to them attributing a lesser importance to the outer world.

A 2010 Pew Global Attitudes Survey found nearly half of Americans had a favourable view of China, slightly higher than Canada where the Asia-Pacific Foundation of Canada conducts a similar national poll every two years. While Americans perceive the economic rise of China as a greater threat to their country, the view in Canada is the reverse – 58 percent are wary of China’s rising military capability.

The view from across the Tasman is similar, says Fergus Hanson, the Lowy Institute’s director of polling. There is an evolution in AU attitudes to China, moving from the perception of China as a huge and benign country hungry for Australia’s rich natural resources to a significant global power willing to “throw its weight around.”

Australia now faces a dilemma: China is acknowledged by a large majority of Australians as a necessary and positive force in Australia’s future prosperity, but is perceived as a threat on the strategic security front. The ambivalence about Chinese foreign investment into Australia – which came to a head during the contentious and ultimately unsuccessful Chinalco bid for Rio Tinto in 2009 – is a clear illustration of the apprehension with which Australia now regards China.

The public symposium on New Zealand, Australia and China's rise was co-organised by the Centre for Strategic Studies: New Zealand and the New Zealand Contemporary China Research Centre at Victoria University Wellington, with co-sponsors the Lowy Institute for International Policy, Strategic and Defence Studies Centre of the Australian National University, the Australian Centre on China in the World and the Asia New Zealand Foundation.

It was officially opened by the New Zealand Foreign Minister, Hon Murray McCully - read the full text of his speech.

Dr Michael Wesley was in New Zealand as a guest of Asia:NZ.

- by Antonia Kokalova-Gray

Related pages:


Photos:

1) Session one was dedicated to the security dimension.

2) (L to R) Dr Michael Wesley, Executive Director, Lowy Institute for International Policy; Professor Robert Ayson, Director, Centre for Strategic Studies: New Zealand; Professor Hugh White, Head of the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University; Dr Marc Lanteigne, Senior Lecturer, New Zealand China Contemporary Research Centre; Dr Richard Grant, Executive Director of Asia:NZ and Professor Xiaoming Huang, Director of the New Zealand Contemporary China Research Centre.

3) Dr Richard Grant analyses the importance of Asia to New Zealand in session two on domestic views and interests.

Last updated: 20 April 2011