A ‘Miss World’ approach to our security?

“Our next most important strategic interest [after the defence of our own shores] is the security, stability and cohesion of our immediate neighbourhood, which we share with Papua New Guinea, Timor-Leste and South Pacific states. Australia seeks to ensure that our neighbourhood does not become a source of threat to Australia and that no major power with hostile intentions establishes bases in our immediate neighbourhood from which it could project force against us.”

A further paragraph deals with assisting Timor-Leste and the South Pacific states in their governance and security - while assuming that New Zealand will also weigh in with help - before going on to talk about Indonesia and the rest of South East Asia.

In other words, the usual motherhood remarks that have appeared in previous White Papers. This is a statement of principles with no more than hints and fudges on concrete action to back them. Something that Professor of Strategic Studies at ANU Hugh White has called “the audacity of hope”.

White decries the White Paper’s lack of robust analysis of our regional engagements. “It assumes things will always work as they used to,” he says.

“It assumes that all we have to do is to be friendly – the Miss World approach to strategic policy.

“There is something inspiring about hope, but it is not a defence policy.”

Indeed there are clear signs that all is not sunshine and light. The bullying approach by China over its claims to the Spratly and Paracel islands in the South China Sea; a similar dispute with Japan in the East China Sea and the recent stand-off with India over the contested border area of Ladakh in the Himalayas have all the hallmarks of an expansionist power testing the resolve of its neighbours to resist it.

It is interesting to note that the initial fury emanating from the Chinese leadership over Rudd’s 2009 White Paper, including initial demands that it be changed, quickly subsided. Beijing respects strength and understands resolve. The 2010 sentencing of Australian Rio Tinto executive Stern Hu and his three Chinese colleagues on bribery charges, often cited as payback for the White Paper, were more to do with the intricacies of iron ore pricing. The business dealings between the two countries have continued as before.

Now, of course, Beijing has another White Paper, with an altogether more conciliatory tone to consider. Whether Chinese analysts will regard this as a gesture of friendship to be reciprocated, or a sign of weakness to be exploited, is a question for the future.