Australia At a Crossroad: Why Paul Keating's Stance On Asia Is Dangerous
Former Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating’s recent comments have reignited a debate on Australia’s strategic position in the rapidly shifting dynamics of Asia. In a recent interview, Keating argued that Australia should steer clear of getting involved in Asian geopolitical tensions, particularly those involving China. He suggested that Australia does not need to rely on the United States and should accept its place in China’s backyard, emphasizing that staying out of regional conflicts is in Australia’s best interest.
While Keating’s perspective may appear pragmatic on the surface, it dangerously underestimates the stakes involved in Australia’s role in Asia. Accepting a diminished role in the region, as Keating suggests, would not only weaken Australia’s strategic position but could also jeopardize its sovereignty and security. In today’s increasingly interconnected and interdependent world, isolationism is no longer a viable option, especially for a country like Australia, which sits at the crossroads of significant geopolitical shifts.
Keating's suggestion that Australia should acquiesce to China’s growing influence in Asia is premised on the assumption that a passive stance will shield Australia from the repercussions of a changing world order. However, this view overlooks the aggressive nature of China’s regional ambitions. China’s actions in the South China Sea, where it has built artificial islands and militarized them despite international condemnation, are a clear indication of its intent to dominate the region. If Australia were to step back and allow China to assert its control unchecked, it would be tantamount to surrendering its own strategic interests.
Australia’s geographic isolation and relatively small population compared to its vast landmass present unique challenges. Unlike many of its allies, which are located on the other side of the world, Australia cannot rely solely on geographical distance as a buffer against potential threats. The South China Sea, through which a significant portion of Australia’s trade passes, is a critical lifeline for the country’s economy. If China were to gain control over this vital maritime route, it could effectively strangle Australia’s economy by imposing blockades or other restrictions. This is not a hypothetical scenario; it is a real and present danger that Australia must confront.
Keating’s belief that Australia could somehow carve out a special relationship with China, where it would be allowed to dissent without facing consequences, is not only naïve but also ignores recent history. China has already demonstrated its willingness to use economic coercion against Australia when it suits its interests. In response to Australia’s calls for an independent investigation into the origins of COVID-19, China imposed tariffs on Australian barley, suspended beef imports, and discouraged Chinese students and tourists from going to Australia. These actions were a clear message: cross China, and there will be consequences.
Given this context, it is wishful thinking to believe that China would treat Australia any differently if it were to acquiesce to its growing influence. On the contrary, by staying silent and allowing China to expand its control unchecked, Australia would be signaling its willingness to be subservient to Beijing’s demands. This would set a dangerous precedent, not just for Australia but for the entire region. If a country like Australia, which has historically been a strong advocate for the rules-based international order, were to bow down to China’s will, it would embolden China to push even further in its quest for dominance.
Australia’s current status as a free and independent nation, able to challenge China or any other nation it disagrees with, is not something that should be taken for granted. It is a position that has been earned through decades of strategic alliances, diplomatic efforts, and a commitment to upholding international law. To abandon this position now, as Keating suggests, would be a betrayal of Australia’s core values and a disservice to future generations.
Moreover, the notion that staying out of regional conflicts is in Australia’s best interest ignores the reality of the globalized world we live in. In today’s interconnected world, the actions of one country can have far-reaching implications for others. The idea that Australia can simply stand by and watch as China reshapes the regional order without it affecting Australia is not only unrealistic but also dangerous. If Australia does not take a stand now, it may find itself in a position where it no longer has the ability to do so.
China’s growing influence in Southeast Asia has already led to a situation where many countries in the region feel compelled to prioritize China’s interests over their own. These countries have found themselves in a position where they must tread carefully to avoid provoking China’s ire. Is this the future Australia wants for itself? A future where it must constantly second-guess its own decisions out of fear of offending China? A future where Australia’s national identity and sovereignty are subordinated to the demands of a foreign power?
The question that Australians must ask themselves is whether they are comfortable with the idea of becoming a satellite state of China. Are Australians willing to sacrifice their hard-won freedoms and the ability to speak out against injustice in exchange for a tenuous peace? Or do they value their current status, where they can stand tall as an independent nation, unafraid to challenge those who seek to impose their will on others?
If the answer is the latter, then it is clear that Australia must take a more active role in shaping the future of Asia. This does not mean recklessly plunging into conflicts, but it does mean standing firm against attempts to undermine Australia’s sovereignty and the rules-based international order. It means working closely with allies, including the United States, to ensure that the region remains free and open, where countries can make their own decisions without being coerced by larger powers.
Australia is at a crossroads. The decisions it makes today will shape its future for decades to come. Paul Keating’s call for isolationism is not the answer. It is a dangerous path that leads to subjugation and the loss of national identity. Instead, Australia must embrace its role as a key player in Asia, working with its allies to ensure that the region remains stable, prosperous, and free from coercion. This is not just about protecting Australia’s interests; it is about upholding the principles of freedom and democracy that have defined the nation for generations.
Australia has always been a country that punches above its weight on the global stage. Now is not the time to retreat into isolationism. Now is the time to stand up, take a stand, and ensure that the Asia-Pacific remains a region where all nations, big or small, can coexist peacefully and with dignity.