4 ms·

China is not a military threat

3 points by graderjs 4y ago

graderjs 4y ago
I mean obviously they are a threat: they have a military, they could pose a threat if they chose to, but the article is saying: Australia should not consider them a threat militarily. I agree. It also says, strategy should not be driven by media coverage and public opinion so formed, I also agree, but it seems rather than strategy being driven by media, Australia has media and strategy both driven by "some other narrativizing force", intent on framing China as a military threat, then using media to produce compliant public opinion for wartime-like strategy by manufacturing consent. Also says: strategy should be founded on useful points of engagement, like: non-military security policy, including foreign policy, economic policy, technology, environmental issues, human rights and development, in order to build a non-confrontational bilateral and multilateral relationship. I also agree. Also: I submit that our security policy should be multi-dimensional. Military, political, development assistance and exchange of people and ideas should all work together to shape the security environment. Agree. Also: Practical engagement with China and other regional countries and trade partners is essential because we are in no way self-reliant. Australia needs stable and preferably friendly relations with other countries for economic and practical reasons. Agree. What's standing in the way of getting to this being a widely held Australian view? The counter-narratives to this are powerful: "they're not like us (they're an authoritarian dictatorship Orwellian surveillance state)", "look what they're doing to their people (Xinjiang, Tibet, Hong Kong), we don't want that happening here", "they don't share our values (look at the human rights, organ harvesting, Muslim suppression)", "we have to trust in the Alliance (they are like us)", "how can we trust them (they are trying to influence our politics and buying our strategic ports and assets, they do debt diplomacy)". These stories invoke powerful emotions of fear and anger. In such a narrative environment, Australians are naturally terrified of the Chinese people in general, and the Chinese state and its intentions in particular. With such a mindset and "heartset", all possible fearful, nightmarish speculations become possible. In truth, Australians really "don't know what those Chinese are up to". In this environment of ignorance, it's unlikely to see any narrative shift. The fear is simply too powerful, to easy to invoke, and too hard to dispel. The lack of a common language, or shared cultural experience, means these fears can't be replaced with commonality, which mostly happens through direct interaction, conversation, time and shared experience. So given that the medium term future history of Australian-Chinese relations will therefore be inevitably dominated by these fears, and that these fears will cause us to miss out on many possibilities and benefits of working together, how to make the best of this fear-environment anyway? They could continue to be mined for domestic political points, and pretexts for new laws, so the fearful environment has high political utility perhaps. But what else could they be usefully put to work to do? If the fears could be channeled into driving some sort of "national awakening" where Australians realize the only way to secure their future is to work hard and hungrily create a better tomorrow (so they can beat those dastardly Chinese creeping at their doorstep doing who-knows-what), it could be a useful motivation for an Oz-style "national rejuvenation." But I think that would be blocked by how good life already is in Australia, and how content Australians can be keeping things mostly the way they are (pending the housing market, of course). I think the main issue is that these fears cost basically nothing, right now. They may of course prove to have a high interest rate, and "come due" at some time in future, but right now, these fears are simply a comfortable backdrop to "how good life is in Australia", reminding people there, that: there are other much worse places out there, their own morals culture is decidedly better (so let's stop bringing up the past?), they have something important that someone else is trying to interfere with and steal. So the fears are comfortable, psychologically compelling (it just "feels right" to be "concerned" about such a "massive potential threat", it would be "irresponsible not to be adequately cautious and concerned about it"), and "cost free" (at least right now). Why fix what ain't broken, indeed?
- mytailorisrich 4y ago
  If Australia considers China an existential threat (I.e. that it is plausible that China might decide to invade Australia) then there is only one option: Nuclear deterrent. This is because Australia is much, much too small to even try to compete with China. This is pretty much what North Korea similarly concluded with respect to the US (though the threat seems proven in their case)
  - graderjs 4y ago
    Agree. So it's sort of like "stand up or shut up", if you really think they're such a threat, then do something about it, otherwise stop yer whinin' and get to building something great together, or at least get along. Unless we decided, "hey we did British colonialism, maybe we can try Chinese colonialism?" I don't think people would go for that tho. It's an interesting possibility tho. Why would they invade? Maybe: too many people, need more space; need more resources; they want to "enslave us". I don't think any of these are that likely. Australia would make a shit colony: they'd constantly be plotting to rebel, too lazy to do real work, too demanding. It wouldn't work. The Chinese need workers? They have better at home. They need space? They still have lots undeveloped at home ("ghost cities", c'mon.) The Chinese might be able to take a portion of land for like a trophy luxury resort (or more practically resources) but honestly would they really want to? Most of the country is pretty inhospitable. Best place would be like Gold Coast, but why bother when they can just buy apartments (or mines)? So it's basically a fanciful delusion. Are we really "all that", do we really have so much that other people want that they are going to invade? I think we flatter ourselves, it's a vanity, and that's probably the point of it. Although, if we are concerned about invasion I think Indonesia (too many people, not enough land, strategically makes sense, little cultural overlap), or Japan (unresolved wartime trauma of stymied imperialist/nationalist ambitions, always simmering below the surface of the "ultra cute manga tech and industrial powerhouse" now in decline) are the actual threats, if there are any threats at all. Indonesia probably twice as likely due to ideological/religious vulnerability and proximity, and I don't think Japan really has any great passion for our country in particular. But saying Indonesia is a military threat to Australia has no currency in public discourse at this time, it's all "China China China". Why is that, I wonder? I don't believe we just "slavishly follow" US narrative warfare on the issue. I think there must be something bigger driving it. It could be that it just plays so well domestically, and a democracy is always happy to purchase emotive issues to distract from substantial failures, but I think there has to be something else, that goes even beyond ancient racism, or current jealousy at their rapid development. I don't really understand it...maybe the issues have less legs than I think and will eventually die out of their own accord, but I don't think so...and I don't think I clearly understand right now what makes these China-scare narratives so popular.
jerojero 4y ago
If China wanted to hurt Australia it wouldn't be through the military, it would be through the economy. China is the largest trading partner for Australia but Australia the 7th for China (still significant). Not only that but how much of Australia internal economy also relies on chinese people? If China somehow forced chinese people to all return it could cause quite a disruption as well.
GianFabien 4y ago
Perhaps people should read ex PM Malcolm Fraser's "Dangerous Allies". He surveyed in detail how Australia's relationships with foreign powers has played out in the past and projects some cautions for the future.
beardyw 4y ago
This binary view is nonsense. It is more correct to say China is a threat because that can be given a scale. To say they are not a threat is to eliminate any possibility of threat. China are a threat greater than zero and less than one. A reasonable conversation can only be possible by assigning a value in that range.
- beardyw 4y ago
  For the avoidance of doubt the same can be said for any country against any other country.

3 points by graderjs 4y ago

I mean obviously they are a threat: they have a military, they could pose a threat if they chose to, but the article is saying: Australia should not consider them a threat militarily. I agree. It also says, strategy should not be driven by media coverage and public opinion so formed, I also agree, but it seems rather than strategy being driven by media, Australia has media and strategy both driven by "some other narrativizing force", intent on framing China as a military threat, then using media to produce compliant public opinion for wartime-like strategy by manufacturing consent. Also says: strategy should be founded on useful points of engagement, like: non-military security policy, including foreign policy, economic policy, technology, environmental issues, human rights and development, in order to build a non-confrontational bilateral and multilateral relationship. I also agree. Also: I submit that our security policy should be multi-dimensional. Military, political, development assistance and exchange of people and ideas should all work together to shape the security environment. Agree. Also: Practical engagement with China and other regional countries and trade partners is essential because we are in no way self-reliant. Australia needs stable and preferably friendly relations with other countries for economic and practical reasons. Agree. What's standing in the way of getting to this being a widely held Australian view? The counter-narratives to this are powerful: "they're not like us (they're an authoritarian dictatorship Orwellian surveillance state)", "look what they're doing to their people (Xinjiang, Tibet, Hong Kong), we don't want that happening here", "they don't share our values (look at the human rights, organ harvesting, Muslim suppression)", "we have to trust in the Alliance (they are like us)", "how can we trust them (they are trying to influence our politics and buying our strategic ports and assets, they do debt diplomacy)". These stories invoke powerful emotions of fear and anger. In such a narrative environment, Australians are naturally terrified of the Chinese people in general, and the Chinese state and its intentions in particular. With such a mindset and "heartset", all possible fearful, nightmarish speculations become possible. In truth, Australians really "don't know what those Chinese are up to". In this environment of ignorance, it's unlikely to see any narrative shift. The fear is simply too powerful, to easy to invoke, and too hard to dispel. The lack of a common language, or shared cultural experience, means these fears can't be replaced with commonality, which mostly happens through direct interaction, conversation, time and shared experience. So given that the medium term future history of Australian-Chinese relations will therefore be inevitably dominated by these fears, and that these fears will cause us to miss out on many possibilities and benefits of working together, how to make the best of this fear-environment anyway? They could continue to be mined for domestic political points, and pretexts for new laws, so the fearful environment has high political utility perhaps. But what else could they be usefully put to work to do? If the fears could be channeled into driving some sort of "national awakening" where Australians realize the only way to secure their future is to work hard and hungrily create a better tomorrow (so they can beat those dastardly Chinese creeping at their doorstep doing who-knows-what), it could be a useful motivation for an Oz-style "national rejuvenation." But I think that would be blocked by how good life already is in Australia, and how content Australians can be keeping things mostly the way they are (pending the housing market, of course). I think the main issue is that these fears cost basically nothing, right now. They may of course prove to have a high interest rate, and "come due" at some time in future, but right now, these fears are simply a comfortable backdrop to "how good life is in Australia", reminding people there, that: there are other much worse places out there, their own morals culture is decidedly better (so let's stop bringing up the past?), they have something important that someone else is trying to interfere with and steal. So the fears are comfortable, psychologically compelling (it just "feels right" to be "concerned" about such a "massive potential threat", it would be "irresponsible not to be adequately cautious and concerned about it"), and "cost free" (at least right now). Why fix what ain't broken, indeed?

mytailorisrich 4y ago
If Australia considers China an existential threat (I.e. that it is plausible that China might decide to invade Australia) then there is only one option: Nuclear deterrent. This is because Australia is much, much too small to even try to compete with China. This is pretty much what North Korea similarly concluded with respect to the US (though the threat seems proven in their case)
- graderjs 4y ago
  Agree. So it's sort of like "stand up or shut up", if you really think they're such a threat, then do something about it, otherwise stop yer whinin' and get to building something great together, or at least get along. Unless we decided, "hey we did British colonialism, maybe we can try Chinese colonialism?" I don't think people would go for that tho. It's an interesting possibility tho. Why would they invade? Maybe: too many people, need more space; need more resources; they want to "enslave us". I don't think any of these are that likely. Australia would make a shit colony: they'd constantly be plotting to rebel, too lazy to do real work, too demanding. It wouldn't work. The Chinese need workers? They have better at home. They need space? They still have lots undeveloped at home ("ghost cities", c'mon.) The Chinese might be able to take a portion of land for like a trophy luxury resort (or more practically resources) but honestly would they really want to? Most of the country is pretty inhospitable. Best place would be like Gold Coast, but why bother when they can just buy apartments (or mines)? So it's basically a fanciful delusion. Are we really "all that", do we really have so much that other people want that they are going to invade? I think we flatter ourselves, it's a vanity, and that's probably the point of it. Although, if we are concerned about invasion I think Indonesia (too many people, not enough land, strategically makes sense, little cultural overlap), or Japan (unresolved wartime trauma of stymied imperialist/nationalist ambitions, always simmering below the surface of the "ultra cute manga tech and industrial powerhouse" now in decline) are the actual threats, if there are any threats at all. Indonesia probably twice as likely due to ideological/religious vulnerability and proximity, and I don't think Japan really has any great passion for our country in particular. But saying Indonesia is a military threat to Australia has no currency in public discourse at this time, it's all "China China China". Why is that, I wonder? I don't believe we just "slavishly follow" US narrative warfare on the issue. I think there must be something bigger driving it. It could be that it just plays so well domestically, and a democracy is always happy to purchase emotive issues to distract from substantial failures, but I think there has to be something else, that goes even beyond ancient racism, or current jealousy at their rapid development. I don't really understand it...maybe the issues have less legs than I think and will eventually die out of their own accord, but I don't think so...and I don't think I clearly understand right now what makes these China-scare narratives so popular.

jerojero 4y ago

If China wanted to hurt Australia it wouldn't be through the military, it would be through the economy. China is the largest trading partner for Australia but Australia the 7th for China (still significant). Not only that but how much of Australia internal economy also relies on chinese people? If China somehow forced chinese people to all return it could cause quite a disruption as well.

GianFabien 4y ago

Perhaps people should read ex PM Malcolm Fraser's "Dangerous Allies". He surveyed in detail how Australia's relationships with foreign powers has played out in the past and projects some cautions for the future.

beardyw 4y ago

This binary view is nonsense. It is more correct to say China is a threat because that can be given a scale. To say they are not a threat is to eliminate any possibility of threat. China are a threat greater than zero and less than one. A reasonable conversation can only be possible by assigning a value in that range.

beardyw 4y ago
For the avoidance of doubt the same can be said for any country against any other country.