Search

This article is a study of the Chifley government's foreign policy towards Asia, in particular India and Indonesia, as evidenced by Australia's attendance at the 1947 Asian Relations Conference and the 1949 New Delhi Conference on the Indonesian-Dutch conflict. Australia's presence at these two conferences provides an ideal opportunity to examine the Chifley government's response to the momentous changes that occurred in post-war Asia as a result of the dismantling of the European colonial world order. Through detailed examination of the archival material and contemporary accounts generated from Australia's involvement in the New Delhi conferences, this article will argue that despite significant political constraints, the Chifley government did adopt a distinctive and innovative policy towards the emergent nations of Asia in the immediate post-war years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors discuss Australian foreign policy in the 1960s and 1970s. The article examines the policies of Sir Robert Menzies and his Liberal-Country Party coalition government between 1949 and 1966 and criticism from the Labor Party. The authors argue that the Menzies government's foreign policy did not actively separate itself from Asia. The article also analyzes the scholarship on Australian political development and foreign policy and Asian public affairs, as well as the diplomatic, political, and economic conditions of Asia during the Cold War. It also discusses Australia's political relationship with India.

Australian foreign and strategic policy has not yet begun to address the implications for Australia's international situation of China's growing power. China today already challenges the American leadership that has kept Asia peaceful and Australia secure for many decades. There are real and growing risks that Washington and Beijing will not find a way to work together peacefully as relative power shifts from one to the other. Unless they do, Asia's future is bleak, and so is Australia's. Australia therefore needs to work to promote a new order in Asia which accommodates China's power without conceding more than is necessary to keep the peace. This will mean encouraging America to forgo primacy in Asia in favour of working with China and others in a shared regional leadership. Australia also needs to start preparing for the possibility that Asia will nonetheless become a more contested and dangerous place over coming decades, and consider what its options would be. None of them appear attractive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has recently announced plans to develop greater regional integration and cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region. Historically, Australian opinion, however, has expressed some anxiety about forging closer economic, political and security ties with Asia. Using trend data from the Australian Election Study and the Lowy Institute Poll, this article examines changes in Australian public opinion on closer engagement with Asia and whether the Australian public is likely to support the Rudd government's push towards developing deeper regional diplomacy. The article finds a shift in opinion since the 1990s with a younger generation of voters who are moderately supportive of Australia's engagement with Asia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This collection of papers focuses on the domestic and international politics of Australia's recent engagement with Asia. The theme of Asian engagement appears to be of particular pertinence to the current study of Australian politics given numerous pronouncements that we are entering an 'Asian century' during which key Asian economies will gain greater ascendancy and certain Asian states will come to play a more prominent role in global politics. We employ the idea of 're-engagement' in order to show how engagement with Asia has been turned to again and again by Australian governments, albeit in different political and strategic contexts. This collection aims to consider the politics of re-engagement from a number of different theoretical positions, as well as from a number of different perspectives (be it international relations/foreign policy, domestic politics, identity politics, or from the perspective of bilateral Asian partners). Emphasis is placed not simply on the foreign policy prerogatives behind re-engagement but also on the implications of the 'Asian century' for domestic politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reviews the history of Australian representations of Asia from the mid-19th century to the present. It argues that there are instructive continuities between recent references to 'Asia literacy' and to injunctions to know Asia that date from the late 19th century. It examines representations of Asia that stress fluidity and unpredictability, and argues that fluid Asia has been assigned characteristics not unlike those attributed to women and the crowd. The implications of this analysis for recent discussions of the threat posed by political Islam are also referred to. In such discussions 'the proper treatment of women' is commonly represented as both an established Australian value and one now under threat. The article ends by suggesting that the Howard government sought to marginalise 'Asia literacy', replacing it with 'Australia literacy'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article argues that 'Asia' has tended to function as an ambivalent 'sign' in Australian political discourse, signifying both fear and hope. That ambivalence is reflected in Australian government policy. The article focuses on the period from Gough Whitlam on, tracing the links between debates over Australian relations with Asia and key issues in Australian domestic politics, including debates over immigration, the economy and Australian national identity. Key differences are identified between the views of John Howard and those of recent Australian Labor Prime Ministers. However, it is pointed out that Kevin Rudd also has ambivalent attitudes towards Asia, both encouraging Asian engagement as a path to future prosperity and fearing that Australia will be left behind in an increasingly 'Asian Century'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]