Search

Treaties allowing investors to initiate arbitration claims directly against host states for illegally interfering with cross-border investments are becoming increasingly common in Asia, but Australia announced in 2011 that it will no longer include such protections in future treaties. The backdrop to this decision includes keen interest from Asia in foreign direct investment (FDI) into Australia’s resources sector, meaning that potential investors may not be significantly deterred by a lack of arbitration provisions in future treaties. This article argues, however, that Australia’s policy shift risks undermining the entire investor-state arbitration (ISA) system, with the earliest impact being felt by major pending treaty negotiations by Australia with Japan, China and Korea (respectively); and that the shift may significantly reduce FDI flows or have other adverse effects. The article criticises the cost-benefit analysis of ISA protections in one pivotal study conducted in 2010 by an Australian Government think-tank, arguing that this assessment is insufficiently nuanced. Instead, the article presents a justification for more tailored and moderate changes to ISA provisions in future treaties. Its tentative interest-group analysis suggests, however, that there may be surprisingly few public or private constituencies that would prefer such moderate reforms, and that most may well prefer the more extreme position recently adopted by Australia, despite the damage that will be done to the ISA system as a whole. The article also argues that Australia’s policy shift and think-tank analysis may make Asian countries more cautious about ISA, especially those (like the Philippines and Vietnam) which have traditionally been more cautious about this dispute resolution system. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Security cooperation between Japan and Australia over the last several decades has been largely underpinned by common factors and interests in the international system. As with most bilateral relationships, however, cooperation has also been encouraged by domestic forces in both countries. The prevailing forces that characterised Japanese foreign policy in the post-war era were the politically and constitutionally entrenched pacifist norm, the powerful position of the bureaucracy relative to a powerful yet fragmented bureaucracy coupled with weak political leadership, and exceptional longevity of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) government during their tenure in power from 1955 to 2009. These characteristic features of Japanese foreign policy also had particular implications for Australia-Japan relations. Concordantly, evolutions in Japanese politics since the end of the cold war have altered the environment in which policy towards Australia and the region is formulated. This article examines how Australia-Japan security cooperation has been affected by the erosion of intense pacifism towards 'normalisation', the assertion of greater power and leadership of the executive over the bureaucracy, and the historic defeat of the LDP government in 2009 leading to the ascension of the Democratic Party of Japan. It concludes that although changes in Japanese politics have not significantly challenged or bolstered security cooperation between Japan and Australia, those changes have proven too limited to significantly strengthen Japan's position in an increasingly volatile region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article discusses Japan-Australia security cooperation in the context of changing regional dynamics in the Asia-Pacific. The combined influences of the rise of China, the US position in the world after two years under an Obama administration, and the changing structure of regional cooperation are setting new challenges and a historically distinct context for security relations between Japan and Australia. After examining each of the above regional changes, this article discusses the effects of political transitions over the last several months in both Japan and Australia. It then highlights three natural areas for Japan and Australia to pursue increased cooperation: denuclearisation, addressing China's policy on territorial integrity, and the rise of China's military, in particular in terms of naval power. The article concludes by providing the author's perspective on Japan-Australia security cooperation and suggests the future direction of relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The March 2007 Japan-Australia Security Declaration has garnered more than its share of hyperbole. Described variously as an historic milestone for peace or an agreement designed to encircle China; the declaration's actual strategic consequences are somewhat unclear. The purpose of this article is to provide a critical analysis of the security declaration and to assess its impact in the context of the changing patterns of the region's security setting. Some have argued that it marks a small but qualitatively significant shift in the essential features of the regional security architecture. The article assesses this claim and argues that while the declaration is of some diplomatic importance, and clearly contributes to improving cooperation in disaster relief and other humanitarian operations, it is of little strategic significance to the broader patterns of East Asian security over the short to medium term. Each side's operational constraints, their different strategic priorities, most obviously their perceptions of China, as well as the continued military predominance of the US, means that the agreement will be of little immediate significance for East Asian security. That said, it remains an important development for the respective parties and is a leading edge indicator of broader forces for change that are increasingly present in East Asia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author comments on the comprehensive and strategic relationship between Japan and Australia. He says that the economic relationship between the two nations developed sometime in the mid-1950s which was formalized by the Agreement on Commerce between Australia and Japan. He enumerates the key factors that led to the increased emphasis on the strategic importance of Australia to Japan. He also discusses the historical background of the relationship between Japan and Australia as well as the basic reasons behind their strong relationship.