Australia's foreign relations are presently being ascertained, analysed and audited.
While Australia's Foreign Minster Kevin Rudd stopped over for a chat with U.S Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton in Washington D.C, on his way back from the 35th Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) meeting in London on 28th April 2011, there are reasons to believe that some changes are in store regarding the policies of Australia.
(Video posted below)
In the press conference post-meeting, Clinton heaped praises on Rudd's efforts:
There is much speculation whether that particular chat with Clinton was simply a social visit or a one-way dressing down, considering the results of Rudd's failed initiatives.
Rudd's uncanny ability to pursue tangents in Foreign Affairs are not in dispute. The results of the such cantankerous detours, at the expense of more important concerns are at the fore.
The question of whether those praises on Rudd are equally shared from all quarters, is a question worth asking, given the dismissal results of Rudd's handling of the Foreign affairs issues.
The Diplomat web publication, highlighted in a 2010 opinion article titled:"Rudd's Pacific Plan Lost At Sea" is prima facie evidence of Rudd's over reach:
Fiji Sun article features Andrew Drysdale's opinion
The entire excerpt of Drysdales article:
(Video posted below)
In the press conference post-meeting, Clinton heaped praises on Rudd's efforts:
"Minister Rudd was very influential in helping us to work toward a greater, more relevant involvement in the Pacific-Asian institutions, such as joining the East Asian Summit. The Trans-Pacific Partnership, which is exploring ways to expand opportunity, is critical, and APEC and ASEAN are two other organizations where we work together."
There is much speculation whether that particular chat with Clinton was simply a social visit or a one-way dressing down, considering the results of Rudd's failed initiatives.
Rudd's uncanny ability to pursue tangents in Foreign Affairs are not in dispute. The results of the such cantankerous detours, at the expense of more important concerns are at the fore.
The question of whether those praises on Rudd are equally shared from all quarters, is a question worth asking, given the dismissal results of Rudd's handling of the Foreign affairs issues.
The Diplomat web publication, highlighted in a 2010 opinion article titled:"Rudd's Pacific Plan Lost At Sea" is prima facie evidence of Rudd's over reach:
[...]Rudd’s vision for an Asia-Pacific super forum was first outlined in a June 2008 speech to the Asia Society Australasia, entitled ‘It’s Time to Build an Asia-Pacific Community.’ Delivered shortly before his first and somewhat delayed visit as prime minister to Indonesia and Japan, the proposal called for ‘strong and effective regional institutions’ to address issues including security, terrorism, natural disasters, disease, trade, energy and food.Graham Davis, former journalist wrote an article that appeared in Pacific Scoop titled "How Australia's Foreign and Pacific Policy Is Hostage To One Man's Ego", was scathing of Rudd:
While acknowledging the region’s existing architecture, the new Australian leader argued for the creation of ‘a regional institution which spans the entire Asia-Pacific region—including the United States, Japan, China, India, Indonesia and the other states of the region.’ It was to be capable of engaging in the ‘full spectrum of dialogue, cooperation and action on economic and political matters and future challenges related to security.’
Rudd also stated that he didn’t intend the ‘diminution of any of the existing regional bodies.’
‘APEC, the ASEAN Regional Forum, the East Asia Summit (EAS), ASEAN Plus Three and ASEAN itself will continue to play important roles, and longer-term may continue in their own right or embody the building blocks of an Asia Pacific community,’ he said.
The new institution was immediately panned by Australia’s Deputy Opposition Leader Julie Bishop, who described it as ‘another example of the prime minister just coming up with policy whims, floating it out there without doing any of the necessary groundwork.’
She was not alone.
Anyone else might be content to strut the international stage as Rudd does, posing as one of the big players and studiously trying to paper over Australia’s status as a middle ranking power at best.Although, both Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd criss-crossed the planet with the unsure objective of firmly anchoring Australia's drifting foreign policy; Brisbane Times article singled out the mending of ties effort, a central priority during Gillard's Asia tour:
Only someone with a world class ego would claim credit – as Rudd does – for being a prime instigator of the no-fly zone over Libya. That’s right. Not Barak Obama, not Nicolas Sarkozy but Kevin – the Tintin lookalike Wonder Boy from Down Under.
IT COULD have got a bit nasty, given the pressures on Julia Gillard to put her stamp on foreign policy and her inexperience in the field, but the Prime Minister's visit to Beijing has shown both sides determined to make the best of the fast-expanding relationship between Australia and China.Pacific regional observers pointed out repeatedly for a different approach to Fiji for some time now.
Gillard has essentially returned Canberra's handling of the relationship to the patient, pragmatic and optimistic approach that her predecessors have found to be the best, ending the prickly tone in some of the messages of the former prime minister Kevin Rudd.
Fiji Sun article features Andrew Drysdale's opinion
The entire excerpt of Drysdales article:
Andrew Drysdale's article was refuted by Dr. Max Quanchi, an academic in University of South Pacific (USP) The entire excerpt Quanchi's response: |
Fiji, Aussie ties writer : Dr Max Quanchi USP 5/3/2011
Croz Walsh's blog posting points out, Dr. Sandra Tarte's sentiments:
The dilemmas facing Australian diplomacy and foreign policy in the region include the obvious ones that have been highlighted in the media debate.
Most prominent is the fact that Australia’s efforts to isolate the Fiji government have encouraged Fiji to actively seek new partnerships, including most notably with China. This has led to the growing influence of China, and what seems to be a commensurate loss of influence by Australia. Another obvious dilemma is that Fiji’s suspension from the Forum has only served to undermine what was once the region’s premier regional organisation and shifted the political focus to other regional and international groupings.
Fiji has made it clear it does not seek an early return to the Forum’s fold but is cultivating new alignments – the Melanesian Spearhead Group, the Pacific Small Islands Developing States group, the Non-Aligned Movement and the Association of South East Asian Nations (where it has sought observer status).
Most recently was Lowy Institute's Jenny-Howard jones who advocated in a 180 degree course correction, in Australian Government's policy towards Fiji:
In a speech to the Press Club in February about Australia's interests in the Middle East, Mr Rudd said: 'a creative middle power recognises that we have to work in partnerships and coalitions to achieve change — including with non-traditional partners to establish better understanding of the issue at hand and to come up with better informed solutions...Australia always stands ready to propose new partnerships to tackle new problems, to tackle old problems in new ways' [...]
But in promoting Australia's credentials as a creative middle power on the world stage in the context of the Arab awakening, Rudd has inadvertently drawn more attention to Australia's diplomatic failings in Fiji [...]Kevin Rudd believes Australian foreign policy should make a difference. If Australia wants to maintain its credibility as the dominant power in this region and be a creative middle power on the world stage, it should start by making a difference in Fiji.
No comments:
Post a Comment