Whatever happened to the Quad?

It is difficult not to conclude that Australia’s defence and security policy is drifting under the Albanese government. 

A combination of the Marxist inspired sentiments of the university educated of the 1980s, 90s and later who now hold ministerial office, the fear of vocal and growing electoral minorities exerting their political weight, and a naivety about the intentions of our adversaries are contributing to the situation.

Penny Wong’s statements about Palestine highlight the drift from the real politic required today, but it is the seemingly slow crabwalk away from calling out the Chinese Communist regime that is the most telling.

The concerns were highlighted by the extraordinarily article by the former Japanese ambassador to Australia, Shingo Yamagami. Lamenting the inattention to the Quad, the multilateral relationship involving Australia, India, Japan and the United States of America, Mr Yamagami warned ‘the strategic reality the Quad faces has not changed for the better. China has continued its decades-long massive military build-up irrespective of its ongoing economic slowdown. The People’s Liberation Army is already on Australia’s doorstep via security ties with a number of Pacific Island countries. Chinese forces continue to haze Taiwan and Japanese island territories, as well as Filipino islands and fishermen.’

‘So, who is leading the Quad right now?’ asked the former ambassador. ‘An honest and correct answer would be nobody. This means there is a serious lack of quadrilateral consultation or co-ordination concerning the strategic challenges in the broad Indo-Pacific region – we are not consulting each other about China. In Australia, even while I was there, ASIO director-general Mike Burgess was told by some inside and outside the government to ease up on ASIO’s counterintelligence activities. I was told by several Australians in politics and government to seal my lips on the subject of China. Developments since my departure suggest Australia’s language regarding its own and our shared deteriorating security environment is narrowing.’

‘The world’s eyes, a few short years ago, were focused on Australia, when it stood tall under tremendous diplomatic pressure and economic coercion by the Middle Kingdom. It is no exaggeration to say Australia gained a prominent international status through its resilience and principled approach. That is the Australia I admired and respected. The emphasis on “stabilising” relations with China is fine, but stabilisation should not mean staging photo opportunities or smiling and shaking hands with China’s Foreign Minister, Wang Yi, while guns are being pointed at your head – as they are in the South China Sea.’

These words should be a clarion call to Australia’s leaders. What, then, is to be done? ‘The most fundamental requirement is collective security, which can most effectively be co-ordinated via the Quad,’ added Mr. Yamagami. ‘If we are to sustain a free and open Indo-Pacific, the Quad must be buttressed as a matter of urgent priority. Kishida’s upcoming visit to Washington DC is of critical importance. It is incumbent upon him to make a clear and powerful case for the Quad.’

It is inconceivable that the former Japanese diplomat was freelancing on foreign policy. Former ambassadors, especially from Asia, tend to remain circumspect, even in retirement. Mr Yamagami’s remarks reflect the views of the Japanese leadership generally, who are worried about the drift in policy under the Albanese government, and a realistic assessment of the security and defence challenges of the region.

‘We rarely hear the word ‘Quad’ from either Albanese or his Foreign Minister, Penny Wong,’ Mr Yamagami writes. He says that during his tenure, he was ‘told by several Australians in politics and government to seal my lips on the subject of China’.

The Chinese regime has displayed acute sensitivity to any nations meeting together to discuss regional security, describing the recent summit in Washington between the US, the Philippines and Japan as an ‘anti-China gathering.’

Ignoring the fact that the PLA has fired missiles into Japanese waters, and has been harassing  the Philippines over a disputed island in the South China Sea, the regime described the meeting as a ‘serious provocation to China’ and a ‘grave threat to regional peace and security.’ Talk about the ‘kettle calling the pot black!’

The CCP also expressed concerns about the leaders of Japan and South Korea meeting with the US. The fact that the two countries which have been wary of each other for decades are conversing is an indication of their perception of the threats from China.

This follows repeated CCP statements condemning Aukus. The possibility that nations other than Australia, the UK and the US might join the alliance has seriously rattled China, as has the possibility of Australia acquiring the superior Virginia-class submarines from America. The AUKUS partners have expressed support for both Japan and New Zealand working with the alliance under pillar two of the arrangements. This pillar involves cooperation, especially in manufacturing and weapons development. Yet there is no reflection by the Xi regime that its own actions are driving various nations together in response to its naked aggression.

Which brings me to the appointment of Admiral David Johnston as the new chief of the Australian Defence Force. He is the first naval officer to head the nation’s defences for 22 years, having been the deputy chief for the past six years. I dealt with Admiral Johnston when he headed Joint Operations Command. He is a competent and very experienced officer who has served his nation with distinction. He now faces his biggest task, including giving ‘fearless and frank advice’ to a government that has a mixed record on defence.

The fact that his appointment is for two years, rather than the usual four - said to be at his own request - should embolden him to the upmost frankness with the government about Australia’s strategic needs and the increasingly febrile security environment. Not since World War II has Australia faced such challenges.

The fact that Australia has had a regrettable churn of defence ministers for more than a decade is an added reason for unburnished advice from the ADF. What is required in leadership, not managerialism.

First published in the Epoch Times Australia.