Australian foreign policy has famously been distinguished by the search for ‘great and powerful friends’. However, Australia's relationship with its current notional protector and key ally—the United States—has generally had more costs than benefits and, I argue, has consequently not been in Australia's much-invoked ‘national interest’. Examining this rather counter-intuitive outcome sheds a revealing light on the challenges that face ‘middle powers’ as they try to navigate a path between their ‘great’ counterparts. Australia is especially illuminating as the great powers in question are the US and China. To understand why Australia has found itself an ‘entrapped’ ally, we need to examine the specific historical circumstances that have helped to create a distinctive ‘strategic culture’, one that imparts a degree of path dependence, shaping and constraining an ideational milieu that effectively defines what is judged to be an appropriate, even ‘realistic’ response to security challenges. In short, I argue that Australia demonstrates how and why the potential influence of middle powers is decreasing as they willingly forgo opportunities to play a more creative, constructive and independent role in the evolving international order.
Policy Implications
- Australian policymakers could pursue a policy of ‘hedging’ like their Southeast Asian neighbours if they want to preserve sovereignty.
- Policies that avoid ‘entrapment’ are preferable to those that are shaped by a fear of ‘abandonment’.
- Australian policymakers should avoid slavishly continuing the policies of the past, especially if they are driven by a fear of being ‘wedged’ politically, rather than a ‘realistic’ assessment of their contemporary costs and benefits.
- Australia could join other regional middle powers in promoting independent, progressive policies that more accurately reflect their specific needs and interests, rather than those of ‘great’ powers.
- Middle powers with limited resources should avoid the dangers of ‘opportunity costs’ and prioritise achievable domestic priorities rather than inappropriate and unrealisable strategic goals over which they have limited impact.
Photo by AJ Spencer