Soft Power: Asia in Australia and Australia in Asia

Things international relations scholars like include varied demarcations of power and contested terms. “Soft power,” that phrase first coined by Joseph Nye in 1990 but intuitively understood for hundreds of years previously (especially by China), is both. Getting countries to want what you want and to share your values is one thing, but soft power is not always so obvious: It is not just values but culture and cultural capital, such as music, art or food. It is usually immediately understood but harder to readily quantify compared with hard power or even economic might. It has often been seen through the lens of how the U.S. has used it: fast food corporations, cultural products, and technology have helped drive its values and economic heft.

Global brand agency FutureBrand suggests that countries can be like brands and “strength or weakness of perception of a country can influence peoples’ decisions to choose them as places to visit, live or invest in.” Not all countries qualify as brands, however. Only 22 of 75 profiled countries did and China did not make the top 20 (though Japan is number one). It is on a list of countries to watch. Though there is a confluence between soft power and brand power, conflating the two only works to a point: FutureBrand’s report suggests that brand perception helps tourism and trade (despite Status Countries ranking high in Value Systems). Monocle produces a soft power report each year and ranked China 19, Korea 15 and Japan 4 in November. Australia is number 8.

But what might Asia’s soft power be in Australia? And how does Asia think of Australia?

Asia’s Soft Power in Australia

An old Mad Magazine Australia comic spoofing political party One Nation – known for its distaste for Asian investment and immigration – profiled its members. Dot, a scowling old woman, had “once eaten a Chinese meal.” In Australia, much of Asia’s cultural capital and wider appeals to multiculturalism are seen through the prism of food. But what else makes up Asia’s cultural capital and soft power in Australia?

Australia has been looking to Asia for decades, from Marshall Plan-esque education schemes to Whitlam’s engagement with China, and Keating’s close ties with Indonesia under Suharto. There is a general consensus that Australia is largely geographically Asian and generally welcoming of Asian migration and influence. These days there are Asian politicians, cooking television stars, and comedians, though they are largely Australian-raised.

Asian may be difficult to parse as, after all, it is a disparate grouping of nations. Yet there are certain trends worth noting. Asian soft power in Australia is driven by some corporations, such as Samsung or even Tata, as well as stalwart Japan. But it is more piecemeal, from restaurants (rather than large chains) to Korea’s hallyu, which has a small but devoted following, to the current showpiece exhibition at the National Gallery of Victoria: China a Golden Age.

After food travel might be Asia’s biggest soft power drawcard. According to Allianz, six out of Australia’s top ten travel destinations are in Asia, Indonesia being number two, Thailand four, and China number six. Australia has had Chinese restaurants since the 19th century – 18 were registered in Melbourne alone in 1920; dumplings (pot-stickers for American readers) are practically the emblematic food of the city now, with Korean fried chicken running a new but close second. A new generation of Vietnamese restaurants has sprung up and Luke Nguyen is one of television’s most bankable culinary stars and cookbook authors.

Asian language learning is declining, and the Asian Century does often seem more focused on China, and largely in economic terms. Even when there is a will to teach Asian languages in schools, Chinese remains problematic for the very high fixed cost of learning it compared with, say, Bahasa, which has been taught on and off for decades.

There are 13 Confucius Institutes but they are still greeted with some suspicion thanks to their being sponsored by the Chinese government. Pointing out China has little soft power – The Australian’s foreign editor Greg Sheridan ripped into it during a visit to an Indian university last year, suggesting that India’s institutions and heroes such as Gandhi carried considerable more weight than China’s did – has been going on for years globally. A recent Foreign Policy story pointed out that Chinese authors at America’s biggest book expo could not even give their books away (though poor organization was also to blame).

In fact, China’s harder aspects of power seem to undercut goodwill towards soft power. A Lowy Institute poll noted that “feelings towards China are at 58°, fairly consistent but lower than Japan, which at 68° is the highest ranked Asian country” on its “feelings thermometer.” The U.S. is 73 and New Zealand 83.

There is, and remains, suspicion at political and local levels over China: from Tony Abbott’s earlier comments that “fear and greed” drive Australia’s China policy to fears of Chinese driving up house prices and suspicion of anything from food imports to those Confucius Institutes. Much of the suspicion is related to modern-day China and its government; things that are simply Chinese are well enough liked. Chinese New Year in Bendigo has a history going back to the nineteenth century and has always been well-attended by tourists eager to see one of the world’s longest dragons.

This is interesting, largely because as China expert and Lowy Institute East Asia Program Director Merriden Varrall pointed out in a 2012 paper, China has understood soft power for centuries, “In fact, the concept of “using virtue” to attract others to the Chinese cause goes back hundreds of years.” China has often tried to lead lesser nations and “barbarians “ by the example of its superior culture.

What of Australia’s close neighbor and on-off friend Indonesia? Save tourism, mostly to Bali, Indonesia does not have a large cultural presence in Australia. Thanks to post-war migration the Vietnamese make up a large and visible group and pho is a popular though still-mispronounced dish. Whilst migrants and a second and third generation have done much to popularize Vietnamese culture it really can’t be seen in Nye’s terns given how much of the older generation remain staunchly anti-Hanoi. Cultural capital is advanced without anyone necessarily wanting what the Politburo wants, save maybe a less aggressive China.

There is Asian cultural capital all over Australia, though it is varied, disparate, and appeals often to niche groups (such as SBS Radio’s programs of the Asian pop charts), but it has not seemingly turned into demonstrable soft power, which is a shame for all involved. Partly this can be explained in Lowy’s poll. Though geographically Asian Australia remains “strongly wedded to Anglo connections.”

“Koalas, Food, Studying and Holidaying”

An Australian in Asia doesn’t always need much. Sometimes a word is enough, and it’s usually “kangaroo.” Often when I was asked where I was from when in Vietnam and answered Uc (the official name for Australia, though the embassy in Hanoi represents it phonetically as Ox-Tray-Lia) I got an excited, “kan-garr-oo!” in reply. Wildlife has been a mainstay of Aussie soft power since before the term was coined (does anyone remember MacArthur’s cockatoo?). Now, we have “Koala Diplomacy,” premiered at last year’s G20 in Brisbane. Australia sent four of the animals to Singapore as part of the same venture (it exports kangaroo meat for pet food worldwide too, of course). Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has said, “it portrays Australia in a soft light and promotes our values as an open, free, tolerant democracy.”

Despite koalas not actually being very cuddly (and usually stoned from the amount eucalyptus they consume) they are a nice symbol and shore up Australia’s reputation in Asia as friendly, and not America. But what does make up Australia soft power in Asia?

It can be hard to even gauge what Australia thinks of its own soft power, past Aussies believing people like the wildlife. Some rhetoric from ASEAN members aside, Australia seems to be generally well thought of, with transparent business practices and good education. The former might be changing given the amount of money laundering apparently going on from Asia-Pacific nations, according to Fairfax. Papua New Guinea Prime Minister Peter O’Neil has called Australia the Cayman Islands of the Asia Pacific. Aussies always love to be liked.

Since Australia axed its Australia Network last year there have been worries its soft power in the region has fallen. Australian diplomat Richard Broinowski told The Diplomat’s Luke Hunt last year that it was a short sighted decision. Others agreed but despaired of the preponderance of Australian Football (AFL) on the channel. Possibly the $20 million a year it cost could be better spent on digital? Certainly, digital is the new watchword of so many areas and industries; Australian diplomacy and soft power efforts are no different. As The Diplomat’s Elliot Brennan has said, it might be a new plank in Australia's efforts after such steep cuts to foreign aid, and he has noted some of Bishop’s efforts in this area.

However, Daniele Cave, who coves digital for the Lowy Institute, noted the lack of real digital policy shown by Australia when covering a recent talk by Bishop on Australia’s soft power. “Bishop missed a huge opportunity. In a major speech on soft power, digital diplomacy wasn't discussed and digital diplomacy didn't occur,” she wrote. And again, after cutting the budget of Australia Network (which broadcast into Asia), that money could have been seeded into digital but has not been. “One year on, Australia finds itself with more social media accounts but stuck in a cycle of broadcasting rather than influencing.” And topics covered? “Koalas, food, studying and holidaying.” Important, especially the tourism and study bits, but aren’t there other messages to push, also, like collaborative counter terrorism efforts? Though on that topic: digital engagement in other areas is progressing: the recent CVE Summit noted the importance of online engagement given it’s a platform for radicalization.

FutureBrand and Monocle both rate Australia’s brand and soft power highly, at eight for FutureBrand. That is, remember, globally. Soft power in Indonesia would not rate as highly right now after the outcries over the recent executions and Boycott Bali campaign. Australia’s soft power in China is generally good, though relations with the U.S. throw in, diplomatically at least, the odd spanner. What Australia decides to say about the South China Sea will likely have an effect on popular opinion. It is an issue increasingly watched and written about in Australia. There is an Australian studies center at Peking University and Australia is a favored destination for Chinese students. Australian universities have campuses overseas, such as the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) in Vietnam. Australia’s banks have also been moving into the region, Macquarie in Korea and ANZ and Commonwealth elsewhere, such as Cambodia and Vietnam.

China is Australia’s second largest markets for tourism, with 709,000 in 2013 and a A$4.8 billion ($3.7 billion) spend. The market should be worth A$7.4 billion or even A$9.2 billion by 2020. These figures represent total visits, though tourism makes up the main share and education comes in at well over 100,000.

Meanwhile Australia also does well in China and Korea for not being America, and this has helped beef exports in the past. Soft power, cultural capital, and Brand Australia are going to be integral to Australia’s trade as it moves away from resources. As has been pointed out numerous times, Australia cannot bank on its recent free trade agreements with major Asian economies alone to drive exports. If Australia is really to do well selling, say, wine in China (its third largest export market, expected to expand after the 14 percent tariff goes away) then Chinese consumers need to have a favorable impression of Australia. The same goes for beef. New Zealand’s dairy campaign and market, though partly fortuitous after concerns over China’s domestic milk, is always cited as instructive. Clean, high quality produce sold through well-cultivated networks is what Australia should be aiming to promote, say experts.

Despite what may turn out to be a popular market for kangaroo meat the days of kangaroo or koala diplomacy are, if not ending, then at least expanding to something a little more substantial.