Australia: Whither Foreign Policy Under Turnbull?

Since Australia’s former Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull ousted Tony Abbott as prime minister, the focus has been messaging, vision and economic management: Restore the confidence of people and the confidence of business. But what is Turnbull’s view of the world and what sort of foreign policy will he follow? These are likely to be some of the first issues he will need to address.

Climate Change

Climate change is an issue with both domestic and foreign implications, and was quickly on the agenda of the new Turnbull government. In Parliament on September 15, Victorian Green Adam Bandt asked if the new prime minister’s plan was to stick with the current Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). Despite being the center-right hero to many on the left (to the sometimes inexplicably spastic fury of the conservatives) for his stance on climate change, Turnbull made it clear that there would be no change and that he regarded the government’s current ETS as one of the best in the world. So far, nothing new to take to COP21 in Paris in November. It’s worth remembering that the government is a Coalition with the National Party, which is a rural party and more conservative. Turnbull needs to keep his coalition partners happy.

The implications of this are broad. As we reported recently the majority of the nations attending the recent Pacific Islands Forum were very clear on what they wanted: different targets on greenhouse gas and temperature rise from Australia and New Zealand. If these remain the same, the relations Australia enjoys with its nearest neighbors will stay strained.

At the same time, Barack Obama has been vocal about Australia’s lack of effort on climate change. There was his pointed speech last year on the sidelines of the G20 and a more recent speech at a conference in Alaska on those not pulling their weight. Given U.S.-China cooperation on climate change and with even British conservatives excoriating Abbott’s efforts, Australia’s stance will likely need a good PR campaign come November. Maybe Turnbull’s belief that the government’s policies need a better salesman than Tony Abbott will pay off, but Pacific leaders already buying properties in New Zealand as their own arable land shrinks may take some convincing.

ISIS

As I have written elsewhere: “While it seems likely then that a Turnbull government will remain open to accepting the Syrian refugees, with Abbott’s ouster, Washington has lost its biggest booster for Australian action against ISIS.”

It has, but that is also because Washington has lost one of its biggest boosters in general, replaced by a man skeptical of lionizing all aspects of the alliance.

Earlier this year, in contrast to Tony Abbott, Turnbull said that it was important not to overstate the importance of ISIS. This is not just in contrast to Abbott, but also to Foreign Minister Julie Bishop, whose stance on counter terrorism regionally and globally has been strong and public, even if she’s lacked Abbott’s “death cult” rhetoric. ISIS, Turnbull said, is not Hitlter’s Germany and “We should be careful not to say or do things which can be seen to add credibility to these delusions."

Regarding Australia’s membership of the U.S.-led coalition against ISIS, the new prime minister said September 15 that the nation was no longer “a country far away from the problems of the world.” This plays down the perception that Australia is keen to follow and help the U.S., something Turnbull has been ambivalent on in the past to a point, but does boost Australia’s global citizen role. “As I speak today, members of the ADF are in the Middle East putting themselves in harm’s way to stop the spread of a violent ideology.” Note the use of “violent ideology” over Abbott’s “death cult.”

Submarines and an Overdue White Paper

Apart from Australia’s “left turn” to fight ISIS in Syria, what are the defense issues that will occupy the prime minister? The submarine issue must be resolved as Australia needs a new fleet of 12 by 2020 to replace the aging half-dozen Collins class. Right now the competitive evaluation process is open to France, Germany and Japan. Abbott has earlier expressed support for an off-the-rack purchase of Japanese Soryu-class, but a component of local build is now expected. Though South Australian senator Nick Xenophon can make a compelling case for the security and sovereignty aspects of local build it was also always down to political expediency for the embattled Abbott.

Last month Abbott also announced an A$89 billion ($62 billion) ship and submarine budget, with A$40 billion to go to naval shipbuilding in the Adelaide shipyards. Most, including Bill Shorten, saw it as an early election promise. At the same time, the surprise announcement may have delayed the anticipated Defense White Paper. Now that Turnbull is prime minister, what will change?

Andrew Davies, Senior Analyst Military Capability at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, told The Diplomat that he thinks there will be continuity, not change, in terms of defense direction. Also, because the issues driving defense policy haven’t really changed, “I suspect Turnbull will keep his ‘change credits’ to other areas of priority for him - economic policy foremost.” And that will depend on the budget for defense. “Is two percent of GDP still the goal for 2023?” If this isn’t to change then it’s likely much of the new White Paper won’t either. In the end, says Davies, “much depends on what Malcolm Turnbull has in mind as overarching priorities.”

As Professor Hugh White noted in February, Turnbull has also said (regarding Kevin Rudd’s 2009 Defense White Paper) “I disagree... that we should base our defense planning and procurement on the contingency of a naval war with China in the South China Sea.” Six years is a long time in naval strategy, of course. Chinese nuclear-armed submarines and increasing stand offs in the South China Sea involving China may not mean Australia must base defense planning around a war with China, but the push by the Americans for the Soryu-class submarine purchase definitely underlines the issue.

Rising China

Tony Abbott had a certain hard business focus in regards to Asia and has pointed to three free trade agreements (FTAs) concluded with major economies during his tenure (though the China FTA was the work of a decade) as evidence of his success. Turnbull is equally enthusiastic about the region; you have only to read some of his speeches to see that. What can also be gleaned from a reading of some of those speeches is an enthusiasm not simply for increased trade, but for the wider possibilities a wealthy and successful Asia offers.

Professor Hugh White noted that Turnbull did not seem to see the world still in terms of U.S. superiority and Anglophone hegemony, but welcomed the rise of China and noted the possibility of security competition. The need to balance the two is important, though that’s hardly nuanced thinking. Near every nation in the region, and beyond, has some stake in that issue.

There will be other issues, from national security and regional efforts to counter terrorism to Australia’s place a middle or regional power. Will Turnbull view the UN more favorably? Probably (though Bishop wound up enjoying Australia’s time at the Security Council), but what sort of policy that will translate to will be more important.

The election is not far off, even if it not an early one, and it’s speculative whether a far-reaching and cogent foreign policy will be developed in election season, when Australia tends to become pronouncedly parochial. International areas of interest may remain what we’ve outlined, along with trade. But Turnbull certainly seems keen to be as prime ministerial as possible and for that one needs to be a statesman as well.