COULD HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS BE THE PRIMARY SOURCE OF CHINA-AUSTRALIA TENSIONS

The Technology and Trade War has become prominent, especially between the United States and China, but the “war” continues on many other “fronts.” Accurately analyzing the tensions between China and Australia, and the root causes of this tension, is crucial for developing the right policies.

On November 19, Australia, through a report announced by Chief of Defense General Angus Campbell, admitted that some of its special forces soldiers had killed 39 innocent people in Afghanistan. By November 30, Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Zhao Lijian shared an image on Twitter with the caption “Don’t be afraid, we’re here to bring peace,” and added, “The killing of Afghan civilians by Australian soldiers is shocking. We strongly condemn such actions and call for accountability.”

Although Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison demanded an apology from China for what he described as an “extremely offensive” post, this demand was rejected by Chinese officials. Furthermore, Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying clearly defended her colleague Lijian with the words, “Why? Do they think it’s justified to ruthlessly kill Afghan civilians but not to condemn such brutal savagery? Afghan lives matter.”

The lives of the Afghans who were killed are undoubtedly important. However, it raises the question: Does Chunying, who referenced the “Black Lives Matter” protests in the U.S. with the phrase “Afghan lives matter,” also believe that the lives of Uyghur Turks are valuable for China?

On November 18, 2020, the Chinese Embassy in Australia released a document to the press, outlining 14 issues in China-Australia relations, including:

The banning of Huawei and ZTE from Australia’s 5G network,
The rejection of more than 10 Chinese investment projects in areas like infrastructure, agriculture, and livestock, citing “vague and unfounded” national security concerns,
Accusations of covert cyber-attacks against China without any evidence,
Calls for an independent investigation into COVID-19,
Funding provided to anti-China think tanks for spreading “false” reports,
And Australia’s “constant and malicious” interference in issues related to Xinjiang, Hong Kong, and Taiwan.

While China clearly expressed its dissatisfaction with the atrocities committed against Afghans by Australian forces, it is equally clear that it is uncomfortable with any mention of the oppression it has created in its own territories.

Morrison, in response to the 14 issues outlined by the Chinese Embassy, stated that this “informal document” from the Chinese Embassy would not stop Australia from determining its own rules and laws in line with its national interests. Therefore, even though Australia has taken a stance supporting the Uyghur Turks, its primary focus remains on maintaining its ability to make decisions in line with its national interests.

It is evident that neither of these two states, which aim to protect the interests of their citizens or certain segments of society and secure a better position in the escalating power competition, is a global human rights defender. Unfortunately, the human rights violations faced by both Uyghur Turks and Afghans are not the primary source of the tension. China and Australia are using each other’s transgressions as propaganda tools in an already strained bilateral relationship.

The most prominent and primary source of tension between China and Australia: 5G

In 2012, when the 40th anniversary of China-Australia relations was being celebrated and official institutions in both countries were emphasizing strong partnerships in trade and the service sector (tourism and education), experts were already noting that intense economic relations were not being supported by political trust. One of the most fundamental indicators of this was the announcement by then U.S. President Barack Obama in November 2011 that 2,500 marines would be stationed in Australia. In his speech to the Australian Parliament, Obama said he made a “deliberate” and “planned” decision, and China openly expressed its dissatisfaction with this decision. While Obama used “goodwill” language towards China in his speech, it was clear to everyone that the decision was taken against China. Therefore, even in 2012, when there was a desire to further develop intense economic relations, Australia stood with its ally, the United States, when it came to foreign relations and security.

A state’s desire to protect its borders cannot be separated from its desire to protect its data. After all, it is impossible to truly protect borders in an environment where data cannot be safeguarded. When evaluated from this perspective, it becomes understandable that Australia, despite the technical competence and cost advantages of Chinese telecommunications companies and its strong economic ties with China, prevented Huawei from participating in the NBN project aimed at increasing the country’s broadband internet capacity in 2012.

Following a report prepared by the U.S. House of Representatives Intelligence Committee in October 2012, which stated that Huawei and ZTE’s network equipment posed a threat to national security, the notion of this threat became increasingly evident for both the U.S. and Australia. In August 2018, Australia banned the use of Huawei and ZTE equipment in its 5G network.

This decision in 2018 caused a significant rupture in bilateral relations, which were already based more on economic interests than political trust. Both countries’ approaches to this decision have remained unchanged. According to Australian authorities, the exclusion of Chinese companies from the 5G network is a necessity for protecting Australia’s national interests and national security. However, according to Chinese authorities and the companies subject to the ban, it is a “politically motivated” decision that does not serve the interests of Australian companies and consumers.

Although both countries have made reciprocal moves against each other by using different issues as tools, especially after 2018, the ban on using Huawei and ZTE equipment in the 5G network has remained a relevant decision. This decision has meanings beyond economic losses for China. From China’s perspective, the decision is one of the obstacles preventing it from gaining strategic advantages in the new global order, which is clearly going to increasingly rely on internet technologies.

Current situation

The tension between China and Australia became even more pronounced after May 2020 with the expanding trade restrictions imposed by China. These restrictions are trying to push the Australian economy, which is dependent on the Chinese market for export revenues, into a crisis. However, as even Australian experts acknowledge, Australia does not have such leverage over China.

Articles published in the Global Times, known to have direct ties to the Chinese government, generally contain the following assessments regarding the issue:

Australia’s exports are dependent on the Chinese market,
Huawei’s 5G equipment is highly qualified,
Australia was the first country to ban Huawei’s 5G equipment,
Australia is following policies dependent on the U.S.

One statement in the Global Times clearly reveals China’s approach to Australia: “The Australian Government should have strived to maintain a friendly relationship with China, the source of about a third of its exports and its largest trading partner.”

The most prominent and primary source of tension between China and Australia, despite its various manifestations such as trade and human rights issues, is Australia’s ban on the use of Huawei and ZTE equipment in its 5G network. Therefore, any change in these manifestations depends on whether there is a meaningful shift in Australia’s desire to protect its data or in China’s ambition to achieve economic and strategic gains.