{"id":28606,"date":"2016-09-12T06:00:19","date_gmt":"2016-09-11T20:00:19","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?p=28606"},"modified":"2016-09-09T16:02:10","modified_gmt":"2016-09-09T06:02:10","slug":"oz-foreign-trade-white-paper-liberal-sacred-cows","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/oz-foreign-trade-white-paper-liberal-sacred-cows\/","title":{"rendered":"Oz Foreign and Trade White Paper and Liberal sacred cows"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/p>\n
Australia\u2019s Foreign and Trade White Paper<\/a>\u2014expected next year\u2014will have several sacred cows grazing through its pages, and the holiest of beasts will be the US alliance, a cow of a bipartisan colour.<\/p>\n On the partisan side of the yard will be the herd draped with Liberal Party ribbons:<\/p>\n Sacred cows tend to be worshiped, not questioned. In the White Paper, though, the US alliance cow will be pushed and probed because of Asia\u2019s shifting balance of power and the China conundrums. The analysis will need to think about the dragon in the same paddock as the alliance cow.<\/p>\n The new beast, \u2018economic diplomacy\u2019, will be so wonderfully groomed it’ll stand as its own justification\u2014more anointed than examined. This cow is central to the Liberal story about how diplomacy, trade and aid should be done.<\/p>\n Here\u2019s Julie Bishop\u2019s proposition: \u2018If the goal of traditional diplomacy is peace, then the goal of\u00a0economic diplomacy<\/strong>\u00a0is\u00a0prosperity’.<\/strong> <\/em>The quote (and emphasis) are from the DFAT<\/a> discussion of economic diplomacy and its four pillars: trade, growth, investment and business.<\/p>\n The big boast of economic diplomacy is the three trade deals the Coalition government clinched with Japan, South Korea and China. The bilateral magic is to be re-worked in future from Indonesia to India to the Brexiting Brits.<\/p>\n The economic diplomacy cow will be one of the bigger animals in the White Paper. Yet there’s a bunch of academic economists sharpening weapons to slit its throat. The professorial posse<\/a> calls for DFAT to lose its grip on the centrepiece of trade diplomacy: negotiation of Free Trade Agreements (FTAs). The old arguments throb: FTAs are preferential, discriminatory and diversionary\u2014they give benefits to the FTA partner and deny them to others.<\/p>\n Shiro Armstrong\u2019s<\/a> assessment of Australia\u2019s 2005 FTA with the United States is that trade diversion caused \u2018a fall in Australian and US trade with the rest of the world’. The modelling says the cumulative effect of the AUSFTA was to reduce or divert US$53 billion of trade with other economies.<\/p>\n The attack on the \u2018free trade mythology\u2019 by the academic posse is that DFAT\u2019s secret negotiation of FTAs involves a misleading process \u2018used to create an unreal public perception\u2019 where proclaimed economic gains are \u2018without any basis in fact’. No basis in fact! Holy cow!<\/p>\n The posse wants to embrace the rigour of the Productivity Commission and give more power to Parliament: \u2018DFAT\u2019s grip on trade policy has proved impervious to public challenge and will be removed only by strong political direction’.<\/p>\n A tacit understanding of the limits of existing economic diplomacy was expressed in Malcolm Turnbull\u2019s<\/a> G20 call to use bilateral building blocks to strengthen the multilateral system:<\/p>\n The professorial posse challenges more than one sacred cow because the economic diplomacy theme flows though much of the Liberal government\u2019s foreign policy, from bilateral deals to the big change in the way Oz does development aid.<\/p>\n In its first term, the Liberal government under Tony Abbott: killed off a golden aid consensus that lasted only a decade (completing the Oz journey from aid superpower to aid superwimp<\/a>); ordered the greatest revolution in Australia\u2019s foreign policy bureaucracy<\/a> since 1987 (integrating AusAID into DFAT<\/a> as Pre-FaT ate WasAID<\/a>), and quietly killed an iron law of Coalition governments that stood for nearly seven decades (previously the wombats<\/a>\u2014the National\/Country Party\u2014always got the Trade portfolio).<\/p>\n The economic diplomacy theme burnishes the Liberal \u2018national interest\u2019<\/a> badging. Thus, the first two principles for the integration of AusAID into DFAT<\/a> stated:<\/p>\n The 1997 Howard government DFAT White Paper (In the National Interest<\/a>) devoted one of its five chapters to bilateral relationships as \u2018the Basic Building Block\u2019, while the 2003 paper (Advancing the National Interest<\/a>) grouped five of its 12 chapters under the heading \u2018Consolidating and expanding our bilateral and regional relationships\u2019.<\/p>\n Behold the sacred cow herd, grazing through the realist bilateral bush and the lush economic diplomacy pasture, contented in the national interest paddock. The sacred beasts do far more than ceremonial duty. They frame the Liberal understanding of the world, defining policy choices and driving political arguments.<\/p>\n To be continued…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Australia\u2019s Foreign and Trade White Paper\u2014expected next year\u2014will have several sacred cows grazing through its pages, and the holiest of beasts will be the US alliance, a cow of a bipartisan colour. On the partisan …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":79,"featured_media":28607,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mi_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[1056,89,365,523],"class_list":["post-28606","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-general","tag-bilateral-relations","tag-dfat","tag-trade","tag-white-paper"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n\n
\n
\n