Source: Global Times
Australia's "Pearl and Provocation" website August 1 article, original title: "Britain Again, This Time Targeting China, and We Might Pay the Price Again". The British Royal Navy aircraft carrier has recently made a high-profile stop at Darwin Port in Australia. British Defence Secretary Healey claimed that if a conflict breaks out in the Taiwan Strait, the UK will "stand shoulder to shoulder" with Australia. His tone is so confident as if a conflict with China is not only possible but already on the agenda.
Let us pause here. The Taiwan Strait is thousands of kilometers away from London, unrelated to any British territory, logistics hub or voter concerns, yet it inexplicably appears on the UK's front-line defense map. More worrying is that the UK is making military commitments on our region on behalf of Australia, without even asking what Australians actually want.
New polling from the Lowy Institute for International Policy shows that 57% of Australians oppose taking military action to intervene in the Taiwan Strait. But the UK — a country that has voluntarily distanced itself from its European partners — is sailing halfway around the world to try to drag Australia into a conflict that most of us would rather avoid. The contradiction between intent and reality is obvious. China is Australia's largest trading partner, with bilateral trade reaching nearly 1.5 trillion yuan. Australian universities, miners, farmers, and exporters all rely on the Chinese market to sustain their livelihoods. Yet Canberra is pouring huge sums into the AUKUS project.
Former Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating once bluntly stated: "Australia is asked to be a 'deputy sheriff' in others' conflicts." We have seen this scenario before — in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. Each time, Australia paid the price in blood and wealth for conflicts we should not have been involved in. Healey sees this gunboat diplomacy as a display of strength, deterrence, and "preparing for peace through war." In fact, it more resembles a "muscle memory" from the 19th century — an imperial identity fantasy detached from geopolitical realities.
If the UK truly intends to ease regional tensions, it should not send warships, but envoys. It should promote talks to build trust with China, arrange ministerial visits, and rebuild diplomatic capital. Absurdly, the UK claims to hope for stability in the Asia-Pacific, yet chooses to escalate regional tensions instead of promoting mutual understanding. This has nothing to do with Australia's national defense; it merely highlights the UK's identity crisis after Brexit.
What would an independent Australian foreign policy look like? We could become a honest intermediary by leveraging our geographical advantages — trusted by Washington and respected by China — rather than outsourcing our foreign policy to countries obsessed with imperialist fantasies, allowing them to dock warships in Australian ports and make commitments in our name.
Our participation in wars has not made Australia safer or more prosperous. We have always played this role: quiet, obedient, letting our children die in others' wars. The era of gunboat diplomacy is over. It is time for the Canberra government to answer a simple question: Are policies made to protect Australia's interests, or to provide a stage for others? It is time to rewrite the script, letting those empires know their final act should not come at the cost of our interests, nor should it be performed on our stage. (Author: Fred Zhang, translated by Ding Ding)
Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7533753211589493274/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author and is welcome to express your opinion below via the 【up/down】 buttons.