Transcript
TESS NEWTON CAIN: I think what we have seen in the past year is an increase in quantity in terms of the amount of attention that has been paid to the Pacific. I think it is an open question whether that quantity is reflected in quality, in terms of the nature of the engagement that we have had, and whether it really has had a flow on effect in terms of improving relationships at a meaningful level.
DON WISEMAN: Australia has always given a lot of aid to the Pacific and no one is going to deny that, but sometimes it's the way the aid is given and the lack of give and take, I guess, with the recipient countries. Would you agree?
TNC: I think that's right. I think a lot of the concern that is reflected in the paper I have written is about, as you say, is the way Australia conducts its relationships and some of the tone it uses. And I think certainly we have seen a number of examples of opportunities that Australia had to demonstrate that they really do see Pacific island countries as partners and as friends, but they haven't necessarily made the most of those opportunities. I think it starts at the top and it starts with things like whether or not the Australian prime minister attends the meeting of the Pacific Islands Forum leaders.
DW: Yes and as is reflected in issues like climate change and the Pacific really have a united view on this, yet Australia is contemplating, or had been contemplating, pulling out of the Paris Agreement.
TNC: I think climate change issue is a key one. As you say it is something that the Pacific Island countries are united around and we saw after the Forum meeting on Nauru concern expressed by Pacific Island leaders about Australia trying to water down the language that went into the communique. What I also think is interesting and it is a point I make in this paper, is that it is a point of divergence between Australia's position and New Zealand's position and that possibly undermines these long held beliefs, that are expressed in the foreign policy White Paper that Australia and New Zealand will always be joint in their positions in relation to the Pacific. And I think climate change is one of the fault lines in that.
DW: Yes and that is just another Australian presumption that because they are the big players everyone else will go along with them.
TNC: Well I don't know if that's necessarily how people in the Australian foreign policy machinery would say that that's what they want to convey but there are certainly a number of areas that I look at in this paper that indicate to me that that is the message that people are getting.
DW: There seems to be a very big divergence between departments so that Foreign Affairs is trying to achieve something yet we have the mess that's been created by Immigration and the de-stabilizing of places like Nauru as a result.
TNC: I think the lack of whole of government approach to the Pacific is one that really does cause a number of problems in the Australian foreign policy scene. We see less of that in New Zealand but in Australia there's definitely seems to be a number of issues - immigration is one, agriculture is another, where other bits of government just don't seem to get that what they are doing is important for relationships with the Pacific, and I think that's something that DFAT struggles with, and needs to do more at, needs to get better at, in terms of educating colleagues in other parts of government about why the Pacific is important and why they need to bear in mind when they are instituting and executing policy in the region, and domestically.
DW: Now your presentation at the ANU coming up in a couple of weeks is called 'Walking the Talk: Is Australia's Engagement with the Pacific a Step Up or a Stumble?. So what's the answer to the question?
TNC: Well the answer to the question is there have been a few stumbles and if there continues to be more stumbling it is going to be very hard to step up.
