Australia urged to forge closer bonds with Taiwan, even if it angers China

Australia should be willing to risk a backlash from Beijing by deepening defence and economic ties with the self-governing island of Taiwan, a group of leading foreign affairs and national security experts has urged.

While recognising the sensitivities involved in moving closer to Taiwan, which China claims as an integral part of its territory, most of the experts agreed that the Australia-Taiwan relationship is underdeveloped and falling behind that of like-minded nations such as Japan.

But one of the nation’s top foreign policy thinkers broke with his fellow panellists to warn that expanding military co-operation with Taiwan would cause too much damage to Australia’s relationship with China, highlighting the thorny politics involved.

Beijing has reacted angrily to Australian politicians visiting Taiwan and China’s ambassador to Australia warned last month that his nation’s position on reuniting the island with the mainland is non-negotiable.

An extensive report by the University of Sydney’s United States Studies Centre, to be launched in Canberra on Thursday, argues that “strengthening ties with [the Taiwanese capital] Taipei is likely to incur short-term economic and political risks for Canberra with Beijing”.

“Nevertheless, the deterioration of Australia’s strategic outlook calls for Canberra to explore all policy options that would develop and reinforce an environment conducive to serving its long-term interests,” the report reads.

The authors, led by the United States Studies Centre’s senior defence adviser Peter Dean and La Trobe Centre for Global Security director Bec Strating, find that Taiwan is “a vibrant democracy whose population is of similar size to Australia’s and whose future matters for the open, rules-based order in which Australia seeks to operate”.

Taiwan, a semiconductor manufacturing powerhouse, is also “a hub of economic and technological relevance well beyond its size”.

“Yet Australia’s policy and public engagement have not kept pace with this growing significance,” they argue.

“In Australia, the use of caution as the default framework for engagement with Taipei, along with our longstanding reductionist debate, has fundamentally hampered any crafting of a sophisticated long-term policy position on Taiwan.

“Critical issues such as regional trade, cybersecurity, democratic governance, foreign interference, and trade and economic dependency in and around Taiwan have been largely overlooked.”

Chinese ambassador Xiao Qian last week warned there was “no room for compromise” on China’s position on Taiwan, which it says is a province of China.

The democratic island of 23 million people has never been controlled by the Chinese Communist Party, but is not recognised as a nation state by most of the world, including Australia.

The authors argue that opportunities for Taiwanese companies to invest in Australia are being lost because of fears in Canberra about offending Beijing.

“Australian government officials have reportedly cautioned some Taiwanese drone companies about operating in the Australian market, causing a chilling effect on Taiwanese business operations overall,” the report states.

“Taiwanese companies in emerging technologies do not feel confident operating in Australia or carrying out their business inquiries.

“This has filtered through to broader Taiwanese industry, which is unsure how best to progress investments in Australia without upsetting the Australian government.”

The Albanese government prides itself on its success at restoring normal diplomatic relations and trade ties with Beijing.

Expert panel member and former Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade boss Peter Varghese rejected the report’s recommendations to expand defence ties with Taiwan, warning this would “have serious adverse implications for our relationship with China without delivering to Australia the benefits which would justify paying these costs”.

“Defence-to-defence relations takes us right up to the boundary line of a state-to-state relationship and in the end that is a risky change to the status quo,” Varghese wrote.

Other expert panel members included former Australian Signals Directorate boss Rachel Noble, the head of the Australian National University’s National Security College Rory Medcalf and the Australian Defence Force’s former chief of joint operations Greg Bilton.

Most experts advocated for the appointment of de facto defence attachés in Taipei and Canberra, following similar moves by Japan, the United Kingdom, the Philippines and the United States.

They also argued that Australia should:

• invite Taiwanese military officials to conferences;
• provide logistical and material support around dual-use technology to Taiwan’s military; and
• consider removing the policy direction that prevents Taiwanese officials from reaching out to the Australian military without first engaging with DFAT.

The report also calls for Australia to support ways for Taiwan to participate in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, even if it does not become a formal member, and to expand bilateral co-operation on green energy and critical minerals.

The report was funded by a grant from Taiwan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but the authors said Taiwanese officials did not participate in the project and that they respected their independence.

Cut through the noise of federal politics with news, views and expert analysis. Subscribers can sign up to our weekly Inside Politics newsletter.