There are two competing trends in contemporary international relations, namely securitization of international relations in conjunction with economization of international relations. This is largely due to diametrically different approaches favored by the two superpowers, the United States and China. Unlike the US who favors security-oriented means, Communist China has a tendency to frequently employ economic means to achieve its political and strategic goals since its inauguration of economic reforms and open door policy in 1979. This is manifest when it comes to the PRC’s policy toward the South Pacific, Australia and New Zealand in particular. The main purpose of this article is to explore Communist China’s corresponding negotiation behavior to Australia and New Zealand in a comparative way.
China has strong economic complementarity with both Australia and New Zealand. In a more specific way, Australia and New Zealand heavily depend on China’s huge market. China is currently Australia and New Zealand’s largest trading partner and number one export market. Australia’s exports to China accounted for 30% of its total exports, so is the same percentage of New Zealand’s exports to China in its total exports. In addition, both Australia and New Zealand are countries which primarily export lamb, beef, milk, dairy products and many other agricultural products. So, the two countries are rivals in the global market. However, one big difference when it comes to exports, Australia also exports energy such as oil and natural gas as well as minerals such as iron ores, coal, aluminum, zinc, copper, as well as critical minerals including lithium, nickel, cobalt, graphite, rare earth, tungsten, vanadium and so on, while New Zealand possesses none of these. It is against this background, in contrast to New Zealand, Australia dares to say no to China. Of course, that does not come without economic cost. The salient example is the case of former Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison, who publicly urged the international community to investigate the origin of the Covid-19. Then, Australia has suffered from China’s economic sanctions till now. By contrast, realizing that it does not have strong bargaining chips, New Zealand has conducted a very skillful and flexible diplomacy toward Communist China with a particular focus on economic gains, most of time gaining access to huge markets ahead of Australia.
With the conflicting economic interests and different negotiating behavior between Australia and New Zealand, Beijing has been able to play off one against the other. Taking the negotiationof free trade agreement (FTA) as an example, Australia made the first move to propose bilateral FTA negotiation with China. Former Chinese President Hu Jintao agreed to launch negotiations in 2003 when he met Australian Prime Minister John Howard in Canberra. Nevertheless, New Zealand ahead of Australia became the first Western country that recognized China as a market economy April 2004 and became the first developed economy to launch bilateral FTA negotiations with China in November, the same year. Moreover, Former Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao paid a visit to Australia and New Zealand in April 2006. He publicly expressed his wishes to conclude FTAs with the two South Pacific countries in their respective capitals. Obviously he attempted to take advantage of competing economic benefit between the two countries with a view to pressing them to make concessions in exchange for economic gains ahead of the other. As a result, New Zealand signed FTA with China 2008, while Australia did not seal FTA with China until 2014.
In the same vein, dissimilar to former Australian Prime Minister Morrison who loudly opposed to China, former New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern did not criticize Chinese authorities publicly and refused to support the Five Eyes (FVEY) joint declaration involving blaming Beijing for its violation of Hong Kong and Xinjiang’s human rights. Subsequently, we are not surprised to see New Zealand upgrade its FTA with China in January 2021 to allow the country to enjoy zero tariff in wood and paper products, dairy products and seafood exports to China, after a similar review between China and Australia failed to manifest in December the previous year. Beijing also in the trade upgrade agreed to open up to more New Zealand investors in areas such as aviation, education, finance, elderly care, and passenger transport. [1] Again, China sent invitation to both New Zealand and Australia’s Prime Ministers, but New Zealand Chris Hipkins went to China with a large delegation of business leaders last month with an aim to attract more Chinese tourists, students and investment.
In conclusion, when it comes to China’s policy toward the South Pacific, New Zealand has been frequently used a negotiation leverage to lure Australia to accommodate itself to terms of China. As for Australia, current Prime Minister Anthony Albanese defeated the Morrison’s Coalition government in May 2022 and has stabilized Australia’s relations with China for the time being.[2] However, their economic relations have not completely normalized yet. That is why Beijing offers an olive branch to Canberra by inviting Albanese, but deliberately arranged Hipkins’ visit ahead of his Australian counterpart. Last month, Australian foreign Minister Penny Wong insisted that Prime Minister Albanese will not visit China any time soon unless China removes all trade barriers. China imposed trade sanctions on several items such as wine, rock lobsters, coal and barley in recent years which has cost Australian exporters almost a$60 billion. [3] While some restrictions have been wound back there are still some bans in place. [4]
[1] “China-New Zealand relations: upgrade to free-trade agreement eliminates nearly all trade tariffs,” The South China Morning Post, January 26, 2021,
https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3119318/china-new-zealand-relations-upgrade-free-trade-agreement
[2] Richard McGregor, “The truce with China is a fragile one,” The Australian Financial Review, June23, 2023,
https://www.afr.com/policy/foreign-affairs/the-truce-with-china-is-a-fragile-one-20230618-p5dhfq
[3] 9種澳洲商品遭中國制裁3年時間：總損失近600億澳元，澳華網， 2023年6月15日，https://www.chinesenews.net.au/navigator/oznews/66523.php
[4] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-22/continued-progress-necessary-before-china-trip-proceeds/102379096
(Adjunct Professor of Diplomacy and Director,Center for WTO Studies College of International Affairs National Chengchi University To-hai Liou, PhD)
