![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Donald Trump’s election precipitated a debate in Australia about the value of retaining close alliance ties with the United States. Similar dynamics are discernible in other U.S. allies as the negative impact of Trump administration policies becomes clearer. Yet despite this “Trump effect,” we argue Australia is unlikely to distance itself from the United States because at the core of Australia’s strategic culture is a very positive “cultural orientation” toward the United States that is highly institutionalized in treaties, formal bilateral ties, Track 2 diplomacy, and public opinion. Such institutionalized ties have powerful path dependent effects. Accordingly, we conclude that the Trump effect does not constitute a powerful enough “exogenous shock” to move Australia off its well-worn grand-strategic path. But this alliance relationship is marked by both high cultural affinity and high institutionalization: American policy-makers should seriously consider whether other U.S. allies can tolerate similar levels of “stress.”
Acknowledgements
We would like to acknowledge the helpful advice provided by the two anonymous reviewers, the diligence of CSP’s editor Hylke Dijkstra, and the comments audience members offered when an early draft was presented at a Politics and International Relations Seminar at the University of Western Australia in May 2018.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1. For theoretical discussion of the entrapment/abandonment alliance dilemma see Snyder (Citation1984, pp. 466–467).
2. The acquisition of the Collins-Class submarines and the F-35 Lightning II are notorious examples. See Davies and Thomson (Citation2011); Magnay (Citation2016).
3. ANZUS obligations between New Zealand and the United States have been suspended since a 1984 dispute over nuclear-armed U.S. Navy vessels’ access to New Zealand’s ports; ANZUS has now effectively become two bilateral treaties (i.e. U.S.-Australia and Australia-New Zealand). But Washington and Auckland still cooperate: For example, they share intelligence through "Five Eyes," and New Zealand contributed troops to the US-led stabilization military mission in Afghanistan.
4. Personal communication (Bloomfield) with Australian Defence Department, March 22, 2018.
5. Short-hand for the complex web of (often secret) agreements between the five primary “Anglo” states: United States, United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia.
6. In cricket, the stumps are the three upright sticks which batsmen defend from bowlers while trying to score runs. Matches officially end when they are pulled from the ground.
7. I.e. Australia’s military would be configured primarily to defend the continent; the Navy and Air Force were prioritized over the army, reversing the previous, long-standing priorities.
8. In 2016 Indonesia spent US$8.1 billion on defense; Australia spent US$27.4 billion (SIPRI, Citationn.d.).
9. In 2016 India spent US$63.9 billion on defense (SIPRI, Citationn.d.).
10. In 2016 Japan spent US$45.4 billion on defense (SIPRI, Citationn.d.).
11. In 2016 China spent US$228 billion on defense (SIPRI, Citationn.d.).
12. For the first time, in 2005; at the time of writing he was standing as a candidate for the anti-immigrant, far-right One Nation party in the 2019 NSW state election.
13. Anecdotal evidence from Beeson’s former students applying for jobs and working in the defense establishment strongly suggests that “unorthodox” opinions about the alliance are typically regarded very unfavourably.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Mark Beeson
Mark Beeson is Professor of International Politics at the University of Western Australia in Perth. Before joining UWA, he taught at Murdoch (also in Perth), Griffith (Brisbane, Queensland), York (UK) and Birmingham universities. He is the founding editor of the Palgrave book series Critical Studies of the Asia Pacific. His latest book is titled Rethinking Global Governance: it will be published later in 2019 by Palgrave.
Alan Bloomfield
Alan Bloomfield works as a Lecturer at the University of Western Australia in Perth. His first book, India and the Responsibility to Protect, was published in 2016 by Ashgate. His second book, Norm Antipreneurs, an edited volume, was published by Routledge in 2017. He is currently preparing a third book with the working title of Australia’s Strategic Culture, to be published by Melbourne University Press in 2020. He has also published in leading journals including Contemporary Security Policy, Pacific Review, Review of International Studies, India Review, and Australian Journal of Politics and History.