Clinton Fernandes, a former member of the Australian Army Intelligence Corps, has emerged as a critical voice in analyzing Australia’s security policy. His insights, particularly in his latest book Turbulence: Australian Foreign Policy in the Trump Era, challenge the prevailing strategic outlook that prioritizes alignment with U.S. interests over independent national policy.
Fernandes argues that Australian policy planners are primarily motivated by a single standard: advancing U.S. power and ensuring Australia’s relevance to it. This perspective is particularly evident in the controversial AUKUS agreement, which involves purchasing nuclear-powered submarines from the United States and possibly Britain. Critics, including former Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating, have labeled this deal as “the worst in all history.”
Historical Context and Policy Critique
Fernandes’ analysis places current policy decisions within a broader historical and geographical context. His previous work, Sub-Imperial Power: Australia in the International Arena, further explores these themes. The decision to engage in the AUKUS agreement is seen as a continuation of past strategic missteps, driven by the desire to ingratiate Australia with its “great and powerful friend.”
The art of ingratiation, as Fernandes describes, has been a consistent feature of Australian foreign policy for over 80 years. This approach is increasingly indefensible, especially during the Trump administration, which many perceive as veering towards authoritarianism. Fernandes’ book also examines the Trump administration’s impact on global relations, highlighting its disdain for Europe and efforts to preserve U.S. technological dominance.
Global Implications and Comparisons
The U.S. has been developing a system of tributary states, Fernandes notes, without the cultural acceptance that characterized earlier imperial arrangements. Australia’s willingness to follow U.S. directives has led to involvement in conflicts like those in Iraq and Afghanistan, often criticized as futile. Fernandes points out the hypocrisy in Australia’s foreign policy, which condemns certain international actions while ignoring others that align with U.S. interests.
“Human rights will be ignored or highlighted as needed,” Fernandes concludes, emphasizing the selective nature of Australia’s alignment with U.S. policies.
China and the Perceived Threat
For both Australians and the Trump administration, China remains a focal point of concern. Fernandes critiques the limited discourse around the “China threat,” particularly regarding freedom of navigation. He argues that China’s military build-up can be understood within the context of U.S. coercive power and the logic of deterrence.
Fernandes advocates for an independent defense capacity, stressing the importance of submarines for a maritime nation like Australia. He supports air-independent propulsion submarines as a cost-effective and non-proliferative option, contrasting with the nuclear path chosen under AUKUS.
Redefining Realism in Security Policy
Fernandes’ work contributes to a growing debate on Australia’s security priorities. He argues that environmental breakdown poses a more immediate threat than traditional security concerns. This perspective challenges the entrenched realist approach that focuses on military capabilities and alliances.
Australia’s political landscape shows little divergence on environmental issues, yet projects like the North West Shelf gas development continue under the guise of national interest. Fernandes calls for a reevaluation of priorities, advocating for cooperation with nations addressing climate change, rather than aligning with an increasingly unreliable U.S. administration.
As Australia navigates its strategic future, Fernandes’ critiques offer a compelling case for rethinking subservience to U.S. power and redefining national interests in a rapidly changing global landscape.
