Taiwan: What Could, Should and Will Australia Do?

IF 1.2 3区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Washington Quarterly Pub Date : 2022-07-03 DOI:10.1080/0163660X.2022.2126113
Brendan Taylor
{"title":"Taiwan: What Could, Should and Will Australia Do?","authors":"Brendan Taylor","doi":"10.1080/0163660X.2022.2126113","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Australia was once famously described as “The Frightened Country”: a strategically anxious nation that sees more danger than opportunity emanating from the Asian continent to its north. Consistent with this characterization, Australian security practitioners and pundits alike have for several years now been warning of the prospects of a Taiwan conflict and its potential consequences for Australia. Three distinct positions have emerged as to how Canberra should respond to the growing risk of war. One camp calls for Australia to make clear its commitment to joining with the United States and others in defending Taiwan from a Chinese attack, with a view to deterring Beijing from ever taking this path. A second perspective maintains that Taiwan’s defense is not a vital Australian interest, and that Canberra should be candid with Washington and Taipei regarding this reality well in advance of hostilities erupting. A third school, and one associated most closely with Australia’s new Anthony Albanese-led Labor government, holds that talking up even the chances of conflict is illadvised. Instead, this camp argues, Canberra should adhere to the tried-andtrue approach of its American ally, maintaining a policy of “strategic ambiguity” regarding how it would respond in the event of a Taiwan conflict. The war in Ukraine has functioned as something of a Rorschach test in this sometimes heated Australian debate, with participants largely doubling down on the positions they held prior to the Russian invasion. Domestic politics have also been influential, as popular concerns on issues including Chinese","PeriodicalId":46957,"journal":{"name":"Washington Quarterly","volume":"45 1","pages":"131 - 146"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Washington Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0163660X.2022.2126113","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Australia was once famously described as “The Frightened Country”: a strategically anxious nation that sees more danger than opportunity emanating from the Asian continent to its north. Consistent with this characterization, Australian security practitioners and pundits alike have for several years now been warning of the prospects of a Taiwan conflict and its potential consequences for Australia. Three distinct positions have emerged as to how Canberra should respond to the growing risk of war. One camp calls for Australia to make clear its commitment to joining with the United States and others in defending Taiwan from a Chinese attack, with a view to deterring Beijing from ever taking this path. A second perspective maintains that Taiwan’s defense is not a vital Australian interest, and that Canberra should be candid with Washington and Taipei regarding this reality well in advance of hostilities erupting. A third school, and one associated most closely with Australia’s new Anthony Albanese-led Labor government, holds that talking up even the chances of conflict is illadvised. Instead, this camp argues, Canberra should adhere to the tried-andtrue approach of its American ally, maintaining a policy of “strategic ambiguity” regarding how it would respond in the event of a Taiwan conflict. The war in Ukraine has functioned as something of a Rorschach test in this sometimes heated Australian debate, with participants largely doubling down on the positions they held prior to the Russian invasion. Domestic politics have also been influential, as popular concerns on issues including Chinese
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
台湾:澳大利亚能做什么、应该做什么、会做什么?
澳大利亚曾被著名地描述为“恐惧的国家”:一个战略焦虑的国家,看到的危险多于机遇来自其北部的亚洲大陆。与这种定性相一致的是,澳大利亚安全从业人员和权威人士几年来一直在警告台湾冲突的前景及其对澳大利亚的潜在后果。对于堪培拉应该如何应对日益增长的战争风险,已经出现了三种不同的立场。一个阵营呼吁澳大利亚明确承诺与美国和其他国家一道,保护台湾免受中国的袭击,以阻止北京走这条路。第二种观点认为,台湾的防务不是澳大利亚的重大利益,堪培拉应该在敌对行动爆发之前就这一现实与华盛顿和台北开诚布公。第三所学校,也是与澳大利亚新的安东尼·阿尔巴内塞领导的工党政府关系最密切的一所学校,认为即使是冲突的可能性也会受到阻碍。相反,这一阵营认为,堪培拉应该坚持其美国盟友屡战屡败的做法,在发生台湾冲突时如何应对的问题上保持“战略模糊”政策。在这场有时激烈的澳大利亚辩论中,乌克兰战争有点像罗夏测验,参与者在很大程度上加倍强调了他们在俄罗斯入侵前的立场。国内政治也很有影响力,因为民众对包括中国在内的问题的关注
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.90%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: The Washington Quarterly (TWQ) is a journal of global affairs that analyzes strategic security challenges, changes, and their public policy implications. TWQ is published out of one of the world"s preeminent international policy institutions, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), and addresses topics such as: •The U.S. role in the world •Emerging great powers: Europe, China, Russia, India, and Japan •Regional issues and flashpoints, particularly in the Middle East and Asia •Weapons of mass destruction proliferation and missile defenses •Global perspectives to reduce terrorism Contributors are drawn from outside as well as inside the United States and reflect diverse political, regional, and professional perspectives.
期刊最新文献
A Fragile Equilibrium: Incentivizing Pakistan’s Regional Recalibration Befuddled: How America Can Get Its Voice Back How Putin’s Regime Survivalism Drives Russian Aggression Carbon Time Machine Can South Korea Trust the United States?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1