| 06 March 2006

Speeches and foreign policy

In this new Perspective, the Lowy Institute’s Program Director for Global Issues Dr Michael Fullilove argues that Australian foreign policy speeches are duller than they need be. Dr Fullilove writes that he finds them workmanlike rather than profound – certainly in comparison to US foreign policy rhetoric. He rebuts the four possible reasons for their lack of flair: that foreign policy is too important for politics; that the area is too technical and difficult for elegant writing; that foreign policy is not regarded as central to national politics; and that Australia’s external circumstances have conditioned our foreign policy in the direction of pragmatism, which does not make for brilliant speeches. He concludes that one can have too much of anything, even moderation.Michael Fullilove

  • Michael Fullilove

In this new Perspective, the Lowy Institute’s Program Director for Global Issues Dr Michael Fullilove argues that Australian foreign policy speeches are duller than they need be. Dr Fullilove writes that he finds them workmanlike rather than profound – certainly in comparison to US foreign policy rhetoric. He rebuts the four possible reasons for their lack of flair: that foreign policy is too important for politics; that the area is too technical and difficult for elegant writing; that foreign policy is not regarded as central to national politics; and that Australia’s external circumstances have conditioned our foreign policy in the direction of pragmatism, which does not make for brilliant speeches. He concludes that one can have too much of anything, even moderation.Michael Fullilove

  • Michael Fullilove