As Australians head to the polls on 3 May, the stakes for foreign policy in the Indo-Pacific are quietly profound. From where I sit in Yogyakarta, Indonesia, the debate in Australia around national security, alliances, and regional engagement is being watched with interest – and, at times, concern.
Much has been made of the current government’s concept of strategic equilibrium – a worldview that seeks to maintain a region where “no country dominates and no country is dominated,” as Foreign Minister Penny Wong described it. This vision resonates deeply with many across Southeast Asia. It signals that Australia understands its place not as an external power, but as an integral part of the regional community. It suggests a sober, measured approach to foreign policy, especially in a time of rising nationalist sentiment and populist rhetoric globally.
Regardless of whether the next government is led by Labor or the Coalition, it is imperative that this spirit of balance endures, by whatever name it may take. Australia does not exist in a vacuum. It is bound, historically and strategically, to the fates and futures of the countries around it. To engage the region not only as an economic partner but as a political and security community is not just wise. It is essential. Australia's choices reverberate far beyond its borders. The region pays attention to not only what Canberra says, but what it does.
The world is entering a period of greater uncertainty, and the Indo-Pacific is its geopolitical epicentre.
Of course, this is easier said than done. Strategic equilibrium demands nuance: it means preserving the alliance with the United States while maintaining credible, independent relationships with key partners in Southeast Asia. It means standing up for democratic values and a rules-based order, without becoming a proxy in great-power rivalry. And it requires Australia to act in a way that reflects regional realities, not domestic political theatrics or ideological swings.
There is a concern in this region that a future government could lean too far into the orbit of an increasingly unilateral Washington, especially under the renewed leadership of Donald Trump. Calls for tighter alignment with the United States may resonate at home, but they could also be seen as undercutting Australia’s autonomy and credibility in the region. A foreign policy that punches above its weight might play well in campaign slogans, but it does not always build trust with neighbours. In Southeast Asia, countries value consistency, consultation, and quiet strength, traits that define strategic maturity, not strategic volume.
From Jakarta’s point of view, a responsible Australia is one that listens, consults, and invests in its regional relationships, not only through defence and diplomacy, but also through education, people-to-people connections, and economic partnerships. Initiatives like the original Colombo Plan or the New Colombo Plan have gone a long way in building this kind of strategic empathy. That spirit should continue, regardless of who wins in May.
The world is entering a period of greater uncertainty, and the Indo-Pacific is its geopolitical epicentre. For Australia, now more than ever, the choice is not simply between the United States and China, but between a reactive, short-term posture and a long-term, balanced strategy. Strategic equilibrium, however framed, should be more than a slogan. It should be the guiding principle for how Australia shows up in the region it calls home.
