Prime Minister Anthony Albanese doesn’t have much in common with Tony Abbott, but as a way of offering a little perspective on the problems that Albanese faces in getting a meeting with US President Donald Trump, the current PM might be interested in some earlier comments by his predecessor.
On coming to office in 2013, Abbott pledged that he would be an “Asia-first” prime minister. Indonesia, China, Japan and South Korea would be the opening ports of call for his official visits.
“Only after our regional and trading partners have been suitably attended to would I make the traditional trips to Washington and London,” Abbott promised.
And so it transpired.
Abbott also held talks with China’s Xi Jinping on the sidelines of an APEC meeting only a few weeks after coming to power, a summit that then US President Barack Obama skipped, sending Secretary of State John Kerry in his place.
No one back then raised the kind of questions Albanese now faces about the ordering of his meeting schedule, and whether he should meet face-to-face with Trump before taking up an invitation from Xi to travel to China. Sky News on Wednesday reported that Albanese’s trip to China is expected in August. Other reports say the visit will be this month, while the next chance for a Trump meeting won’t but until the Quad summit in India, or the UN General Assembly in September.
“It seems that this government and this Prime Minister is better able to, and is more interested in, getting a meeting with the President of China than the President of the United States,” declared shadow defence spokesman Angus Taylor.
It’s an easy story for the media to tell – how many phone calls, or how many meetings? – in a realm that is so often defined by opaque and iterative measures.
Trump’s decision to leave the G7 meeting early last month in the midst of the Israel-Iran conflict, consequently missing a first-time meeting with Albanese, has compounded a perception problem. Australia is hostage to a handshake. This week, in media interview after interview, the PM has been grilled about whether he is kicking himself for not getting on a plane to Washington earlier, or if the lack of facetime with Trump has become embarrassing.
Put together, the theme suggests a government under pressure over the management of the US alliance, adding to concerns about the Pentagon’s review of the AUKUS deal, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth’s demands for additional defence spending, and whether Australia can secure a carve-out of the Trump tariffs.
But it’s also an easy story for the media to tell, and a good talking point for an opposition eager to stir. It involves a tangible outcome. (How many phone calls? How many meetings?) Foreign policy stories are rarely so simple. Such a count allows a quick quantitative judgement in a realm that is so often defined by opaque and iterative measures.
Does the order of meetings matter? Prime ministerial visits are invested with all sorts of symbolism, sometimes deliberately and sometimes in a manner that is constraining.
Australia’s recent diplomatic habit, for example, is to make Indonesia a first port of call for a new PM. But Albanese chose to attend a Quad summit in Japan just days after he was elected in 2022. Maintaining the Indonesia tradition took some mental gymnastics. Jakarta instead became the PM’s first “bilateral” visit. He made up for any slight by making sure to go to Indonesia first after he was re-elected in May.
Back in 2013, Abbott had the advantage of having met Obama before his prime ministership, when the US President delivered a speech to the Australian parliament in 2011. Abbott was also looking to shake off a reputation for being too focused on the Anglosphere.
It was a time too when Australia’s relations with China had a markedly different quality to today. Xi hadn’t yet ordered artificial islands to be built in the South China Sea. No Chinese warships had circumnavigated Australia. No diplomatic freeze of the type that also left Scott Morrison dangling.
That’s the reality that confronts Albanese. It’s also fair to observe that there clearly isn’t a strong personal rapport between the Australian PM and his US counterpart, which will reverberate throughout their respective systems. Nor will it have gone unnoticed in Washington that the debate in Australia about Albanese meeting Trump offers a leverage point in the relationship.
Also – and the government won’t say this part out loud – there are probably doubts in the PM’s office about the value of being too cozy with Trump, given (a) Lowy Institute polling showing how unpopular the US President is with Australians, (b) having already campaigned in the election against imported Trumpian politics, and (c) Trump’s junkyard dog propensity to wag his tail one moment and bite savagely the next. The international leaders currently seen as close to him might just as soon find themselves smarting.
The other point Albanese is trying to make, carefully, is that Australia need not dance to Trump’s tune. Relationships are a two-way affair. Just as Trump likes to invoke America First, Albanese has his own version.
“We’re working on a date to have a face-to-face meeting, but of course our officials continue to engage,” Albanese said.
In other words, don’t judge the whole relationship via the calendar appointments of two busy leaders. Even if Albanese would doubtless much prefer to have a firm circle around a date.
