As Australia enters a new electoral term with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese back at the helm, and world affairs in a state of turmoil, it is critical to ask whether human rights will get deserved attention in the government’s foreign policy. Not only because it is morally right, but because Australia’s long-term economic and security interests are best served in a region and a world that respects rights.
In its last term, the Albanese government made some efforts to promote human rights in foreign policy. Australia co-led international efforts to hold the Taliban in Afghanistan accountable for its violations against women. It sanctioned banks and other entities in Myanmar for post-coup abuses. It led a joint statement on China’s human rights abuses at the United Nations, and is leading a new global declaration to protect aid workers.
These are important efforts, to be commended. But they are not enough.
Governments that deny human rights create chaos. They are repressive regimes that go to great lengths to control their populations at home and abroad. Their populations eventually agitate for freedom. And governments that deny human rights often get trapped in cycles of conflict which disrupts economies, makes countering terrorism more difficult, and leads to displacement and people seeking asylum. Ignoring human rights in foreign relations is also no guarantee that a state will remain a loyal ally, trade partner, or friendly neighbour.
In this new term and this new era, China may no longer be Australia’s biggest challenge, but the United States.
For most of the Albanese government’s previous term, it was challenged by how to navigate its relationship with China. His government claimed that its priority on China was to “rebuild” and “stabilise” the relationship. Yet, these terms appeared to mean a deprioritising of human rights concerns.
Albanese said that his approach was to “calmly” call out abuses, and that “issuing threats and delivering ultimatums may be the easy road, [but] it never takes you very far”. But neither does “calmly” calling out abuses. It might get your lobster trade back – which provides livelihoods to many – but there were no tangible consequences for the Chinese government’s grave human rights violations.
Quiet diplomacy engenders bullying.
China was so undeterred by the Albanese government’s “calm” rebukes that it issued baseless arrest warrants for an exiled democracy activist and a former lawmaker from Hong Kong living in Australia. And, in a sign of escalating tension, Beijing felt comfortable to send a naval ship to circumnavigate Australia.
The Australian government’s fear of China also made it less willing to confront human rights violations by other regional governments it has been courting to try and counter China’s influence.
For instance, the Albanese government has largely ignored human rights abuses in India, instead rolling out the red carpet for Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his 2023 Australian visit. Albanese embraced him on stage, calling him “the boss”, and assured Modi that “strict actions” would be taken for the vandalism of Hindu temples in Australia without mentioning the deadly attacks against religious minorities within India.
This pattern of relegating human rights to keep diplomatic relationships “steady” was not limited to regional superpowers. Australia and Singapore have annual leaders’ meetings, yet the death penalty – for which Australia has an abolition strategy – has never been raised publicly even when Singapore has executed people immediately before these meetings.
In other instances, the Albanese government missed opportunities to link violations of rights to areas of joint concern. During Albanese’s 2023 visit to Vietnam, the two countries agreed to work on the climate crisis. But there was no public mention of Vietnam’s escalating crackdown on environmental activists event though Vietnamese police arrested a prominent environmentalist on bogus charges days before Albanese arrived.
The second presidency of Donald Trump is a new test for the Albanese government. Trump’s first 100 days in office involved a relentless barrage of actions that violate, threaten, or undermine human rights in the United States and abroad. Albanese may have been reluctant to ruffle Trump’s prickly feathers ahead of the Australian election. However, on issues that Australia has historically been firm – respect for international law and judicial processes – the government must stand up to future human rights threats posed by the US government.
In this new term and this new era, China may no longer be Australia’s biggest challenge, but the United States, its closest ally, could be instead. In this landscape, the Australian government should remember that human rights are central to national security. Trade and security are neither stable nor predictable when they are intertwined with governments that do not respect human rights.
