Rudd unlikely to do as Romans do on Rio
Kevin Rudd has been in Rome this week, but do not expect him to cry 'Civis Romanus Sum' when its comes to the case of Stern Hu, Australian national and Rio Tinto executive detained in Shanghai on suspicion of spying and stealing state secrets. Roman citizens could expect to be protected by the Roman empire if ever they were taken in custody on foreign soil. The British Prime Minister, Lord Palmerston, liked to think that Britons were afforded that same entitlement, as well. But Kevin Rudd has taken a very different approach with China, such is the worry about offending Australia's second biggest trading partner.
In Canberra, the relationship with Beijing is a matter of extremely careful calibration - and especially so for the Mandarin-speaking Mr Rudd, who has long been sensitive to the 'Manchurian candidate' jibe.
No doubt wishing to play on this, the opposition has been calling on him to take a tougher line over Mr Hu's detention, and to publicly voice his concerns to China. As they have delighted in pointing out, he has the linguistic skills to do so.
But speaking to an ABC reporter in Italy, all Mr Rudd would say was that his government was moving 'calmly, methodically, and step by step' - which happens to be a pretty neat summation of his governing philosophy. (When Mr Rudd was asked about asylum seekers earlier this week in Malaysia, he offered the same formulation, saying it was being dealt with in a 'methodical, calm, effective way.')
Certainly, the relationship with China is vital, especially when the Australian economy is teetering on the brink of a technical recession. Only this week, the Reserve Bank of Australia cited the strengthening of the Chinese economy as a key factor in its decision to keep interest rates on hold.
Still, it is wrong to argue that Australia's prosperity is solely China's gift, the modern-day variant of Donald Horne's 'Lucky Country' argument back at the start of the 1960s that Australia's status as a resources powerhouse helped compensate for unimaginative political leadership ('Australia is a lucky country, run by second-rate people who share its luck,' is his book's most ringing quote).
After all, the resources boom really only kicked in around 2003, and Australia has enjoyed 17 years of economic growth. Similarly, the key market for Australian coal is Japan rather than China.
So is the Rudd government being too meek in its dealings with China, over the Hu case and in general, and are the Chinese taking advantage of this timidity?
This is the view of Greg Sheridan, the foreign editor of The Australian: "There is an air of contempt in the way the Chinese authorities have failed to respond to Australian government requests for information and for consular access to Mr Hu until today.
"What does the much touted Australia-China relationship add up to if Beijing treats Canberra with such conspicuous discourtesy and indifference?"
In recent weeks, we have heard Mr Rudd speak Spanish and Italian in public. But don't expect to hear that Latin location, Civis Romanus Sum, any time soon.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~56~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Our Prime Minister needs to be tough on issues pertaining to Stern Hu's human rights. Apparently this guy was responsible for a 87% price increase for our iron ore contracts. We need this guy to negotiate with the Chinese companies. I just hope Kevin Rudd doesn't chicken out on this.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
I don't follow the charge of too meek the Australian government. The Australian newspaper's editor was pointing out quite fairly that it was China who delayed in responding to protocols asking for information and consular access. More to the point is to reference the charge coming from Australia's plagued opposition leadership, whose rather wild running-off-at-the-mouth grabbed the world's headlines and left more than a few people scratching their heads.
I think they were being ignorant of the diplomatic procedure and irresponsible towards Australia's role in it, if Messrs. Turnbull and Bishop thought they could score some cheap political points. Comparisons are inevitable with the arrest and detention of Mohamed Haneef, as too the calls to intervene in the case of David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib.
They have to realise that there is much at stake for hasty intervention by the Australian government, first because it may make the situation worse for the Rio executives, and second it could in the short term affect the trade in iron ore China has with Australia.
A cool head with diplomatic dialogue will be time consuming, but get the best outcome. And before any facts are known, information and consulate access will have to be forthcoming, presumably also legal representation for the Rio executives. Evidence might also come to light. On this issue I agree with the PM.
Complain about this comment
Mr. Hu, apparently was unwilling to provide the necessary "gifts" to Chinese officials in the contract negotiations. China maintains maps that include every land that a Chinese has ever stepped foot on, claiming as their own, and therfore as Mr. Hu is of Chinese heritage the Chinese consider him Chinese and therefore by claimnig to be Austrailan, and unwilling to spy for the Chinese, is obviously a spy. Maybe one day, the Mongolians, who actually organized and civilized what is now called China, will reclaim those poorly administered lands.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Why would any intelligent Australian take any notice of what Greg Sheridan wrote. China is a major trading partner of Australia and our mandarin speaking Prime Minister Kevin Rudd knows how to deal with them. No one in the consevative side of politics in Australia has any diplomatic skills so why listen to anything they say. There are plenty of examples where British diplomacy or power failed when Britain was an empire eg Khartoom. Just watch the Labor Government work to get him released as they also have a Chinese Australian as a Minister (Penny Wong) and what an asset she would be when compared with Julie Bishop. Just leave it to the professionals and butt out.
Complain about this comment
Mr. Byrant's comments speak of a cavaliar attitude to Australian livelihood and a ill-informed history of Australia's recent economic history. He's British off course and who cares if Australia's economy goes down the tube; he'll still be making his smug and clever comments when Australia goes down.
Some Australians, right wingers particularly, consider the incident as a direct result of the failed Rio-Chinalco deal; is this true? Chinalco was invited by Rio (described by Rio as a 'white knight') to rescue it from a hostile takeover and to assist it from a financial strait caused by inept board decisions on a ill-considered takeover of Alcan. ( By the way, these poor decisions were made mainly by British directors sitting in far-flung London.) The Australian government, pressured by political expediency ( to avoid 'the Manchurian candidate moniker" ) deliberately delayed the FIRB decision; to allow Rio to wiggle out of its agreement which it did when the situation got better. The Chinese comments in its official newspaper, Xinhua, initially described the failed deal as a lack of business experience on the part of Chinalco and that they need to learn more about others' business practice ( meaning the propensity of Australian companies to dishonour deals ). However, the Australian media described it as stupidity on the part of the Chinese as a whole and continously mocked them as dumb. To add insult to injury the Australian opposition took out big media advertisement to destroy the deal, linked it to the Tian-An-Men Square incident and proposed that Australia should not deal with a Communist government. If this is what Australia really feel then it should not trade with China at all. It can then insult China all it wants? But can Australia survived without Chinese; maybe but badly!
That the Australian public has been cajoled to show an infriendly face to China, a crucial trading partner, is remarkable. The Australian media simply cannot refrain from its anti-Asian tendency and its sense of superiority as a 'white race'. In this current world when the US has a black president already, it shows an ignorance and a bloated sense of importance about its place in the world. For a small population and a relatively small economy run by 'Donald Horne's mediocre people', it is truly amazing!
I would urge Mr. Byrant not to make it worse for us.
Complain about this comment
One Australian newspaper reports that Mr Hu had only lived in Australia for 8 months. His wife had lived in Australia for 2 years (just to satisfy the requirement for Australian citizenship). If the claim is true, obviously Mr Hu had been given special treatment for receiving his Australian citizenship. But for what reason? Mr Hu's contribution to Australia's financial gain in China? We all know that Chinese officials can be very corrupted - how can one to be sure that the Chinese people are not harmed financially when Rio Tinto gains?
Complain about this comment
U sAy iiT sIsTa!!!!!!!!!!!!111!!!!! ii ToTallii GeT wAt U sAyin..
LoL
Complain about this comment
Your opinions are very well thought out and you have a great Australian insight.
I like this blog the very most out of all your blogs.
Complain about this comment
I know not why my previous comment was removed. It seems increasingly clear, to me at least, that free speech (vis-a-vis Chinese issues) is only valid as long as it contains anti-Chinese sentiment.
I was merely pointing out an untruth that is expressed in comment #3, namely that were China to claim, as its own, "every land that a Chinese has ever set foot on" (I assume the author is referring to the tributary system of Imperial China) then, by this logic, China would be laying claim to Brunei, Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Japan, Korea, Philippines, Thailand, Nepal and Vietnam.
Indeed, there is even a body of evidence that suggests that China discovered (present day) America. Is China laying claim to the United States?
Complain about this comment
Well, if anything it is embarrasing for China... to act like a spoiled child when something doesnt go their way. They're being too transparent! As an outsider I'd say that Australia showed more maturity than China. The business community will judge how to deal with China in light of this.
Complain about this comment
Might Kevin 747 say: "Civis terra reginae sum" since he really isn't a citizen of Rome.
Complain about this comment
This is a real 'fork in the road' moment for Kevin Rudd. He is being tested by China to see how he will react on a key trade issue. The arrest of Rio's business team in China so soon after the company rebuffed the Chinese share offer is clearly retaliation - and seeing the Chinese brazenly claim otherwise is quite an eye opener.
Rudd is taking completely the wrong tack. He is still acting as if he is an official with the department of foreign affairs, trying to smooth over things and get the best result for the individual using consular protocol. This is not a consular matter, it is a major political challenge to Australia and the way we do business. Any decent leader would have made this clear to China from the very beginning, in a polite but forceful way.
The Chinese side should have been told that Australia regards this as retaliation, that it is a totally unacceptable way of doing business and that Australia is taking the matter seriously as an unfriendly act that will seriously harm trade relations between the two countries.
If were PM I would be recalling the Australian ambassador right now for 'urgent consultations' and also making public announcements that the Foreign Investment Review Board may need new guidelines on dealing with Chinese investors.
Complain about this comment
It is of course possible that the guy did something that's illegal under Chinese law. I'm not saying I think that this is what happened or even that it's likely.
I'm with Holmes16 on the source used. It is alarming seeing "Greg Sheridan Foreign Editor of the Australian" quoted on the subject. I'm worried that British readers might get the impression that Sheridan represents what Australians think, or that he has a shred of objectivity on the issue. Sheridan is a frenziedly one-eyed commentator who peddles the Murdoch world-view as though it has just been handed to him on tablets of stone. His main concern on this issue will be as a stick to beat Rudd with. The Sheridan pieces that I've read so far have been:
- snooty dismissal of any idea of giving West Papuans rights as being not the realpolitik thing
- Greg getting all heavy breathing about the Australian Armed forces because they're so tough and all
- And I'm pretty sure I remember a whole bunch of 'Iraq's going better than everyone thinks' and 'Iraq's all about opposing tyranny' articles from him. Apologies if I'm wrong on that.
Complain about this comment
To go on on Sheridan's comments that "Beijing treats Canberra with such conspicuous discourtesy and indifference", may I ask how much courtesy was accorded India when they trumped up charges on Dr Hanneef and destroyed his reputation; there was only utter contempt for India and Indians.
What about the media charges that the Indonesian Justices were corrupt and less than competent when Schapelle Corby was charged with drug traffiking. It was widely reported that an Australia lawyer, since discredited and sanctioned, revealed that the Indonesian police were asking for bribes to free Schapelle. Where is the courtesy for Indonesia? I could go on.
Courtesy begets courtesy and if Australia wants to be shown some, be prepared to give respect equally.
Complain about this comment
Why should the Aussies get tough with what is essentially THEIR citizen spying on China? If anything, they would deny all knowledge of it. Most likely the guy was fast tracked into Australian citizenship in return for gathering intelligence and influencing affairs at Rio Tinto's China HQ.
Complain about this comment
I'm not surprised. When I was representing one of our largest insurance companies in negotiating an insurance license to operate in China, we got 90& through all the negotiations...weeks of work...and had the final meeting with Beijing officials. They just stared at us across the conference table and asked "So where are you going to build us a hospital if we give you this license?" Like it was normal to do this. My boss took great offense and collected his papers. We left without another word being spoken. We were back at the hotel for less than a few hours and we were contacted by reception to say we had to leave immediately as our visas had been canceled. That's the Chinese for you!
It's master race stuff and you have to grovel.
Complain about this comment
The Australian media should grow out of the 19th century gunboat mentality.Just because one of your citizens are involved are you going to send in your army to squash those insolent natives?Come on. The world has moved from that.Open your eyes, ears and hearts ,listen to the the Chinese authorities first before making your judgements.The Chinese government will charge these people at the time of their choice,just as the Australian will choose to charge any Chinese caught spying on Australian soil on its own time,not due to pressure from the Chinese government.
Complain about this comment
China has decided it is powerful enough to unmask its real nature and test the acceptance of the rest of the world of the way it intends to do business. Humiliating a middle power and see who in the world objects. To see what level of diplomatic reaction is generated and from where.
The messages are simple and blunt.
1. What China wants China gets.
2. Any Chinese employees are beholden to the State first in all matters - confidential data will no longer be considered safe either in a business or diplomatic context. The Chinese have clearly learnt from the Iranians treatment and arrest and prosecution of the Iranian British consulate advisor. You can get away with such actions and obtain loyalty through fear and the rest of the world sits back and tuts.
3. China will continue to manipulate the flow of International trade and capital to the detriment of the rest of the world.
Nations should now review Chinese ownership of businesses in their countries and in China in light of the fact we are dealing with a Chinese Regime not a business and therefore these businesses can no longer be seen as operating in the best interests of the countries within which the are situated or the non-Chinese shareholders .
If China persists in its actions China should be forced to divest its ownership in these companies and businesses. Until China can clearly prove judicially and politically the Chinese regime are not involved directly or indirectly in a way which distorts trade they should be excluded from international economic forums and restrictions placed on any business activity to make sure China adheres to appropriate business practices.
Complain about this comment
It seems very puzzling to me as to why should the Prime Minister of Australia be involved in a case of suspected commercial spying.These men are not accused of spying for the state of Australia,they are accused of spying for their company,Rio Tinto.Their actions are for their own narrow interests,unless,of course the Australian Government is somehow involved.Can the executives of a company that back out of a contract that the world whole knows about be trusted to keep their word to the Australian people and government that they are not involved in spying?Hello,they cannot even honour a contract signed in front of the world.Kevin Rudd may just get a shock of his life that those not so lily white executives lied to him and the Australian people.
Complain about this comment
China's Gross Distortion of the free market system
China's foreign exchange reserves, the world's largest,
have surpassed $2 trillion (£1.2tn), the country's
central bank has said.
Record rise in UK jobless total
The US Fed predicts the jobless rate could get as high as 10.1%,
from its old estimate of 9.6%. In June, unemployment
climbed to 9.5%, a 26-year high.
Clearly the notion of free flowing capital and resources to give
equitable return to all has failed. China continues to severely distort the world economic system in its favour to the detriment of the rest of the world.
Mr Stern Hu should be free to continue proper business practice not languishing in a Chinese prison in an attempt by the Chinese regime to give further advantage to Chinese manipulation of markets to the disadvantage of all but themselves.
National Greed particularly China and corporate Greed Particularly
the banks continues unabated the distorted application of a discredited
application of theory in practice.
Complain about this comment
I may be wrong but it seems like Australians government was quite often pressured to bail their citizens out when they were caught in trouble in foreign soil, even they were clearly breaking the law of foreign country.
Stern Hu's case is the most recent one. Up until now Chinese government has spoken that they have evidence that Hu is spying for his company. Why not wait for the Chinese government to officially charge Hu and see what is the outcome? This is a case between Chinese agency and Rio Tinto, not Chinese government vs Australian government. Why is there a need for political intervention now?
Another recent case involving a mother, caught stealing a bar mat while she was on holiday in Thailand. Australian government was urge to intervene with the court case to bring her home. The evidence was against her and court rules that she is guilty and was sent to prison. She was later fined and released after a guilty plea. You may argue it was a just a joke, but in foreign soil, this kind of joke could be an insult.
Another one, in 2005 when a young Australian was caught trafficking illegal drug in Singapore. He was sentenced to death. Australian immediately urge their government to intervene and 'rescue' this young person, and the government even ask Singapore's President for special clemency. Many Australian even rallied to boycott Singapore's product (ya right, try to boycott petrol and diesel from Singapore...). Of cause in the end this young man was executed.
Have Australian lost their ability to judge what is right and what is wrong? If a person was arrested for committing a crime in foreign country, will Australian please let the legal system of that country to deal with the issue rather then to ask your government to intervene? Will you ask your government to intervene if someone commit a crime in Australia?
Back to Hu's case, don't point finger at other people, and blame China. Just wait and see how the Chinese agency present their evidence.
Complain about this comment
Concerning #19, #22
"China's gross distortion of the free market system"
In the 19th Century, China, beset by foreign occupation, was robbed not only of its most valuable treasures but also of the territories - Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan - that would have greatly helped the country to climb out of its medieval poverty.
One century later, some of the countries that took part in the above adventures in China controlled, more or less, the entire global financial architecture, from the exchange rate mechanism, to treaties, to resources, to the world reserve currency, to the International Monetary Fund, to the World Bank, through to the World Trade Organisation.
I will say no more for fear of my comment being moderated. Suffice to say that I hold the views of #19, 22 in utter contempt.
Complain about this comment
- China's Foreign Ministry delivered a veiled threat over continued "anti-Chinese" commentary 'noise' from Australia.
- The Foreign Ministry spokesman Mr Qin informed the world "There is ... and old Chinese saying: A man of noble character acquires his wealth through honourable means".
The Chinese Foreign Ministry inadvertently failed to include humanities most noble sayings:
An honourable man will not sit quietly to enable the tranquility of silenced voices so valued by regimes such as exist in Iran and China.
An honourable man prefers the 'noise' of the clamour for justice and not the grinding squeal of the cogs of suppression and fear.
An honourable man utilises transparent norms of natural justice in administrative process.
An honourable man accepts true independence can be gained only by diligently working to enable the independence of others first.
An honourable man with any understanding of economics knows rigging exchange rates to your advantage does not honourably enable the fair distribution of wealth across the world.
An honourable man is able to discern the difference between actual justice and an ass.
As for a previous comment:
So it is China's turn to pillage the world? It may have passed your notice but it would be my observation there is not one society which at some time or another has not been pillaged and subjugated.
There is no excuse for bad behavour either historical or current to be overlooked because - 'They did it to us'!
This is the type of logic which encourages all of us to greater exploitation of each other with the resultant known negative consequences.
Complain about this comment
Concerning #23
On reflection my concern at to comment # 23 is the degree of fear which the comment may be subject to moderation and rejected.
The comments are valid as I see them.
It is true China has been dealt with in a very dishonourable way in the past.
China has indeed found it difficult as a significant participant in world affairs to be included in world forums.
Nothing excuses the first comment. China has a right to be aggrieved by what has occurred in the past with no lack of imperialist ambition from any number of countries having a terrible impact on the Chinese people.
The second comment is also true but the reason why this occurred was because rightly, as I see it, some nations and their people in the rest of the world were not convinced China's regime, as opposed to the Chinese people in general, were prepared to abide by basis rules of engagement in an economic and judicial sense which framed the rest of the worlds accepted norms.
This is not to say the non-Chinese participants were or are pristine themselves in all their actions.
The comment also, I believe, misses the intent of comments #19, #22
Acting inappropriately in an economic and judicial sense knows no boundaries.
Where a country defines a process as acceptable as Iran and China or an individual comments #19, #22 categorically disagrees it is an attempt to define what one accepts as appropriate behaviour not only in Iran and China but in the rest of the world. For human actions economic, judicial, environmental, etc...impact have no boundaries.
So processes occurring in China are rightly subject to evaluation and criticism from fellow humans. If China believes it should be able to influence events outside it's boundaries should it be able to dismiss the right of others to affect China's decisions as well?
Stern Hu should be able to defend himself within a transparent judicial process were natural justice applies. I do not believe this is too much to ask of China's regime. In fact it would be an honourable action on China's behalf to enable this to happen.
I would advise your contempt would be better reserved for the nature of our state of interaction which the notion of sovereignty currently condemns us to. Until this is changed we will alas continue to condemn each other with the misconstrued belief we are the righteous ones.
Complain about this comment
CHINA ATTEMPTS TO REDIFINE THE WORD HONORABLE
We all are, including the local Chinese media, to remain silent on the question of Stern Hu
As with the Iranian regieme of the Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei silence equates to tranquillity. How tranquillity is achieved in Iran and China is by threats and intimidation. Both excel in locking up those who challenge them not only politically but now economically as is the case in China today.
In Chine we have the proved unwelcome quintessential ferreter of others secrets, both business and security wise, expressing outrage at an as yet unproved event occurring in China. As well, given all the spying China does on those China see as threats outside China what incredible hypocrisy.
If the world held China to account for all the intrusive spying it continues to do, China would be lucky to see the light of day for the next thousand years,
It would appear also what China calls spying may be regarded as normal business practice of obtaining business intelligence involved in what is called driving a hard deal.
The fact China is not pleased with the business position taken by Australian resource companies is I believe the root cause of this dishonourable incarceration oh Mr Stern Hu.
China talks about monopoly and imperialism both of which China is displaying in spades by attempting to relegate Australia to a poor quarry while it itself amasses a fortune in foreign currency at not only Australias expense but the rest of the world.
The fact is by manipulating its exchange rate and at the same time utilising Chinas massive reserves generated by the exchange rate imbalances China is attempting to create vertical integration of industries through direct ownership or by applying the whip hand when China cannot get its way in negotiations such as with Australian iron ore companies.
If China is allowed to succeed this will have only one outcome a vast shift of wealth in one direction China. This is Honourable behaviour? The definition has radically changed, in Chinese speak it now stands for Hypocrisy and Greed.
China's Iron and Steel Associations deputy chairman Lun Bingsheng had better start to realise Australia can if it so chooses expand its Steel industry and cease being Chinas poor quarry.
Australia has the expertise to do so if it sees it gains nothing from a relationship with China other than grief. Australians know the difference between a good deal and a raw deal, real justice and an ass. Free Stern Hu and the others and do the current non-Chinese version of honourable.
No Resource Company with any sense of propriety would agree to any sourcing of raw materials to China until China has released Stern Hu and the others.
Complain about this comment
A CRUISE MISSILE IN EVERY POT
What level of hypocrisy does China's elite expect the rest of the world to stomach before they realise unless we all enable each others independence first all we can expect of the future is a cruise missile in every pot.
"A complaint with the World Trade Organization (WTO) accusing China of restraining exports of important raw materials. U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk said China was using export quotas, exports duties and other measures in an effort to make the materials cheaper for domestic companies.
"China is a leading global producer and exporter of the raw materials in question, and access to these materials is critical for U.S. industrial manufacturers," said Kirk. "The United States is very concerned that China appears to be restricting the exports of these materials for the benefit of their domestic industries, despite strong WTO rules designed to discipline export restraints."
The materials at issue are bauxite, coke, fluorspar, magnesium, manganese, silicon metal, silicon carbide, yellow phosphorous and zinc -- key metals and chemicals used in steel, aluminum and chemical manufacturing."
Free Stern Hu and the others and do the current non-Chinese version of honourable.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS