Source — AITW Ep003: Turnbull's "China Reset" Speech¶
Metadata¶
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Episode | 3 |
| Title | Turnbull's "China reset" speech, Australia's soft power review, and interview with Miles Kupa |
| Publication date | 2018-08-23 |
| Speakers | Allan Gyngell, Darren Lim, Miles Kupa (guest) |
| Guest | Miles Kupa — former Australian Ambassador/High Commissioner (Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia, Philippines); former Deputy Head of Mission in Jakarta; former Deputy Secretary, DFAT |
| Duration | ~47 min |
Summary¶
The third episode introduces what will become one of Allan's most distinctive analytical registers: reading diplomatic events not for their surface content but for their choreography. His account of Turnbull's UNSW China speech is a practitioner's reading from the inside out — noting that the Chinese ambassador was present, that the Foreign Ministry was "primed to respond immediately," that Xi Jinping was quoted strategically to carry points Turnbull himself wanted to make. This is not the analysis of a commentator who read about the speech the next morning; it is the analysis of someone who has spent decades arranging and decoding precisely these kinds of signals. The word "choreographed" is used deliberately, and it establishes the frame: diplomacy is performance with an intended audience, and competence lies in understanding who is watching and why.
Equally revealing is what Allan identifies as the problem preceding the speech. The wounds were "self-inflicted" — ministers had made ill-disciplined public statements, and the relationship had "gotten unravelled a bit." His correction is almost parental in its brevity: "the important thing is to know what you want, to bring the Australian policy together, to articulate that consistently and clearly and with one single voice." The phrase "blindingly self-evident" carries mild but unmistakeable impatience with the failure to do something he regards as obvious. For Allan, the diplomatic virtues are not complicated — they are consistency, clarity, and unity — and the recurrent failure to practise them is what exasperates him.
The exchange about "soft power" provides a small but characteristic moment. Allan dismisses the definitional debate about smart power, sharp power, and the rest: "in my view, power in any form is power, that is the ability to influence the behaviour and thinking of others... we should be grabbing anything that helps us to do that." The pragmatism is absolute. He then attends a book launch at the ANU for Brendan Taylor's The Four Flashpoints and recommends it on air, drawn in part by its "unexpected conclusions." Both details confirm something already visible in episode two: Allan is embedded in the Canberra policy community, attends its events, and reads its output — but is drawn to work that challenges the conventional wisdom rather than confirms it. The episode also carries one of the earliest examples of Allan's dry wit, slipped in before the episode proper begins: "It doesn't matter what you really think. Just give us the five star."
Key Topics¶
- Turnbull's UNSW China reset speech: diplomatic choreography, intended audience, reception
- Kevin Rudd's critique ("grovelling mea culpa") and broader reception
- Australia-China relations: messaging problems under Turnbull government
- Soft power: definitional debates ("smart power," "sharp power"); Allan's pragmatic definition
- Social media as diplomatic instrument
- Australia's image: tension between tourism brand and tech/science positioning
- Malaysia: Mahathir's return, corruption, BN's defeat
- Indonesia: upcoming election, vice-presidential choices, Jokowi
Key Quotations¶
On the choreography of the China reset speech¶
"Some things in foreign policy happen unexpectedly. This, however, was deliberate and carefully choreographed... The Chinese ambassador was present for the speech. The Chinese Foreign Ministry was primed to respond immediately by noting and commending the speech."
— Allan Gyngell [00:04:40.800 --> 00:06:37.600]
"I thought it was a very cleverly crafted speech. It was reassuring to all of the stakeholders in Australia, given the dependency for Australian university funding on foreign students. I thought he cleverly quoted Xi Jinping to make a number of the points that he himself wanted to make."
— Allan Gyngell [00:04:40.800 --> 00:06:37.600]
Allan reads diplomatic events for choreography and craft, not just content. This analytical lens — asking who arranged what, for whom, and how it was framed — is characteristic.
On Australia's self-inflicted messaging problems¶
"It marks essentially a restatement of the policies towards China that have been adopted by every Australian government since Rudd's... the reason it's been generally well received is that we welcome China's rise, that we accept that it will want to extend its voice... This is not exactly the same as the views of others. It's a different line, for example, from the words we hear in documents like the U.S. National Defense Strategy, which describes China as a central challenge to U.S. Prosperity and security."
— Allan Gyngell [00:07:04.340 --> 00:08:13.980]
On China's internal uncertainty¶
"The job of doing these things is going to be the single most difficult task for Australian foreign policy in the decades ahead... Australian governments generally are just seeing at the moment relate to China's own uncertainty about ways of being a great power and debates within China that are hidden from our views at present."
— Allan Gyngell [00:08:36.980 --> 00:09:56.780]
Key insight: China itself is uncertain about how to exercise great power. Allan resists treating China as a unified, deliberate actor.
On what Australia needs to do with China¶
"I think it's blindingly self-evident. I think what we need to do with China... the important thing is to know what you want, to bring the Australian policy together, to articulate that consistently and clearly and with one single voice. And that was the thing that had gotten unraveled a bit in recent months here."
— Allan Gyngell [00:10:40.300 --> 00:11:26.860]
"Blindingly self-evident" is typical: he uses mild impatience to signal that the answer is obvious to anyone who thinks clearly. Clarity, consistency, unity of voice as diplomatic virtues.
On soft power¶
"In my view, power in any form is power, that is the ability to influence the behaviour and thinking of others... So in my view, we should be grabbing anything that helps us to do that."
— Allan Gyngell [00:12:56.860 --> 00:14:11.120]
A pragmatist's definition: dismisses terminological debates; focuses on what actually works.
"Whether the nation brand we want is one that emphasises our innovation and sophistication... the tourism ads is unclear... I'm absolutely sure that tourism ad will get people flocking out here, but it's not going to do a whole lot for the image of Australia as a top ranking power in areas of high tech and science."
— Allan Gyngell [00:17:52.860 --> 00:18:40.540]
On self-deprecating humour about the podcast¶
"It doesn't matter what you really think. Just give us the five star. We need five stars."
— Allan Gyngell [00:01:18.980 --> 00:01:22.780]
One of the earliest examples of Allan's dry, self-deprecating humour about the podcast itself.
Reading Recommendation¶
Allan recommends Brendan Taylor's The Four Flashpoints: How Asia Goes to War (Black Ink, ANU):
"Brendan's done a really terrific job covering the areas of potential flashpoints in the Indo-Pacific including Taiwan, the Korean peninsula, the East China Sea and South China Sea... I was at the launch last week and his view for example unlike a lot of commentary is that the South China Sea matters less than some of the other areas of possible contesting."
— Allan Gyngell [00:45:24.620 --> 00:46:19.620]
Shows: Allan reads current strategic literature from Australian scholars; attends book launches (suggesting active membership in Canberra policy circles); values counterintuitive conclusions.
Evidence Relevant to Allan's Views¶
- Policy continuity across Australian governments on China: all governments since Rudd have welcomed China's rise
- The problem with Australia's China relationship was messaging, not policy
- Clarity, consistency, and unified voice are essential diplomatic virtues
- China is uncertain about its own great-power role — this is often overlooked
- "Soft power" terminological debates are unproductive; what matters is the ability to influence behaviour
Evidence Relevant to Allan's Style and Persona¶
- Reads diplomatic events for choreography (who primed whom, when, for what purpose)
- Uses "blindingly self-evident" to signal impatience with policy confusion
- Attends book launches and is plugged into the Canberra-ANU policy network
- Dry humour about podcast reviews
- Brings diplomatic practice to bear (from his career) without being pedantic
Biographical Fragments¶
- Was at a seminar in Sydney in 2009 at the Lowy Institute on Australia's relations with the South Pacific, where he first saw Julie Bishop (then Shadow Treasurer) asking "good questions, taking copious notes" — an early observation that impressed him
- Attends book launches in the ANU/Crawford School precinct (e.g., Brendan Taylor's Four Flashpoints)
Guest: Miles Kupa¶
Notable moment: During his High Commissioner posting to Malaysia, Kupa recalled to Mahathir Mohamad that Paul Keating had once described him as "recalcitrant." Mahathir acknowledged this with a "rueful smile" — illustrating the long diplomatic memory of senior Asian politicians and the weight of Australian diplomatic history in the region.
Characteristic Phrases¶
- "Blindingly self-evident"
- "Deliberately and carefully choreographed"
- "China's own uncertainty about ways of being a great power"
- "Grabbing anything that helps us to do that" (on soft power)
Relevance to Central Biographical Question¶
Allan's analytical eye for diplomatic choreography — asking not just what was said but how it was arranged, who knew in advance, what signals were embedded — reflects practitioner knowledge that most academic commentators lack. He is also comfortable criticising his own side (Australia's messaging failures) without apologising for Australian interests. Both qualities contribute to his authority.
Open Questions¶
- Does Allan's view of Turnbull's China speech prove prescient? What happens to the relationship in subsequent months?
- How does the soft power review ultimately conclude, and does Allan comment on it in later episodes?