Source — AITW Ep009: US-China Rivalry Through the Lens of Regional Summitry¶
Metadata¶
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Episode | 9 |
| Title | US-China rivalry through the lens of regional summitry |
| Publication date | 2018-11-29 |
| Speakers | Allan Gyngell, Darren Lim |
| Guest | None |
| Duration | ~47 min |
Summary¶
This episode opens with one of the series' rare direct corrections: Darren begins with a somewhat lecture-format survey of all the November regional summits, and Allan cuts in — "Can't be too didactic, Darren." It is brief, almost affectionate, and completely characteristic. Allan prefers the conversational to the professorial, and he is comfortable enough in this partnership to say so directly. What follows is the mode he favours: a practitioner working through real events with a knowledgeable interlocutor, asking what actually happened and why.
The two most revealing analytical moments in the episode concern, on their face, opposite problems. On the failed APEC communiqué, Allan says simply: "It all seems really weird to me." He has read the chair's statement carefully — forensically, noting exact language like "some leaders emphasize" — and he cannot reconcile the stalled language with the actual content of the disagreement. The puzzlement is not a sign of analytical failure; it is the honest response of someone who knows how these processes work and is genuinely unsettled by their collapse. On the Manus Island announcement, by contrast, he is certain and direct: "I think it was a mistake for the Americans to come on board." The judgement is not anti-American — he wants US engagement — but it reflects the practitioner's grasp of regional politics: involvement by the United States in a PNG military initiative changes the signal, and not for the better.
The clearest formulation about Australia's strategic situation comes when Allan addresses the Prime Minister's "we don't have to choose" mantra about China and the US: "That's true in an existential sense. I doubt that it will ever come down to China saying, give up the ANZUS treaty or we'll stop trading with you. But in the real world, we are having to make choices." The distinction between the existential and the real is Allan at his most precise — not disputing the PM's logic but clarifying what it doesn't cover. The reading recommendations at the close confirm the deliberate broadening of his frame: Kai-Fu Lee on AI competition between China and the US, and Yuval Noah Harari on why technology favours tyranny. "Which is something we really got to begin to get our minds around here." The episode is a record of someone extending his own analytical range to meet the new world he is observing.
Key Topics¶
- ASEAN, EAS structure and Australia's founding role in APEC
- Trump's absence; Pence as deputy; comparison with Reagan/Bush
- US "Free and Open Indo-Pacific" (FOIP) vs. Chinese defense of globalization
- APEC's failed communiqué: who blocked it, and why
- PNG as APEC host; Chinese pressure on O'Neill
- Manus Island naval base announcement: "overblown" and potentially counterproductive
- G20 significance as the only table with all major players
- Saudi Arabia/Khashoggi and Trump's blatant transactionalism
- AI competition: Kai-Fu Lee's thesis; Yuval Noah Harari on technology and tyranny
- Middle powers and the future of APEC
Key Quotations¶
Opening gentle rebuke¶
"Can't be too didactic, Darren."
— Allan Gyngell [00:04:43.800 --> 00:04:46.260]
Rare direct correction; shows Allan's comfort in the relationship but also his preference for conversational rather than lecture-format discussion.
On why we have so many regional meetings¶
"There may be a lot of meetings, but you can contrast it with the lack of contact there was before APEC when there was no informal way in which the leaders of Japan and China and the US could ever get together at all. So we're better off than we were then."
— Allan Gyngell [00:04:46.540 --> 00:06:02.080]
Historical baseline: the meetings are not excessive; the alternative was worse. Anti-cynicism grounded in history.
On Trump's absence¶
"You sort of got the sense that he really couldn't be asked, turning up. Other US presidents have skipped one or two or three, I think, in the past, but it's two years in a row."
— Allan Gyngell [00:06:38.280 --> 00:08:09.000]
"I was trying to imagine whether Ronald Reagan, for example, would ever have deputed George H.W. Bush, his vice president, to give a major speech on the Soviet Union."
— Allan Gyngell [00:06:38.280 --> 00:08:09.000]
Historical counterfactual to illuminate the abnormality of Pence's role.
On Australia and choosing between the US and China¶
"We've had a couple of examples recently of the Prime Minister repeating the mantra that Australia doesn't have to choose between China and the US. And of course, that's true in an existential sense. I doubt that it will ever come down to a question of the Chinese saying, give up the ANZUS treaty or we'll stop trading with you. But in the real world, we are having to make choices."
— Allan Gyngell [00:12:27.020 --> 00:13:29.380]
Decisive formulation: "true in an existential sense" but not in daily policy reality. A careful analytical distinction.
On the failed APEC communiqué¶
"I have to say that it all seems really weird to me. I've read the PNG chair's statement that was issued in lieu of a communiqué. And there seems nothing in this... They agreed to the words, 'some leaders emphasize the importance of shared prosperity and being able to compete freely and fairly.'"
— Allan Gyngell [00:15:15.020 --> 00:16:38.940]
The forensic close-reading of the communiqué language — "some leaders emphasize" — is characteristic. He reads the exact words and notes what they reveal.
On Manus Island announcement¶
"The early reports of a new US-Australian naval base, sort of a Pearl Harbour at Manus, were seriously overblown... My own view is that it was a mistake for the Americans to come on board. I think it complicates a good initiative."
— Allan Gyngell [00:28:44.520 --> 00:30:05.100]
Willing to criticise an allied decision. "Seriously overblown" is a judgement he makes with confidence.
On APEC as a middle-power initiative¶
"APEC from the beginning was really a middle power initiative. It remains as important as ever for those very middle powers. So we ought to be working as hard as we can to use APEC to reinforce the normative commitment to open regionalism."
— Allan Gyngell [00:33:03.100 --> 00:34:19.100]
On the G20's importance¶
"The G20 is really, really Important because it has all the major states... It has the G7, the P5 members of the United Nations. It has the BRICS. And most importantly, if you're sitting here in Canberra, it has us."
— Allan Gyngell [00:36:44.810 --> 00:38:08.770]
"Most importantly, if you're sitting here in Canberra, it has us." Australia-centred; not chauvinist but precise about Australian interests.
On Trump's transactionalism over Khashoggi¶
"I was shocked by the directness of what is normally hidden in Trump's response, that is the blatantly transactional nature of his comments... There's nothing cynical about stating that the United States has important economic interests in Saudi Arabia. There's nothing cynical about saying that it wants the Saudis to be on the side against disruptors like Iran. But the way in which he moulds all these things together."
— Allan Gyngell [00:41:19.100 --> 00:42:28.050]
On the myth of technocratic management¶
"The fantasy of officials all over the world: 'If only they left it to us, we could organize the world so neatly and efficiently, and it all would be fine'... But it's the leadership at the top that matters."
— Allan Gyngell [00:22:36.520 --> 00:23:11.780]
Reading/Listening Recommendation¶
Allan is reading on AI competition — specifically referencing Kai-Fu Lee's work and Yuval Noah Harari's article "Why Technology Favours Tyranny" in The Atlantic:
"[Kai-Fu Lee] essentially saying that the next round of competition in AI will be won between China and the US... He quotes PwC as expecting these two countries to capture a full 70% of AI gains... I also had an article by the Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari in the latest edition of the Atlantic magazine, why technology favours tyranny, which is something we really got to begin to get our minds around here."
— Allan Gyngell [00:44:49.100 --> 00:46:06.380]
Evidence Relevant to Allan's Views¶
- Trump's absence from regional summits is a real cost, not offset by Pence
- Australia "is having to make choices" despite the PM's "don't choose" mantra — the existential framing is too comfortable
- APEC's failed communiqué is genuinely puzzling; the chair may have been pressured
- Manus Island US involvement complicates a good Australian initiative
- APEC remains most valuable as a middle-power institution; Australia should lead that effort
- G20 is the only table that matters because it includes Australia and all major states
Evidence Relevant to Allan's Style and Persona¶
- Rare direct correction: "Can't be too didactic, Darren" — comfortable enough to correct the format
- Forensic reading of exact communiqué language
- "Most importantly, if you're sitting here in Canberra, it has us" — Australian-centred without apology
- "Seriously overblown" — clear, confident judgement against the media narrative
- Recognises and names the technocratic fantasy ("if only they left it to us")
Biographical Fragments¶
- Now reading about AI and technology geopolitics (Kai-Fu Lee, Harari) — broadening his analytical frame
- Has deep knowledge of APEC's history and Australia's founding role
Characteristic Phrases¶
- "True in an existential sense"
- "Seriously overblown"
- "Most importantly, if you're sitting here in Canberra, it has us"
- "Can't be too didactic, Darren"
Relevance to Central Biographical Question¶
The correction "Can't be too didactic, Darren" is significant: it shows Allan as a co-equal shaping the podcast format, not just responding to Darren's questions. His forensic attention to exact communiqué language ("some leaders emphasize") is a practitioner's habit — he knows what these formulations mean and what they hide. His willingness to criticise the Manus Island US involvement, and to name the technocratic fantasy, reinforces the sense of an independent mind that defers to evidence not to convenience.
Open Questions¶
- How does the G20 Buenos Aires summit actually go — and does it deliver on multilateral commitments (climate, trade)?
- Does the Manus Island base continue to be controversial in subsequent episodes?