Skip to content

Source — AITW Ep046 — Australia-China Tensions Over a Covid-19 Inquiry

Episode Metadata

Field Value
Episode number 46
Title Ep. 46: Australia-China tensions over a Covid-19 inquiry
Publication date 2020-05-06
Recording date Tuesday, 5 May 2020 (Darren: "speaking today, the 5th of May")
Guests None (Allan and Darren only)
Allan present Yes
Format Unscheduled news episode — entire episode on the Australia-China COVID inquiry dispute

Summary

An unscheduled "emergency" episode focused entirely on the Australia-China COVID inquiry spat. Allan and Darren had not planned to record that week. The episode narrates the dispute chronologically: Payne's Insiders call for an independent review (19 April); Morrison's subsequent amplification; Ambassador Cheng Jingye's AFR interview with veiled economic warnings (26 April); the DFAT Secretary Adamson / Ambassador Cheng phone call (27 April) and the embassy's unprecedented release of its contents; Andrew Forrest's press conference appearance with the Chinese Consul General; the business lobby (Forrest, Kerry Stokes) calling for Australia to back down. Allan's central verdict on the Payne initiative: "it has a feeling of being made up on the run." His key formulation: "it's a reminder of the difference between foreign policy, the objective you want to achieve, and diplomacy, the mechanism by which you get there, and the dangers when those two things are not aligned." On Cheng's economic warnings: "in the annals of international threats, it really doesn't rank." On the embassy releasing the Adamson phone call: "it was certainly a measure of how pissed off the Chinese were." Historical parallel: the 1957 Japan–Australia commerce agreement, which McEwen pushed through against public anti-Japanese sentiment — within ten years Japan passed Britain as Australia's largest export market. New biographical disclosure: Sir Russell Madigan of CRA was one of Allan's predecessors as AIIA National President. Reading: Money Heist (Netflix); personal disclosure — "I love heist movies."

Key Quotations

"The difference between foreign policy, the objective you want to achieve, and diplomacy, the mechanism by which you get there"

"It's a reminder of the difference between foreign policy, the objective you want to achieve, and diplomacy, the mechanism by which you get there, and the dangers when those two things are not aligned."

— [00:03:46.880 --> 00:05:45.200]

A formulation Allan says comes from his Australian Foreign Affairs piece on the China relationship (Darren references it). In the context of the Payne initiative, the argument is precise: the foreign policy objective (understanding the pandemic's origins, preparing for the next one) was legitimate; the diplomatic mechanism (an off-the-cuff TV statement, no prior consultation with China or key allies, comparison to human rights egregious situations) was not aligned with that objective. The distinction is more than definitional — it is a complete diagnosis of the Payne initiative's failure. He is not saying the goal was wrong; he is saying the means were miscalibrated to the goal. Darren attributes the original formulation to the Australian Foreign Affairs piece, so this is a written position being applied to a live event in real time.

"In the annals of international threats, it really doesn't rank"

"The interpretation in parts of the media, I thought, was more fevered than the words in the transcript. I went to the transcript after seeing the press reports. Ambassador Cheng certainly issued warnings, though he couched them hypothetically about what China's consumers might do. But honestly, in the annals of international threats, it really doesn't rank."

— [00:10:58.480 --> 00:11:41.600]

Allan's immediate move: read the primary source (the AFR transcript) rather than rely on press reports. Having read it, his verdict is deflation — "in the annals of international threats, it really doesn't rank." The phrase "in the annals of" is characteristic: he is placing the event in a long historical sequence and finding it minor. This is not a defence of China's position; it is a calibration of what actually happened. He has seen threats in his career. This, as phrased, does not qualify. The contrast with Darren's more concerned reading of the same words reveals the practitioner's higher tolerance for diplomatic bluster — and, possibly, the analyst's different threshold for what counts as a serious signal.

"Coercion is simply getting others to do what you want because they fear something worse if they don't. And it's a permanent feature of all relations between states."

"I get a bit uncomfortable with coercion because it's one of those words that are thrown around incredibly loosely. Coercion is simply getting others to do what you want because they fear something worse if they don't. And it's a permanent feature of all relations between states."

— [00:16:15.740 --> 00:17:07.030]

A definition, not a verdict. Allan resists the word "coercion" not because he denies China's actions but because he thinks the word has been weaponised into polemic. His definition strips it back to neutral: coercion is a structural feature of interstate relations, practiced by all — including Trump, including Australia. The examples follow immediately: Trump uses it frequently with mixed results; China tried it with South Korea over THAAD and South Korea didn't budge. Characteristic move: take a charged term, define it precisely, strip the moral valence, apply it symmetrically. The analytical goal is not to excuse China but to produce a more useful understanding of what is actually happening.

"It was certainly a measure of how pissed off the Chinese were"

"It was certainly a measure of how pissed off the Chinese were that they did this. And the breach of a norm in this way is going to come at some cost to them."

— [00:18:42.330 --> 00:20:27.410]

One of very few instances in the corpus where Allan uses genuinely informal register. "Pissed off" breaks his usual diplomatic register — and that break is the signal. He uses it because it is the right word: the Chinese embassy's release of the Adamson phone call contents was not calculated; it was an angry, impulsive breach of diplomatic norms. He then immediately analyses the consequence: this will make Australian officials unwilling to speak frankly with Chinese counterparts for "a fair while," adding an additional constraint to any effort to restore the relationship. Anger and its costs, precisely observed.

"You should have been a diplomat, Darren"

[After Darren drafts an alternative script for what Ambassador Cheng could have said] Allan: "You should have been a diplomat, Darren."

— [00:14:33.280 --> 00:14:34.560]

Six words, maximum effect. Darren has produced a polished alternative diplomatic statement that threads the needle — maintaining China's position while avoiding the coercive reading. Allan recognises the skill immediately and pays the highest compliment available to him: professional validation. Characteristic brevity: the compliment is total and delivered without elaboration.

"I love heist movies"

"I love heist movies, and there's a terrific Spanish series on Netflix called Money Heist, complete with a master criminal called The Professor, which is a great way of taking your mind off the current reality."

— [00:33:04.000 --> 00:33:19.280]

One of the most direct personal preference disclosures in the corpus. Not "I enjoyed" but "I love" — a stronger verb than Allan typically deploys for personal matters. The genre choice is characteristic: heist movies are about intelligence, planning, deception, and the management of complexity toward a specific objective, all under time pressure. That he loves them is unsurprising. The Professor (a master planner operating through layers of indirect control) is the kind of character Allan might have admired professionally.

Biographical Fragments

Evidence type: New — AIIA predecessors; entertainment preference

  1. Sir Russell Madigan of CRA as a predecessor AIIA National President: "Senior business leaders helped critically in building the relationship with Japan through the late 20th century... Indeed, one of them, Sir Russell Madigan of CRA, was actually one of my predecessors as National President of the AIIA." CRA = Conzinc Riotinto Australia (now Rio Tinto). Madigan was a major figure in Australia-Japan resources trade. Allan is making a dual point: business relationships are legitimate foreign policy assets, and the AIIA has historically included senior resources industry figures. (Ep046)

  2. "I love heist movies": Direct personal preference disclosure. Combined with his recommendation of Money Heist (La Casa de Papel — the Spanish Netflix series about an elaborate bank heist, featuring a master criminal called "The Professor"). Among the very few entertainment genre preferences confirmed in the corpus. (Ep046)

  3. "I'm quite good at delayed gratification": Allan has still not watched the final series of Game of Thrones during COVID lockdown, despite planning to. "Social isolation hasn't been nearly long enough for me. I'm quite good at delayed gratification." Self-characterological disclosure — patience, not urgency; quality over immediacy. (Ep046)

Style and Method Evidence

  • Read the primary source: Allan's first move on the Cheng interview is to go to the original AFR transcript, not rely on press reports. "I went to the transcript after seeing the press reports." This is his consistent analytical practice — the secondary account may be mistaken; you go to the primary document. The verdict follows only from the primary source.
  • Historical parallel precision: The 1957 Japan–Australia commerce agreement. Allan knows: it was McEwen and the Country Party who drove it (not Menzies, who was cautious); several Labour politicians refused to meet PM Kishi when he visited; within ten years Japan passed Britain as Australia's largest export market. He has the chronology, the actors, and the outcomes. He deploys it to argue that business interests in foreign policy are legitimate and can produce positive long-term outcomes.
  • Definitional precision on charged terms: "Coercion" — he objects to the word not because the action was fine but because the word is being used loosely. He defines it, places it in its proper context, and applies it symmetrically. The discipline of defining before arguing.
  • The Forrest episode as Hirschman: Darren applies Albert Hirschman's 1945 framework on economic influence and political constituencies to the business lobby's pressure on Morrison. Allan engages seriously with the framework, corrects the implied normative sentiment (economic interests are not less legitimate than security interests), and offers Japan as a counter-example.

Reading, Listening and Watching

Allan — Money Heist (La Casa de Papel), Netflix

"I love heist movies, and there's a terrific Spanish series on Netflix called Money Heist, complete with a master criminal called The Professor, which is a great way of taking your mind off the current reality, which is what we all need."

The only pure entertainment recommendation in the corpus to date — no analytical overlay, no policy application. Allan simply loves the genre and the show. The Professor (a meticulous planner who operates through layers of controlled indirection, managing a team of specialists toward a complex objective under pressure) is a character type he has obvious professional sympathy for. Allan also mentions the Song Exploder podcast in passing — having heard an episode where composer Ramin Djawadi discusses writing the Game of Thrones theme. This is another rare media format recommendation: he listens to podcasts about creative process.

Open Questions

  1. The 1957 Japan–Australia Commerce Agreement — Allan says McEwen drove it against Menzies' caution. Does any episode elsewhere confirm Allan's depth of knowledge of Australian trade history? Is this drawn from Fear of Abandonment?
  2. Sir Russell Madigan of CRA as AIIA National President — when did Madigan hold the presidency? Is there a full list of AIIA National Presidents that would contextualise Allan's own tenure and his predecessors?
  3. Money Heist recommendation — does any later episode follow up on whether he finished it?
  4. Has still not seen the final series of Game of Thrones as of May 2020 — does he ever revisit this in later episodes?