Source — AITW Ep055 — Richard Maude Returns (Part 2): China, Models of Cooperation, & What Australian Foreign Policy Can Do¶
Episode Metadata¶
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Episode number | 55 |
| Title | Richard Maude returns (Part 2): China, models of cooperation, & what Australian foreign policy can do |
| Publication date | 2020-08-29 |
| Recording date | Same session as Ep054 (between 4–23 August 2020) |
| Guests | Richard Maude (Asia Society Policy Institute) |
| Allan present | Yes |
| Format | Part 2 of 2-part interview — China (HK, Taiwan, tech decoupling); minilateralism/Five Eyes; Australian foreign policy options |
Summary¶
Continuation of the Richard Maude interview. Topics: Hong Kong (no surprise; always going to assert authority); Taiwan (most dangerous flashpoint but Australia marginal to outcome); technology decoupling (structural drift toward splinternet, unlikely to be reversed); minilateral cooperation and Five Eyes; what Australian foreign policy can do. Allan's standout contribution is a pointed warning about Australian foreign policy retreating into comfortable relationships — "we need to pay particular care that we're not simply hanging out with mates." The Five Eyes observation is a biographical marker: "I come from a generation where Five Eyes was a concept which was whispered quietly in corridors, not blared over the front pages of newspapers as an alliance." Multilateralism requires "profound, deep thinking... a century on from our first efforts to build a league of nations." No reading segment.
Key Quotations¶
"Not simply hanging out with mates"¶
"I come from a generation where Five Eyes was a concept which was whispered quietly in corridors, not blared over the front pages of newspapers as an alliance. Now, you know, all in favour of close relations with Americans and Brits and, you know, who can go past a good evening with Canadians and New Zealanders, but this is easy, you know, it really is easy to talk to such people. Ditto with the Pacific step up in favour of that, but talking to the small island states who speak English and play rugby and, you know, go to the same sorts of churches we do is again not hard. So, you know, we need to pay particular care, I think, that we're not simply hanging out with mates in the time ahead. I know the government would deny that it's doing any of that, but it's always, it's always seductive to slip back into those easy patterns of relationships. The world is harder and we need to recognise that and we need to deal with the hard bits of it as well as the easy bits."
— [00:30:03.980 --> 00:31:30.420]
The most pointed critique of Australian foreign policy in Ep055 and one of the most direct in the corpus. The target is not incompetence but comfort-seeking — the gravitational pull toward relationships that are culturally easy (English-speaking, cricket, rugby, shared churches). He names the components of this comfort zone precisely: Five Eyes partners, Pacific island states, all English-speaking. The "whispered quietly in corridors" line is a generational self-placement: he worked in an era when Five Eyes was genuinely classified in its existence, not a brand. "Who can go past a good evening with Canadians and New Zealanders" is the comic acknowledgement of his own susceptibility to this pull before landing the critique. Characteristic: the diplomatic cover ("I know the government would deny that") paired with the pointed observation that denial is exactly what you'd expect.
"Going down to Bunnings and getting a spec filler"¶
"It's not simply a matter of fixing this up, going down to Bunnings and getting a spec filler and sort of slapping the holes in the walls."
— [00:20:53.660 --> 00:22:27.540]
On the impossibility of easily repairing multilateral institutions. Bunnings is Australia's dominant hardware chain — the domestic reference is deliberate, grounding a discussion of global institution reform in the most ordinary Australian consumer experience. "Spec filler" (gap filler / spackle) and "slapping the holes in the walls" — the metaphor is both precise and slightly self-deprecating. Allan knows a Biden administration rejoining WHO and Paris Accords would send a signal, but he refuses to oversell it. The Bunnings reference is one of the most distinctively Australian cultural references in the corpus.
"If a global pandemic and planet-altering climate change aren't tragedy enough"¶
"You talk about we need a great tragedy. Well, if a global pandemic and planet altering climate change aren't tragedy enough, you know, I don't know what is."
— [00:20:53.660 --> 00:22:27.540]
Responding to Darren's suggestion that major catastrophe is needed to generate political will for global cooperation. Allan's point is that we are already inside the tragedy — the question is why it has not produced the political will. Characteristic: refuses to accept the premise that the necessary condition hasn't been met; redirects to the actual problem, which is domestic political structures and major power rivalry blocking cooperation even when the need is manifest.
"Profound, deep thinking about what multilateralism looks like a century on"¶
"What we really do badly need from academics and from think tanks is some serious thinking about what multilateralism looks like a century on from our first efforts to build a league of nations. That's profound, deep thinking about multilateralism. And I don't think there's enough of that on the part of either the academic community or governments."
— [00:20:53.660 --> 00:22:27.540]
A prescription directed at both the academy and governments. The 100-year mark (1919 League of Nations → 2019) is the frame. His concern is structural: the intellectual frameworks for multilateralism were built in the 1940s and evolved in the 1970s–90s; they were not designed for major power rivalry plus mass democratic politics plus 193 diverse sovereign states. He is not just lamenting a gap — he is naming it as an institutional failure of think tanks and universities, including his own sector.
Biographical Fragments¶
Evidence type: New — Five Eyes generation; biographical self-placement
- "I come from a generation where Five Eyes was a concept which was whispered quietly in corridors": Direct generational self-placement. Allan is not merely analytically aware of Five Eyes — he is from the professional cohort for whom its existence was classified. This is consistent with his early career in ONA's intelligence analyst role (mid-1980s), his Five Eyes work confirmed in Ep013 ("while it was still classified"), and his ONA DG tenure. The contrast with "blared over the front pages of newspapers as an alliance" marks a genuine historical shift he has personally witnessed across his career. (Ep055)
Style and Method Evidence¶
- "Hanging out with mates" as foreign policy critique: Allan names the seductive pull of culturally easy relationships — Five Eyes, Pacific islands, English-speaking — with precision and a light touch. He does not name the government as guilty of this; he acknowledges the universal pull ("it's always seductive") and then issues the warning. Characteristic: the critique lands without being a formal accusation.
- Bunnings as deliberate domestic grounding: The hardware chain reference is not accidental. In a discussion of global institutional repair, he reaches for the most ordinary Australian consumer experience. The effect is to make the point that multilateral reform is not just technically complex but structurally unlike anything you can fix with simple tools.
- "I come from a generation" as biographical operator: Deployed here (as in other episodes) to distinguish experiential knowledge from analytical knowledge. He was not just taught about Five Eyes from documents — he lived the transition from silence to ubiquity.
- Comic deflation within pointed argument: "Who can go past a good evening with Canadians and New Zealanders" — the warmth is genuine and the concession is real, which makes the critique that follows more effective. He is not dismissing the relationships; he is identifying why they are insufficient on their own.
Reading / Listening Segment¶
None — episode ends without reading/watching recommendations.
Open Questions¶
- Allan's reference to Five Eyes "whispered quietly in corridors" — when exactly was Five Eyes declassified as an organisation? What was Allan's specific position within or adjacent to Five Eyes during his career?
- "Profound, deep thinking about multilateralism" — has Allan written on this himself? The call seems to be directed at others, but given his own institutional position (AIIA) and writing record (East Asia Forum, AFR, AFA), he is positioned to contribute to this thinking.
- The "hard bits" of Australian foreign policy — he names easy (Five Eyes, Pacific islands) but does not name the hard bits explicitly beyond China. What else does he have in mind? Indonesia? India? Southeast Asia?