Source — AITW Ep077 — Debating Democracy and the "Competition of Systems"¶

Episode Metadata¶

Field	Value
Episode number	77
Title	Debating democracy and the "competition of systems"
Publication date	2021-07-02
Recording date	Thursday, 24 June 2021
Guests	None — Allan and Darren only
Allan present	Yes
Format	Single-topic thematic episode (no news items); plus reading segment

Summary¶

A full episode on democracy, Biden's "competition of systems" framing, and what it means for Australian foreign policy. Allan's most sustained theoretical statement in the corpus: he defines statecraft, foreign policy, and diplomacy with unusual precision, invokes the Peace of Westphalia as the origin of modern foreign policy, and argues that interests rather than political systems should organise Australia's external engagement. He cites the EIU Democracy Index (only 8.4% of the world's population lives in a full democracy; the US is "flawed"), notes neocon DNA in Morrison's language, warns against Australia "hanging around with old mates, if not the Anglosphere, then the Eurosphere," and closes by endorsing Owen Harries: "democracy is not an export commodity, but a do-it-yourself enterprise." Reading segment: Frances Adamson's National Press Club farewell address — Allan attended her reception the previous evening.

Biographical significance: Allan has been invited to give a War College lecture on grand strategy in July 2021. He attended the reception for departing DFAT Secretary Adamson, alongside the PM, Foreign Minister, and Trade Minister — confirming continued access to the senior policy community. Owen Harries cited as "the great Australian scholar and editor."

Key Quotations¶

Foreign policy defined — "the slow, grinding job of managing differences"¶

"Foreign policy, for me, is the part of statecraft whose purpose is the slow, grinding job of managing differences between actors in the international system. The daily business of engagement, negotiation, action, reaction across the span of government activities, both bilateral and multilateral, through which our countries advance their interests and protect their values. It's the arduous, if you like, task of constructing brick by brick the foundations of a stable international order."

— [00:10:33.680 --> 00:13:42.680]

The most precise definitional statement in the corpus. Three elements: purpose (managing differences); method (brick by brick, daily, bilateral and multilateral); dual objective (interests and values). The emphasis on grinding, arduous, daily, brick-by-brick work is deliberate — it is the opposite of grand strategy visions and systematic foreign policy doctrines. The "no end point" point is the anti-teleological corollary: "there's no end point you can reach with foreign policy any more than the economy can have a destination." There is no final state of affairs to be achieved; the process is continuous. He also distinguishes foreign policy from diplomacy: "I think of diplomacy as its operating system. Diplomacy, as practiced by diplomats, has its own language and practice, of course. But in its elements of persuasion and negotiation, it operates in every human interaction you can think of." This connects directly to his claim from Ep074 that diplomatic principles are continuous with ordinary human interaction.

"Hanging around with old mates, if not the Anglosphere, then the Eurosphere"¶

"I do worry that the emphasis on democracy means that Australia is in danger of finding ourselves simply hanging around with old mates, if not the Anglosphere, then the Eurosphere. We need a broader focus for our foreign policy. And for me, the idea of national interests provides it."

— [00:32:44.680 --> 00:33:43.680]

The practical consequence of the democracy-focused framing stated precisely and with uncharacteristic colloquial sharpness. "Hanging around with old mates" is deliberately casual — it deflates the rhetorical elevation of "a world order that favours freedom" to its actual operational content. "Anglosphere... Eurosphere" names the actual membership of the proposed coalition. He also identifies the Morrison speech's intellectual lineage: "He drew that phrase 'world order that favours freedom' from George W. Bush's national security adviser Condoleezza Rice... So there is a bit of, you know, neocon DNA in that language." The Condoleezza Rice connection was not discussed in Ep076 — he has since researched it. His alternative (national interests) is then challenged by Darren as approaching Trumpist transactionalism — which produces the only flash of exasperation in the episode.

"You can't tie me with that brush, Darren"¶

"Oh, yeah. You can't tie me with that brush, Darren."

— [00:34:30.680 --> 00:34:37.460]

Rare flash of exasperation. Darren has suggested that Allan's national-interests-over-democracy framing "starts to approach the stark transactionalism of America first." Allan's reaction is immediate and unguarded — a single sentence with no analytical qualification. The rebuff matters because the comparison to Trumpism is the one accusation that Allan will not accept; his entire intellectual project is structured around rejecting the idea that "interests" means narrow zero-sum self-interest. The distinction he maintains throughout the corpus is between interests properly understood (which include values, alliance commitments, long-term relational stability) and the transactional quid-pro-quo of America First. "You can't tie me with that brush" asserts the distinction is real, not rhetorical.

The Peace of Westphalia — modern foreign policy's origin¶

"Well, of course we can work things out with different systems. That's the whole point of foreign policy. It's more or less where it started, at least in its modern guise, with the Peace of Westphalia in 1648. Now, I'm sure all our listeners will remember hearing that after the carnage and slaughter of the Thirty Years' War, Europe's Protestant and Catholic princes finally recognised that they had to find a way of living with each other. Now, this was a big deal, not least because at the time most of them believed that if you didn't manage to convert your neighbours to your version of religion, they were going to be condemned to eternal damnation."

— [00:20:57.680 --> 00:22:23.680]

He delivers the Westphalia argument to answer Darren's intra-democracy cooperation question — "of course we can work things out with different systems." The historical parallel is precise and functional: the Catholic/Protestant divide in 1648 is structurally analogous to the democracy/autocracy divide today — a clash of systems that required a pragmatic settlement of coexistence, not conversion. "Most of them believed that if you didn't manage to convert your neighbours to your version of religion, they were going to be condemned to eternal damnation" — an analogue to the contemporary conviction that if authoritarian states aren't transformed into democracies, security will deteriorate. He undercuts Darren's pessimism about Westphalian sovereignty being too old-fashioned: "didn't you and I declare sovereignty our 2020 word of the year?" and invokes the Lombok Agreement (Australia-Indonesia, 375 years after Westphalia) as proof the concepts remain active.

"Democracy is not an export commodity, but a do-it-yourself enterprise" (Owen Harries)¶

"As the great Australian scholar and editor Owen Harries used to say, democracy is not an export commodity, but a do-it-yourself enterprise."

— [00:35:50.680 --> 00:36:42.680]

The closing sentence of the episode's theoretical discussion — Allan gives this to Harries rather than stating it as his own. The positioning is significant: it is the distillation of everything he has argued, and he attributes it to a named authority he describes as "great." Owen Harries (1930–2021) was the founding editor of The National Interest — a conservative, realist foreign policy intellectual, Australian-born. "Used to say" implies he is recently deceased or no longer active (Harries died in March 2021, three months before this recording). The endorsement positions Allan in a realist intellectual lineage. The aphorism does the full work: democracy as a domestic achievement, not an exportable good; requiring self-determination, not external imposition; "do-it-yourself" implying agency, effort, and local ownership that no external actor can substitute.

8.4% of the world's population — the democracy index¶

"According to the Economist Intelligence Unit's annual democracy index... just 8.4% of the world's population lives in a full democracy. Across the Indo-Pacific, only Australia, New Zealand, Japan and South Korea achieve that rating. The United States is a flawed democracy."

— [00:28:47.680 --> 00:30:27.680]

He has the EIU Democracy Index figures at his fingertips, used to deflate the competition-of-systems framing at its foundations. If only 8.4% of the world lives in a full democracy, a foreign policy built around democracy as organising principle requires constant adjudication of who qualifies. "The United States is a flawed democracy" is a specific, data-grounded observation that complicates the entire Biden framework — the leading democracy is not itself a full democracy on the only systematic measurement he cites. The practical conclusion is his: "Isn't it much easier to simply decide where your interests align with others and work your way forward from there?"

"In areas from industry policy to state intervention to protectionism, we're beginning to look a lot more like China, aren't we?"¶

"In areas from industry policy to state intervention to protectionism, we're beginning to look a lot more like China, aren't we? And isn't that sending a message that autocracies can in fact do some things more efficiently than democracies? It's not so long ago that both sides of Australian politics were proclaiming openness as a distinctly Australian value, and we haven't been hearing much of that recently."

— [00:17:58.680 --> 00:19:06.680]

The sharpest internal critique of the democracies' own position — the liberal economic package that accompanied liberal political democracy is being dismantled by democratic politicians. When the West adopts industrial policy, protectionism, and state intervention, it concedes the economic argument to the model it claims to oppose. The framing is deliberate: "aren't we?" is a rhetorical inclusion (you too, Darren; and Australia too). "Openness as a distinctly Australian value" — his free-trade conviction from Ep076 here appearing as a loss, not just an endangered personal position.

Biographical Fragments¶

War College lecture on grand strategy — July 2021¶

Evidence: Ep077 [00:15:46.680]. "I've been invited to give a lecture on just that subject at the War College in Canberra in July, and I need to do a hell of a lot more thinking about grand strategy before I subject myself to the critique of a room full of professional military officers." Confidence: High (direct statement of upcoming professional engagement).

Allan has been invited to lecture at the Australian War College (now the Australian War College at ADFA/Duntroon) on grand strategy. He defers Darren's grand strategy question to this preparation: "I want you to ask it again to me in a month." The intellectual humility is characteristic — he acknowledges openly that he needs to think harder on a subject before presenting to experts. The engagement itself confirms he is sought out by the defence establishment as an external intellectual, consistent with his ONA background and AIIA role.

Frances Adamson reception — attended with PM, FM, and Trade Minister¶

Evidence: Ep077 [00:36:49.680]. "Our warm thanks for her service to the nation, as the PM, the Foreign Minister and Trade Minister all said at the reception in her honor last night." Confidence: High (direct statement, incidental detail).

Allan attended the farewell reception for departing DFAT Secretary Frances Adamson alongside Prime Minister Morrison, Foreign Minister Payne, and Trade Minister Tehan. The "last night" timing (recording 24 June 2021; Adamson retiring "at the end of this week") confirms a specific evening. This places Allan in the inner circle of Australian foreign policy at senior government level — a farewell reception for a Secretary-level departure is not a public event. Consistent with AIIA National Presidency, China Matters board, and ONA DG background. He was also with Adamson previously as a podcast guest.

Owen Harries as intellectual touchstone¶

Evidence: Ep077 [00:36:42.680]. "As the great Australian scholar and editor Owen Harries used to say." Confidence: High (direct statement; "used to say" timing significant).

Allan cites Owen Harries (1930–2021) as "the great Australian scholar and editor." Harries died in March 2021, three months before this recording. "Used to say" is a memorial phrasing. Harries founded The National Interest journal (Washington) and was a prominent realist foreign policy intellectual who argued consistently against the exportation of democracy. Allan positions Harries's aphorism as the conclusive statement of the episode — endorsing his intellectual lineage explicitly. This is the clearest confirmation in the corpus that Allan's intellectual affinities include the realist tradition and specifically Harries's anti-democracy-promotion position.

Style and Method Evidence¶

Precision in definition: Statecraft, foreign policy, and diplomacy each receive careful, distinct definitions. This is the most systematic conceptual statement in the corpus.
Anti-teleological: "No end point you can reach with foreign policy any more than the economy can have a destination" — process not outcome; continuous not conclusive.
Historical grounding: Westphalia invoked naturally, not pedantically — as a functional analogy, not a display of learning. The Lombok Agreement as a modern counterpoint.
Intellectual humility about grand strategy: "I need to do a hell of a lot more thinking about grand strategy before I subject myself to the critique of a room full of professional military officers." Genuine preparation acknowledged, not false modesty.
Realism as intellectual home: Owen Harries as closing authority; interests over democracy as organising principle; EIU data to ground the analysis. The pattern across the corpus coheres: he is analytically a realist who holds liberal values personally but refuses to make liberal values the organising principle of foreign policy.

Reading / Watching / Listening Segment¶

Frances Adamson — Address to the National Press Club, 23 June 2021¶

Episode: Ep077 (2021-07-02) Context: Adamson retiring as DFAT Secretary after five years; Allan attended her farewell reception the previous evening. Allan's comment: Structures around three themes: Australia's agency; reflections on China; diversity in the Foreign Service. Her diplomat formulation: "We are the sharp eyes, the attuned ears and the influential voice of Australia overseas." Allan's Game of Thrones analogy: "Can't you also hear echoes of the oath of the Night's Watch? I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the wall." He recommends it "for close textual analysis" as "a superb example of diplomatic tradecraft." Specifically notes a paragraph on the development program and competition for influence — "well and delicately said." Reveals: Allan watches Game of Thrones — or at least knows the Night's Watch oath. He also has a particular appreciation for speeches that communicate policy indirectly through careful phrasing. His recommendation of Adamson's speech "for close textual analysis" reveals his pedagogical instinct: he is thinking about how to teach diplomatic tradecraft through example. The farewell reception attendance confirms professional proximity to the DFAT leadership.

Open Questions¶

War College lecture on grand strategy: Allan defers the question, promising to return to it after the July lecture. Does he come back to grand strategy in a subsequent episode, and does he report on the lecture?
Owen Harries: Is this the only citation of Harries in the corpus? Given the "great" endorsement and the placement of his aphorism as the episode's closing line, he may appear again.
EIU Democracy Index and India: Allan names only Australia, NZ, Japan, and South Korea as full Indo-Pacific democracies. India is conspicuously absent — consistent with his concern about "illiberal democracies" complicating the framing. Does he address India's democratic status directly?
The Longest Telegram: Darren recommends it again; Allan endorses: "We should all regularly reread the longest telegram." Does he say more about this essay in subsequent episodes?