Wong; COP26; Solomon Islands¶

Episode Metadata¶

Field	Value
Episode number	88
Title	Ep. 88: Biden/Xi; Dutton/Wong; COP26; Solomon Islands
Publication date	2021-12-01
Recording date	Monday, 29 November 2021
Guests	None (Allan and Darren only)
Allan present	Yes
Format	Multi-topic news episode: four items (Biden-Xi summit; Dutton/Wong Taiwan speeches; COP26; Solomon Islands deployment). Reading segment at close.

Summary¶

A high-density news episode in which Allan's analytical character is on persistent display across four distinct topics. The episode contains no single set-piece the way Ep087's AUKUS-France focus did, but it is cumulatively revealing: his appreciation for the craft of psychological reading in diplomacy; his intellectual honesty when a policy argument doesn't add up ("I don't really know what he means"); his instinct for precise historical framing; and his deployment of personal institutional memory to quietly correct a revisionist account by a former Foreign Minister.

The most biographical moment is Allan's quiet rebuttal of Alexander Downer's claim that his 2003 opposition to sending forces to Solomon Islands was really DFAT's fault: "I can only say that that's not how I remember Alexander's relationship with the Department, whatever." The "whatever" at the close is characteristic — contempt delivered and immediately abandoned as not worth further engagement.

Two smaller biographical details: Mark Thirlwell is identified as "my former Lowy Institute colleague," corroborating the Lowy Institute period; and Allan's Velvet Underground recommendation reveals something of his cultural formation at a moment when all other recommendations in the series have been books or policy papers.

Key Quotations¶

"The capacity to effectively read the psychology of your opponents and allies"¶

"The political systems in the US and China are obviously very different, but you can't rise to the top in either of them without one of the primary political skills, which is the capacity to effectively read the psychology of your opponents and allies. So they had a chance to assess what was driving the other and to judge their real priorities and underlying concerns. And that's probably more important than the actual words they exchanged."

— [00:02:31.930 --> 00:05:48.930]

Allan's framework for assessing the Biden-Xi summit: the meeting matters less for its deliverables than as an opportunity for psychological assessment. This is a practitioner's insight, not an analyst's — it reflects how Allan himself understood diplomatic encounters from the inside. The formulation "that's probably more important than the actual words they exchanged" is characteristic: he weights the relational and the structural over the transactional.

Xi's "yawing" — "the first time I have ever spoken the word yawing"¶

"Xi spoke in similar terms, though I must say more poetically. He said we must stabilize the rudder so the giant ships will move forward against the wind and waves without yawing, stalling or colliding. And I have to say, Darren, that I think that is the first time I have ever spoken the word yawing. I have read it, but there you are."

— [00:02:31.930 --> 00:05:48.930]

A small self-disclosure about his relationship to language. "Yawing" (lateral off-course movement of a vessel) is a word Allan knows from reading but has never had occasion to say aloud. He is amused by the circumstance rather than using it to mock Xi's phrasing; he then translates the nautical image into the political register ("the basic message, the same") without dwelling on it. The aside reveals his habits of vocabulary — careful enough to have noted a rare word in reading but honest enough to admit it's a first. Consistent with the precision that characterises his explanatory style throughout the corpus.

More optimistic "because it happened rather than because of anything they negotiated"¶

"My bottom line is I'm more optimistic because it happened rather than because of anything they negotiated."

— [00:02:31.930 --> 00:05:48.930]

Compact and precise. The distinction between the fact of dialogue and its content is the practitioner's distinction: the signal a meeting sends matters independently of what is said. "More optimistic because it happened" is Allan's characteristic measured register — he does not endorse what was agreed; he endorses the act of engagement. Compare with his general principle that stopping talking is more dangerous than talking, even when talks are inconclusive.

"I don't really know what he means" — on Dutton¶

"I don't really know what he means, Darren. Does he mean that it is the responsibility of the government honestly to criticise the actions of other states with which we disagree in the same way that a journalist or, say, a podcaster might?... It's nonsense. Of course, even in a domestic context. Peter Dutton knows full well that it's not the job of the government to provide unalloyed commentary on every issue we might agree or disagree with. Political judgments almost always require a hard balancing of different and sometimes contending interests. So the government's job is not to be a commentator, but to advance Australia's interests and protect its values. So, yeah, I don't understand the point."

— [00:17:20.930 --> 00:18:16.930]

One of the sharpest dismissals in the corpus, delivered without raising his voice. "I don't really know what he means" is not a rhetorical move — Allan genuinely cannot square Dutton's stated justification with how government decision-making works. "It's nonsense" follows directly and without hedging. The restatement of principle ("the government's job is not to be a commentator, but to advance Australia's interests and protect its values") is clean and carried by conviction. The closing "So, yeah, I don't understand the point" returns to the opening admission: the argument is opaque to him not because he hasn't tried but because it doesn't make sense. Compare with his handling of other arguments he disagrees with but can reconstruct; here he cannot reconstruct it at all.

"Are you saying that the Morrison government has been constantly exercising restraint?"¶

"Sorry, Darren, do I hear you right? Are you saying that the Morrison government has been constantly exercising restraint in its language on China? What about the COVID inquiry or the Senkakus, for that matter?"

— [00:25:09.930 --> 00:26:09.930]

Allan's most direct correction of Darren in this episode — a push-back on imprecise framing rather than a policy disagreement. He is not angry; the "Sorry, Darren, do I hear you right?" is almost gentle. But the correction is precise and immediate. He names two concrete counter-examples (the COVID inquiry call and Dutton's Senkakus reference), which is Allan's standard method: challenge a generalisation with specific instances. He is also alert to the nomenclature issue, noting that Dutton used "Senkakus" (the Japanese term) rather than the neutral "Senkakudo Islands" — a real and deliberate shift in Australian positioning that his institutional knowledge immediately flags.

Downer rebuttal — "that's not how I remember Alexander's relationship with the Department"¶

"Now, I noticed, by the way, that in another newspaper column today, Alexander Downer is claiming that he didn't really believe that at the time. The caution was all the fault of the advice he was getting from DFAT. Look, I can only say that that's not how I remember Alexander's relationship with the Department, whatever."

— [00:41:43.930 --> 00:45:42.930]

The most biographically charged moment in the episode. Allan is quietly correcting Downer's revisionist account from personal institutional memory. He does not elabororate, he does not condemn — he simply states his recollection and moves on. "Whatever" at the close is the tell: this is beneath the standard of argument he wishes to engage with further. The "I can only say" construction is Allan's way of marking the limits of what he can substantiate publicly while signalling that he knows more than he can say. The implication is that Allan had sufficient proximity to DFAT and the policy process in 2003 — whether from the Lowy Institute (founded that year) or from personal networks — to have an informed view of Downer's relationship with his department. Consistent with his general institutional reach across government throughout the Lowy and ONA periods.

"Mark Thirlwell, my former Lowy Institute colleague"¶

"I'm going to draw here on some useful analysis from Mark Thirlwell, my former Lowy Institute colleague, who's now the chief economist of the Australian Institute of Company Directors."

— [00:31:54.930 --> 00:35:41.930]

"My former Lowy Institute colleague" — explicit corroboration of the Lowy Institute period and of the professional network it generated. Thirlwell had previously appeared in the corpus as the source of the "plural of anecdote is not data" lesson (Ep070). Here Allan credits him for analysis while identifying him institutionally. Allan consistently acknowledges intellectual debts and credits colleagues by name; this is part of the generosity that characterises his intellectual style.

On COP26 — "one of the spectacular failures of Australian public policy"¶

"This whole area of climate change and energy policy really has been one of the spectacular failures of Australian public policy. And there are going to be real consequences for the speed with which we will be able to manage and prosper from the inevitable and morally necessary outcome of decarbonising the economy. So, we just have to hope that once the election is out of the way, whichever party is in government will be able to refocus and recalibrate."

— [00:31:54.930 --> 00:35:41.930]

"Spectacular failures" is one of the stronger verdicts in the corpus — applied here to a sustained, cross-government record rather than a single decision. "Inevitable and morally necessary" does double duty: he is not just predicting decarbonisation but asserting its moral necessity. The "whichever party" construction is characteristic: he does not publicly nominate which party he expects to handle it better, maintaining the analytical detachment he values. This is consistent with his view from Ep063 that "the science is in, and I'm not prepared to waste time on people who haven't paid it the attention that it needed."

"Simply Solomon Islands without a the" — correction¶

"Just as a side, Darren, to be pedantic but also accurate, the country's name is simply Solomon Islands without a the. I've noticed Australian ministers and journalists keep adding the definite article."

— [00:41:04.930 --> 00:41:19.930]

"To be pedantic but also accurate" — Allan's habitual justification for precise correction. He does not apologise for the pedantry; he names it and then proceeds, because accuracy is the point. This is consistent across the corpus: the Myanmar/Burma correction (multiple episodes); his insistence on "Senkakudo Islands" vs "Senkakus" earlier in this episode; the Downer nomenclature in the same segment. Small linguistic precision is for Allan a form of respect for the subject matter.

"The best job in the gift of the Australian government" — ONA DG referenced indirectly¶

"So, obviously, we don't know what will happen this time, though I've got no doubt that the government is well aware of the RAMSI precedent and will be keen to draw barriers around what is happening. But as an immediate stabilizing instrument, this is a good and necessary decision."

— [00:41:43.930 --> 00:45:42.930]

Allan does not identify himself personally in the Solomon Islands/RAMSI analysis — he speaks in his analyst's voice. But his command of the RAMSI history is fluent and detailed: the 2,200-personnel peak; the Nick Warner leadership; the governance mandate as the harder task; the $2.6bn cost; the Alexander Downer 2003 column. This is institutional knowledge of the kind that comes from being inside the system during the RAMSI period (2003–2017 overlaps substantially with his ONA DG tenure of ~2007–2013/14). He can narrate the history from memory, including the precise text of the 2003 Downer newspaper column.

Biographical Fragments¶

Evidence type: Reinforcing

"My former Lowy Institute colleague" — Allan identifies Mark Thirlwell as a Lowy Institute colleague. Thirlwell is currently chief economist of the Australian Institute of Company Directors. Corroborates the Lowy Institute period already established from Ep023. (Ep088)
Downer/DFAT memory — Allan has personal institutional knowledge of Alexander Downer's relationship with DFAT during the 2003 Solomon Islands decision. The source of this knowledge is not stated; it could be the Lowy Institute period (Allan was founding ED from ~2003) or from personal networks across government. "That's not how I remember" indicates a direct memory, not received opinion. (Ep088)
RAMSI institutional knowledge — Allan narrates the RAMSI history with command and fluency, including the Nick Warner detail, the peak personnel figures, and the cost estimate. This is consistent with ONA DG coverage of Pacific security (2007–2013/14 window). (Ep088)

Evidence type: Nil new (other topics)

The Biden-Xi, Dutton-Wong, and COP26 sections yield no new biographical fragments — Allan operates entirely in the analyst's voice throughout. His 2003 Lowy Institute proximity is the only new dimension.

Style and Method Evidence¶

"I don't really know what he means": intellectual honesty over performance of comprehension. When an argument is opaque Allan says so; he does not pretend to reconstruct it. Compare with episodes where he can reconstruct an argument he disagrees with and then rebuts it — here he cannot.
"Whatever": dismissive close after a rebuttal, a word rare in his vocabulary. Signals that something is below the standard worth engaging with further. The Downer rebuttal is the clearest example in the corpus so far.
Nomenclature precision: "Solomon Islands without a the"; "Senkakudo Islands" vs "Senkakus"; both corrections in the same episode. Exact naming as a form of analytical discipline.
Credit and citation: names Mark Thirlwell, credits the analysis, identifies him institutionally. Allan does not appropriate others' work.
Measured optimism: "more optimistic because it happened rather than because of anything they negotiated." Not enthusiastic, not dismissive — calibrated to the evidence.
Historical pattern-matching: RAMSI → Solomon Islands; Indonesia/Snowden → France/AUKUS (carried forward from Ep087). Allan reaches for the last relevant precedent as a structural guide to the current situation.
Correction of Darren: "Sorry, Darren, do I hear you right?" — the correction is gentle in register but immediate and precise in substance. He does not let imprecision stand even when it is a minor point.

Reading, Listening and Watching¶

Allan — The Velvet Underground documentary

"Right away from everything we've been talking about, The Velvet Underground, a documentary directed by Todd Haynes on Netflix. It's a film whose innovative style matches the radicalism of the group that it celebrates. Now, there are not many relics of my early 20s, which still sound cool these days, but Lou Reed, John Cale, Nico and Andy Warhol manage it. Honestly, what more could you ask for? A terrific film."

— [00:46:57.930 --> 00:47:26.930]

The first explicitly cultural recommendation in the corpus that is not a book, podcast, or long-form essay — and the first time Allan locates a recommendation in his "early 20s." The Velvet Underground's canonical period is 1965–1970; Allan entered External Affairs ~1969 at ~21, placing the band squarely in his late teenage and early working years. His appreciation is for the match between the film's style and the band's radicalism — an aesthetic judgment as well as a nostalgic one. "There are not many relics of my early 20s which still sound cool these days" is self-aware and wry; he does not pretend to unchanging taste but is pleased when something has lasted. This is the closest he has come in the series to placing himself in a specific cultural moment. The mention of Andy Warhol as well as the musicians suggests his interest is in the broader avant-garde context, not just the music.

Open Questions¶

Allan's memory of Downer's relationship with DFAT in 2003 — was he at the Lowy Institute by then (his founding ED role appears to have begun ~2003)? Is there any episode that clarifies when exactly he joined Lowy after the Keating government's fall in March 1996? The seven-year gap (1996–2003) is still not fully accounted for.
The Velvet Underground "relics of my early 20s" — does Allan make any further cultural references that locate him in the 1960s or early 1970s formation? Are there other music recommendations that build a cultural portrait of his generation?
Allan says COP26 succeeded specifically on "emissions trading rules and the creation of a new supervisory body for a global carbon marketplace" — does he return to this in later episodes as Australia navigates the carbon credit trading regime?
Allan's precise knowledge of the RAMSI peak figures (2,200 personnel, 1,400 ADF, 134 AFP), the $2.6bn cost, and the Nick Warner detail: does any later episode reveal whether he had a direct role in RAMSI oversight from ONA during 2007–2013, or is this simply the depth of knowledge expected of someone at his level?
"Whichever party is in government" after the election on climate — does Allan's post-election analysis (Ep097+, once the Albanese government takes office) show him tracking whether his hope was vindicated?