Lingnan University Digital Commons @ Lingnan University Theses & Dissertations Department of Political Sciences 9-7-2016 Balancing versus bandwagoning : the strategic dilemma of Australia’s China policy Man Kwong YEUNG Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.ln.edu.hk/pol_etd Recommended Citation Yeung, M. K. (2016). Balancing versus bandwagoning: The strategic dilemma of Australia’s China policy (Master's thesis, Lingnan University, Hong Kong). Retrieved from http://commons.ln.edu.hk/pol_etd/17 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Political Sciences at Digital Commons @ Lingnan University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Lingnan University. Terms of Use The copyright of this thesis is owned by its author. Any reproduction, adaptation, distribution or dissemination of this thesis without express authorization is strictly prohibited. All rights reserved. BALANCING VERSUS BANDWAGONING: THE STRATEGIC DILEMMA OF AUSTRALIA’S CHINA POLICY YEUNG MAN KWONG MPHIL LINGNAN UNIVERSITY 2016 BALANCING VERSUS BANDWAGONING: THE STRATEGIC DILEMMA OF AUSTRALIA’S CHINA POLICY by YEUNG Man Kwong 楊民光 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Philosophy in Political Science Lingnan University 2016 ABSTRACT BALANCING VERSUS BANDWAGONING: THE STRATEGIC DILEMMA OF AUSTRALIA’S CHINA POLICY by YEUNG Man Kwong Master of Philosophy Recent research on power shift, or the change in relative power of states in an international structure, has focused on how states adapt to strategic difficulties. As a key change in international politics, scholars have long discussed how states react strategically to power shift. One school in international studies, neorealism, emphasizes the prime importance of security affairs over other strategic concerns in an anarchic international structure. It explores states’ dilemma in choosing between balancing a more powerful state or bandwagoning with it. While this approach sheds important insights on the study of international politics, the parsimony of neorealism suffers from a lot of criticisms and challenges. Among these, argument on the multi-faced nature of a state’s strategic interests has gained the strongest traction. Power shift profoundly impacts the Asia-Pacific region. The rise of China, for example, draws concerns for changing distribution of power in the region and around the globe. Others regional states, especially secondary powers, have to redefine their strategies to adapt to the changing geopolitical landscape. However, strategic choices of these states are barely studied. Australia’s reaction to the power shift, for instance, challenges the neorealists’ “balancing versus bandwagoning” model. Australia’s search for her own regional position is filtered through its threat perception. Seeing ideological differences with a rising China, Australian politicians have continuously tried to engage China to gain profit while remaining skeptical about a more assertive China. This thesis challenges the balancing literature and investigates why hedging has been the strategic response used by Australia to deal with the power shift. This research analyzes and interprets Australia’s strategic dilemma with evidence collected from the Australian government, academics, and media. This thesis affirms the neorealists’ position on the predominance of self-help principle in international politics. However, it also tries to move further to argue that security is the principle that cannot be over-emphasized. Australia simultaneously maximizes her strategic interests, which include security interests and economic interests. Principally, Australia aims at maintaining her status quo position while concurrently balancing against a rising China and bandwagoning with China economically for profit-maximization. By managing the strategic risk posed by China and not turning the China problem into China threat, Australia cautiously decides on her strategic response to prevent a riskier situation. CONTENTS LISTS OF TABLES .................................................................................................... iv LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................... v ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................................... vi ACKNOWLEDGMENT ........................................................................................... viii 1. INTRODUCTION: AUSTRALIA’S STRATEGIC DILEMMA ON ITS CHINA’S POLICY ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background of research...................................................................................... 1 1.2 Scope of study and research questions ............................................................... 3 1.3 Research significance ......................................................................................... 5 1.4 Data collection ................................................................................................... 5 1.5 Structure of the thesis ......................................................................................... 7 2. LITERATURE REVIEW: “BALANCING VERSUS BANDWAGONING” AND THEIR VARIATIONS ................................................................................................ 9 2.1 Balancing and bandwagoning – the dichotomous pair in international politics ................................................................................................................................ 10 2.1.1 Structural realism and the balance of power theory .................................. 10 2.1.2 Balance of power: Preliminary problems and criticisms ........................... 13 2.1.3 Balancing and bandwagoning: Waltz’s variants ........................................ 14 2.2 Bandwagoning: The understudied strategic phenomenon ............................... 19 2.2.1 Conceptualization of bandwagoning in literature ...................................... 19 2.2.2 Constraints and costs of bandwagoning .................................................... 25 2.3 Two muddling-through strategies: Engagement and accommodation ............. 26 2.3.1 Engagement ............................................................................................... 27 2.3.2 Accommodation ......................................................................................... 28 3. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: HEDGING AS NATIONAL INTERESTS MAXIMIZATION ..................................................................................................... 31 3.1 Hedging strategy in the literature: Conventional understanding as risk minimization .......................................................................................................... 32 3.1.1 Security risk-minimization – the limited balancing rhetoric ..................... 33 3.1.2 Profit-seeking and pragmatic cooperation ................................................. 35 3.1.3 The rise of less-committed strategic partnerships ..................................... 36 3.2 An alternative theoretical understanding of hedging – maximization of strategic interests .................................................................................................... 38 3.2.1 Defining the “maximization of strategic interests” ................................... 38 3.2.2 Diplomacy to secure strategic interest – what do hedgers do? .................. 43 i 3.3 Chapter summary ............................................................................................. 46 4. THE “CHINA PROBLEM” IN AUSTRALIA’S STRATEGY: POLITICAL DIMENSION ............................................................................................................. 47 4.1 Australia’s “China problem”, 1996-2015: A brief historical review ............... 48 4.1.1 John Howard’s government and the development of the “China problem” 1996-2007 ........................................................................................................... 50 4.1.2 The “China problem” of the Rudd, Gillard and Abbott governments, 2007-2015 ........................................................................................................... 56 4.2 Australia’s management of the “China problem” – developing political relationships as a basis to maximize security ......................................................... 60 4.2.1 Australia-China political relations, the “China problem”, and issues of the “China problem” ................................................................................................. 61 4.2.2 Multilateral binding engagement for political interest maximization ....... 66 4.3 Chapter summary – revisiting the “China problem” ........................................ 70 5. INTERNAL BALANCING IN AUSTRALIA’S CHINA POLICY ...................... 72 5.1 Forward-defending approach of Australia’s security policies ......................... 73 5.1.1 The origins of Australia’s two Defence approaches: “Forward Defence” and “Defending Australia” ................................................................................. 73 5.1.2 Australia’s Defence approach in the 1990s and the revival of “Forward Defence” in the 2000s ......................................................................................... 75 5.2 Australia’s defence