asia policy, volume 15, number 4 ( october 2020 ) , 7–20
• http://asiapolicy.org •
roundtable essay
Is It Time for Australia to Adopt a “Free
and Open” Middle-Power Foreign Policy?
Joanne Wallis
joanne wallis is Professor of International Security in the Department of
Politics and International Relations at the University of Adelaide (Australia).
She was formerly with the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre in the College of
Asia and the Pacific at the Australian National University. She can be reached
at <>.
keywords:australia; pacific islands; u.s.-china competition; free and
open indo-pacific; rules-based order; middle power
© The National Bureau of Asian Research, Seattle, Washington
, asia policy
executive summary
This essay examines Australia’s understanding of the concepts of the
“Indo-Pacific” and “rules-based order” and analyzes how Australia pursues its
geostrategic interests in the Indo-Pacific, particularly its increased emphasis
on minilateralism.
main argument
Australia and other regional countries confront the threat that U.S.-China
tension could escalate from competition to outright confrontation. To address
this challenge, Australia should adopt a more “free and open” strategic and
foreign policy by partnering with other middle powers and smaller states to
create a new Indo-Pacific security order that seeks to rebalance regional power
dynamics. This security order would be better guided by rules than by values,
but given the limitations of the existing rules-based order, Australia should
recognize problems with the current rules and work to make them attractive
to smaller states. This may involve middle powers compromising some of their
“shared values” and making sacrifices to their national interests (narrowly
defined) in service of the overriding interest in preserving regional peace
and security based on rules that are seen as legitimate and respect-worthy by
many states, not just the most powerful ones.
policy implications
• Behind closed doors, middle powers are questioning whether the U.S.
should continue to take the lead in securing order in the Indo-Pacific,
and in fact do not necessarily trust that it is capable of doing so. Many
Indo-Pacific states are wary of being caught between an activist China and
an unpredictable U.S. and are reluctant to make a strategic choice.
• Over the last two decades, Australia has demonstrated its capacity as a
middle power by leading interventions in Timor-Leste and the Solomon
Islands, and most recently by implementing its cross-government policy
to “step up” its engagement in the Pacific Islands. Australia should draw
confidence from these and other efforts.
• Creating an Indo-Pacific security order negotiated and led by middle
powers and small states will strain alliance relationships and strategic
partnerships, and it will be challenged by Southeast Asian states’ emphasis
on ASEAN centrality and the preference of regional states for nonalignment
and autonomy. This suggests that creating this order will require
sustained diplomatic commitment and compromise and necessarily be an
iterative process.
• http://asiapolicy.org •
roundtable essay
Is It Time for Australia to Adopt a “Free
and Open” Middle-Power Foreign Policy?
Joanne Wallis
joanne wallis is Professor of International Security in the Department of
Politics and International Relations at the University of Adelaide (Australia).
She was formerly with the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre in the College of
Asia and the Pacific at the Australian National University. She can be reached
at <>.
keywords:australia; pacific islands; u.s.-china competition; free and
open indo-pacific; rules-based order; middle power
© The National Bureau of Asian Research, Seattle, Washington
, asia policy
executive summary
This essay examines Australia’s understanding of the concepts of the
“Indo-Pacific” and “rules-based order” and analyzes how Australia pursues its
geostrategic interests in the Indo-Pacific, particularly its increased emphasis
on minilateralism.
main argument
Australia and other regional countries confront the threat that U.S.-China
tension could escalate from competition to outright confrontation. To address
this challenge, Australia should adopt a more “free and open” strategic and
foreign policy by partnering with other middle powers and smaller states to
create a new Indo-Pacific security order that seeks to rebalance regional power
dynamics. This security order would be better guided by rules than by values,
but given the limitations of the existing rules-based order, Australia should
recognize problems with the current rules and work to make them attractive
to smaller states. This may involve middle powers compromising some of their
“shared values” and making sacrifices to their national interests (narrowly
defined) in service of the overriding interest in preserving regional peace
and security based on rules that are seen as legitimate and respect-worthy by
many states, not just the most powerful ones.
policy implications
• Behind closed doors, middle powers are questioning whether the U.S.
should continue to take the lead in securing order in the Indo-Pacific,
and in fact do not necessarily trust that it is capable of doing so. Many
Indo-Pacific states are wary of being caught between an activist China and
an unpredictable U.S. and are reluctant to make a strategic choice.
• Over the last two decades, Australia has demonstrated its capacity as a
middle power by leading interventions in Timor-Leste and the Solomon
Islands, and most recently by implementing its cross-government policy
to “step up” its engagement in the Pacific Islands. Australia should draw
confidence from these and other efforts.
• Creating an Indo-Pacific security order negotiated and led by middle
powers and small states will strain alliance relationships and strategic
partnerships, and it will be challenged by Southeast Asian states’ emphasis
on ASEAN centrality and the preference of regional states for nonalignment
and autonomy. This suggests that creating this order will require
sustained diplomatic commitment and compromise and necessarily be an
iterative process.
