Four questions for the Australian government

China-Australia relations seem to be on a tortuous road, which worries some experts. Mei Xinyu, an associate researcher at Chinese Academy of International and Trade Cooperation run by the Ministry of Commerce, published an article in Shanghai Security News to advise the Australian government and people to calmly and reasonably think about the situation of bilateral relations. Excerpts:

China-Australia relations should be continuously improved by the complementary economic structure, huge volume of bilateral trade, and the dramatic growth of direct investment, but things have come to the very reverse. In the past two years, the elements above have unexpectedly become a source of tension between the two countries.

The obstruction of China’s investment in Australia, the frustration of Chinalco’s plan to increase its shareholding of Rio Tinto and the detainment of Stern Hu, all these disputes soured the bilateral relations. In 2010, relations seem to be unstable again confronted with the tough negotiation of the controversial price of iron ore.

As a researcher who expects a further integration of both sides and has dealt with Australian mainstream media for years, I believe it is quite necessary to advise the Australian government and public to calm down and think about four questions rationally.

The first question: Should the government waste such a large amount of political and financial resources to pay the bill for certain companies’ immature and even illegal ways? The government should focus its resources on the most needed field, so the best way to avoid the waste of resources is to require Australian companies to comply with the laws of host countries. What Rio Tinto and Stern Hu did would be utterly taboo in any host country.

The Australian government and media?has?taken actions to?support the Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton to charge exorbitant prices.It is well known that the stability of the monopolistic position of Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton depends on their large share of natural resources, which cannot be reproduced or sustained. If they overuse the monopolistic advantage to squeeze profits, the downstream consumer will be forced to look for another provider or develop an alternative resource. Consequently, to maximize the long-term profit, the best strategy is to pursue a proper and sustainable profit. The Australian government, Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton all should be clear-headed that the contemporary account business triumph and its corresponding increased bonuses for senior executives are not in line with the long-term interests of Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton.

The third question: Has the ongoing Australian practice pushed the Chinese advocates of a mild foreign policy on Australia to be losers? If those advocates give in and cease their efforts to promote a mild policy on Australia, the bilateral relations will deteriorate even more. Could this result protect and increase any interests of the Australian government and people?

The fourth question: Has Australia fallen into a trap set by other countries? Originally, the China-Australia relations looked to be bright. Australia has a huge reserve of natural resource and can be a big supplier for China. What is wrong in reality? The crux lies on some unfriendly forces trying to form a group of "contain China", which takes its cue from the US and UK. Hereby, they need to draw Australia in and let it be a “super aircraft carrier” in the west Pacific Ocean. So these forces always try to drag Australia out of Asia and turn it into a bridgehead to contain East Asia, especially China. Will the plot harm the interests of Australia? They don’t care.

The international community is inclement. Be cautious, the unadorned Australian.