What does Trump really think about China? | Insiders On Background

Key Concepts

• Australia-US Alliance: The strengthening relationship between Australia and the United States, particularly in the context of defense and security.
• AUKUS: A trilateral security pact between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States, focused on enhancing Australia's defense capabilities, notably through the acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines.
• Critical Minerals Deal: An agreement between Australia and the US to secure supply chains for critical minerals essential for defense and technology.
• Defense Spending: The allocation of national resources towards military capabilities and readiness.
• Taiwan Strait: The body of water separating mainland China from Taiwan, a region of significant geopolitical tension.
• Deterrence: Strategies and actions aimed at discouraging an adversary from taking a particular course of action, such as military aggression.
• Strategic Ambiguity: A foreign policy approach where a nation's stance on a particular issue is deliberately unclear to maintain flexibility and deter potential adversaries.
• Hybrid Warfare: The use of a combination of conventional military tactics, irregular tactics, and other influence techniques, such as political warfare and disinformation.

Summary of Discussions

The Albanese-Trump Meeting: A Diplomatic Triumph

The recent meeting between Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and US President Donald Trump was widely perceived as a significant success, exceeding expectations. Key outcomes included the signing of a critical minerals deal, a strong endorsement of the AUKUS security pact, and Trump's defense of Australia's military spending levels. While an awkward exchange with Ambassador Kevin Rudd occurred, the overall sentiment was that the meeting advanced Australia's interests.

Defense Spending: A Divergent Perspective

Key Points:

• Trump's Stance: President Trump expressed satisfaction with Australia's defense spending, stating he "always like more, but you can only do so much. I think they've been great." This contrasts with his previous criticisms of other US allies, such as European nations and Canada, for "free-riding" on military spending.
• ASPI's Analysis: Justin Bassie, Executive Director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), acknowledged the positive reception of the meeting but maintained ASPI's stance that Australia needs to increase defense spending. ASPI's "Cost of Defence" report argued that the current budget fails to meet responsibilities, making Australians less secure.
• Historical Context: Bassie highlighted that Australia has a history of consistent defense spending, committing to 2% of GDP as early as 2016, a commitment that predates current geopolitical shifts. This historical context is seen as a factor in Trump's positive assessment.
• AUKUS as a Commitment: The AUKUS pact itself is viewed as a demonstration of Australia's commitment to its own national security, requiring significant financial investment.
• Evolving Threats: Bassie argued that the increased security threats since 2016, including China's military rise, Russia's war in Ukraine, and Middle East crises, necessitate a corresponding increase in defense spending, beyond the 2% of GDP target set in a less volatile era.
• NATO vs. Australian Spending: While NATO members have a different methodology for calculating defense spending percentages, Australia has traditionally been more stringent. The discussion touched upon Defense Industry Minister Pat Conroy's suggestion of a 2.8% target, which would align with broader international metrics when all components are considered.

Argument: While Trump appears content with Australia's current defense spending, ASPI maintains that evolving global threats demand a higher investment to ensure national security, independent of external political commentary.

AUKUS: Full Steam Ahead, with Nuances

Key Points:

• Trump's Endorsement: Trump's declaration that AUKUS is "full steam ahead" is seen as a significant boost, dispelling concerns that a review might lead to its termination.
• Ongoing Work: Despite the review process, work on AUKUS has continued at political and defense department levels across all three nations, including Australia's shipyard development and the US's submarine industrial base.
• Moving Beyond Support: The meeting's outcome allows the focus to shift from questioning AUKUS's support to actively pursuing its objectives and understanding its foundational rationale.
• Ambiguities in AUKUS: US Secretary of the Navy John F. Kelly's comment about "ambiguities" in AUKUS has raised questions. Bassie suggests these are likely related to practical implementation, such as Australia's readiness to crew and maintain Virginia-class submarines by the early 2030s.
• Certification Process: The transfer of in-service submarines involves a rigorous certification process, not simply an acquisition of design. This process requires the Secretary of the Navy to certify Australia's readiness, encompassing personnel, dockyards, and overall operational capability. This is distinct from a simple "veto" power.

Argument: While Trump's public backing is crucial, practical challenges and the need for Australia to demonstrate readiness for operating advanced submarine technology remain key areas for clarification within the AUKUS framework.

Trump on China and Taiwan: Deterrence Through Ambiguity?

Key Points:

• Trump's Dismissal of Invasion: Trump stated, "I don't see that at all with President Xi. I think we're going to get along very well as it pertains to Taiwan and others." He expressed a belief that Xi would not invade Taiwan.
• Interpreting Trump's Remarks: Bassie suggests Trump's comments are not necessarily a literal prediction but a form of deterrence, a message directly to President Xi, implying "not on my watch." This is seen as a negotiation tactic and a way to project American strength.
• Distinction Between Deterrence and Response: Bassie differentiates between America's potential response to an invasion and its efforts to deter one. Trump's rhetoric is interpreted as part of the latter.
• China's Strategic Goal: While China's stated goal is "reunification" with Taiwan, Bassie posits that Xi's ideal scenario involves achieving this through political and hybrid warfare, wearing down Taiwan and the international community, rather than a direct military invasion.
• Preparedness for War: Despite the hope for a non-military resolution, Bassie emphasizes the necessity for Australia and its allies to prepare for the possibility of war, drawing a parallel to Europe's perceived lack of preparedness for Russia's actions in Ukraine.
• The Role of Force: The strategy is to make President Xi believe that any attempt to take Taiwan by force would be too costly, thus deterring him from using that option.
• Strategic Ambiguity vs. Biden's Clarity: The discussion contrasts President Biden's more explicit statements about defending Taiwan with Trump's historical lack of such commitments.
• Risk of Complacency: Bassie warns of the risk of complacency, both within the West and potentially from Trump's rhetoric, regarding China's intentions and the potential for conflict.
• Consequences of Invasion: An invasion of Taiwan would have devastating consequences, and Trump's legacy would be significantly impacted if such an event occurred during his presidency, especially given his claims of being a peacemaker.
• Australia's Role: Countries like Australia and Japan, along with NATO allies, have a role in ensuring that the US does not bear the sole security burden and in engaging in conversations about deterrence and potential scenarios.
• Risk Appetite: The risk appetite for a conflict over Taiwan is significantly different from bombing an Iranian nuclear site, given the geographical proximity and China's regional military buildup.

Argument: Trump's comments on Taiwan are likely a strategic maneuver to deter China, rather than a definitive statement on US policy. While a direct invasion might not be Xi's preferred method, the possibility of force remains, necessitating continued preparedness and a united allied front.

Kevin Rudd's Role and the Awkward Exchange

Key Points:

• Rudd's Effectiveness: Bassie believes Kevin Rudd has performed an "excellent job" as ambassador, despite the awkward moment with Trump. His advocacy for AUKUS and the critical minerals deal is highlighted as crucial to the recent successes.
• Overblown Criticism: Calls for Rudd's removal due to past tweets or criticisms of Trump are deemed "excessive" and would be detrimental to the bilateral relationship.
• Distinction from UK Ambassador: The situation is differentiated from the UK recalling its ambassador due to links with Jeffrey Epstein, emphasizing the unique nature of Rudd's past criticisms.
• Trump's Reaction: Trump's response to the awkward exchange was characterized as a "joke," demonstrating his dominance and then moving on, indicating the meeting was not derailed by the incident.
• Value of the Ambassadorial Role: Having a former Prime Minister as ambassador signifies the high value Australia places on the relationship with the US, a consistent practice with previous high-profile appointments.

Argument: Kevin Rudd's tenure as ambassador has been effective, and the criticism regarding past statements is disproportionate and risks damaging the important Australia-US relationship.

Conclusion and Takeaways

The meeting between Albanese and Trump marked a positive step for Australia-US relations, solidifying key security and economic partnerships. While Trump's public statements on defense spending and Taiwan offer a degree of reassurance, the underlying strategic challenges and the need for Australia to maintain its own robust defense posture remain paramount. The AUKUS pact, despite minor ambiguities, has received a crucial endorsement, allowing for continued progress. The discussion underscores the complex interplay of diplomacy, deterrence, and evolving geopolitical threats in the Indo-Pacific region.