As Senator the Hon. Penny Wong stressed in April last year, “we deploy our own statecraft toward shaping a region that is open, stable and prosperous. A predictable region, operating by agreed rules, standards and laws.” While there’s debate as to whether Australian foreign policy should prioritise supporting democracy, experts stress the knock on benefits of effective states and good governance in the region - and highlight why Australia could do more to share its values.
Bridi Rice, in the United States Studies Centre Debate Papers Series: ‘Should democracy have a greater role in Australian foreign policy?’ writes:
“Be clear about why democracy has a place in Australian foreign policy. Effective states look after themselves and the region. They are critical to Australia’s economy, its national security and the stability of the region as a whole. Australian efforts to support effective states are more about providing services to people, supporting healthy, actively engaged populations and enabling countries to act with autonomy and respect for sovereignty — less about a clash of systems or narrowly defined competition with China.”
Experts in the Development Intelligence Lab’s Situation room on ‘Australian Support For Democracy’ say:
"There remains significant need and ample opportunity for diplomacy and long-term development efforts to find space for civil society, create local demand for better governance and support service delivery in the Indo-Pacific.”
Graham Teskey, in the Development Intelligence Lab’s Intel: ‘What’s the case for doubling down on governance efforts in the development program?’ writes:
“What is this thing called governance? Simple. It’s the skeleton of the state – its hard-core bones. Without effective governance, the body politic would crumble, public services wouldn’t be delivered, the private sector won’t invest, and lives and property would be at risk of attack. Dear reader – kindly note we’re talking about effective governance, not good governance (often code for liberal democracy). We measure effective governance by its outcomes, not by what the systems look like, or how leaders acquire their power.”
Other experts have echoed these sentiments. Their work is available below.
- Hugh White, Thenu Herath and Tim Watkin on the Development Intelligence Lab’s Intel: ‘Using the aid program for geostrategic competition: good, bad or indifferent?’
- Richard Moore, Anthea Mulakala and Daniel Runde on the Development Intelligence Lab’s Intel: ‘Should development cooperation be the frontier for re-engagement with China?’
- Justin Bassi, Hayley Channer and Heather Murphy on the Development Intelligence Lab’s Intel: ‘When should and shouldn’t we compete with China?’
- Bridi Rice on Australia In the World Podcast: ‘Australia’s international development policy.’
- Bridi Rice and Nick Bisley in the United States Studies Centre Debate Papers Series: ‘Should democracy have a greater role in Australian foreign policy?’
- Heather Murphy in the Development Intelligence Lab’s Policy Brief: ‘Transactional or transformational? Navigating the competing purposes of Australia’s aid program.’ and on the Lab’s Podcast, The Readout: 'Navigating the competing purposes of Australian development.'
- Experts on The Development Intelligence Lab’s podcast The Readout: ‘democracy series’.
