Don’t give a free pass to Beijing for its aggressive behaviour | The Strategist
www.aspistrategist.org.au
The whole point of the post-World War II system of international rules and norms was that large countries, great powers, could not just do whatever they wanted. The post-War order is meant to provide a ...

The post-War order is meant to provide a check on the untrammelled power of the powerful, whether through military invasions or more subtle ways of bending the will of other countries—methods such as interference, coercion and malicious cyber intrusions.

Yet when asked recently how Australia would address China’s influence in the Pacific, Foreign Minister Penny Wong said, ‘China’s doing what great powers do, and great powers try to lift their influence and expand their influence in the region that they wish.’

[…]

The type of influence China exercises is not something we can accept as simply ‘what great powers do’. It launched a cyber attack on the Pacific Islands Forum, spreads online disinformation in the Pacific to undermine democracies and weaken Pacific partnerships, sought security agreements that lack public transparency, and undertaken various other malicious activities—such as hybrid and grey zone operations.

And that’s just in the Pacific—China is carrying out this malicious activity globally, not to mention being the main supporter enabling Russia’s war on Ukraine.

Of course, other significant powers seek influence, but responsible nations don’t behave like this.

[…]

  • NaevaTheRat [she/her]@vegantheoryclub.orgEnglish
    14·
    17 days ago

    This account seems to only post news stories critical of the Chinese government, I only noticed after the three posted here in such a short time.

    That’s not a comment on their accuracy, just be aware the poster is deliberately spreading propaganda with a very narrow focus.

    • eureka@aussie.zoneEnglish
      10·
      17 days ago

      This is straight from a think tank commentary site (their words).

      ASPI was established by the Australian Government in 2001 and is partially funded by the Department of Defence

      The following copypasted from Wikipedia:

      In 2020, Myriam Robin in the Australian Financial Review identified three sources of funding, in addition to the Department of Defence. ASPI receives funding from defence contractors such as Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems, Northrop Grumman, Thales Group and Raytheon Technologies. It also receives funding from technology companies such as Microsoft, Oracle Australia, Telstra, and Google. Finally, it receives funding from foreign governments including Japan, Taiwan and the Netherlands.

      For the 2019-2020 financial year, ASPI listed a revenue of $11,412,096.71. The ASPI received from the Australian Department of Defence 35% of its revenue, 32% from federal government agencies, 17% from overseas government agencies, 11% from the private sector, and 3% from the defense industries. Finally, it receives funding from foreign governments including Japan, Israel, Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands.

      So it’s important to understand the article with that bias in mind - this is sponsored content.