Conflict Between History and Geography in Australia

Ever since the beginning of the 20th century Australia has faced a difficult choice. The country needed to choose between its history and its geography in terms of politics, economics and security. Over time, this choice has been extensively regarded and debated with the resulting outcomes being at times extremely uncertain. This work will consider the history of Australia's choices and their evolution over time, how different Australian governments reacted to the need to face these choices, and the situation in Australia at the moment. The thesis of this work will consist of the argument that whilst history and geography may be thought of as mutually exclusive, it may be possible to incorporate both into Australian foreign policy, although the result of this may be not receiving the full benefits of either.

At the beginning of the 20th century Australia was a small, open economy. At this point in time, Australia was heavily dependent on Britain as its closest trading partner. Australia depended on Britain both as an export market Ð'- the majority of Australian exports went to Britain and other Commonwealth countries, and as a source of migrants and capital. Australia also depended on the outside world for imports and capital. The imports consisted of capital goods, consumer goods and equipment; it was open to new ideas and technology, and there were few limits on imports and none on capital. The main means of paying for Australian imports were exports. Exports consisted primarily of unprocessed primary goods such as foodstuffs and materials (especially early in the century). Imports were essential to both production and to maintain the high standard of living that most urban Australians had become accustomed to. However, imports were also competitive and seemed to undermine the local urban economy. As a result, protectionism evolved and was a politically popular policy for the better part of the 20th century.

With the growth of the international economy, the resulting increase in world trade, capital flows and migration affected Australia also. The growth of world trade and the world economy resulted in increased demand for Australia's exports of primary goods. It opened doors to new markets for Australian exports predominantly in Britain and Japan; counties that were poorly endowed with natural resources to support their growing economies and industrialisation. Following the end of the Second World War, the economic growth internationally once again drove Australia's primary exports. During the 1950s Japan became a major destination, and by the 1960s had replaced Britain as the prime market for Australian exports. Other industrialising nations of Asia Ð'- Korea, Honk Kong and Singapore just to name a few Ð'- have added to the international demand for primary products. The revenue gained from the export of (fundamentally) primary goods to developed and developing countries remained essential to Australia's ability to earn revenue.

Underlining the import and export markets in Australia was the policy to protect Australian industries from the full effect of international competition. Australia tended to raise protection of its industries (both primary and secondary) at times of world economic downturn and general global commotion. This happened following the First World War, the Great Depression and the Second World War. During the middle of the century politicians were pleased with the ability of the tariff system to deliver full employment and were not impressed with the criticisms the policy generated as the tariff protection crept upwards. Eventually politicians recognised that the protectionist system was not an effective approach in a globalising environment and the Keating government embarked on enormous policy changes during the 1980s and 90s.

The shift to economic liberalism has been justified as Ð''an international imperative forcing domestic adjustment'. In other words, globalisation has forced successive Australian governments to abandon protectionist policies in order to take advantage of current global economic trends and to remain competitive in their chosen export markets as well as to attract further foreign investment. To tie globalisation into the current discussion on history and geography, it has been contended that globalisation offers nations and regions means through which they can better engage with global markets.

At the beginning of last century Australia was a nation with a powerful friend Ð'- Britain, this relationship was shown by the fact that Britain was Australia's largest export market. However, as the century continued global economic forces gave Australia opportunities it simply could not afford to ignore. Industrialising nations such as Britain and Japan, later to be followed by several other Asian nations allowed Australia to diversify its imports and exports. The country began to reconsider its history in favour of its geography. With the added effect of the liberal economic policies implemented by Australian governments in response to the globalisation phenomena the region in which Australia is located has been increasingly seen as a portal to opportunity. This view however has not always been universal.

The decisions made by different Australian governments with regards to the history-versus-geography debate seem to be marred by divergence. It seems that the differences emerge between the earlier Labour and current Howard governments over the best position for Australia in the changing global environment. Importantly, both former and current Prime Ministers Ð'- Paul Keating and John Howard Ð'- expressed the view that engagement with Asia as a geographical neighbour is Ð''as important to Australia's foreign policy as the alliance with the United States'. Under Keating it was possible to define Australia's engagement with Asia as an active process which sought to increase interrelations between Asia and Australia. If closer cooperation was not being sought, Australia would merely pursue a policy of adaptation to the inevitable consequences of globalisation. As a result of globalisation, interdependence between Asia and Australia will certainly deepen. It depends on whether the engagement is voluntary to make a case for closer relations.

Australian engagement with Asia began in the 1980s, and by the mid-1990s had undoubtedly gathered momentum. The main reason it took so long was because of the Cold War and the superpower rivalries Ð'- East versus West. This rivalry meant that the strategic value of Australian alliance with the United States and Britain was beyond dispute. Following the end of the Cold War security concerns were replaced by economic concerns. This was particularly worrying to Australia due to