
Australia's China ties in focus as election rivals hunt for votes
Australian
prime minister
Anthony Albanese
spent Easter Monday at the Golden Lily restaurant, posting photographs on Facebook with foreign minister Penny Wong showing a Lazy Susan laden with
Chinese
food.
Albanese's choice of dining venue – in Box Hill, a Melbourne suburb where about 30 per cent of residents were born in China – was a reminder that Australia's May 3rd election could turn on which leader voters think is best equipped to manage foreign relations amid the turmoil of
Donald Trump
's trade war.
While the race has largely been fought on domestic cost-of-living issues, it also comes as Australia is grappling with how to balance its close ties to the US, its primary security patron, with China, its largest trading partner, especially as Trump has ratcheted up tensions with Beijing and applied more pressure to some of Washington's closest allies.
'The key part of the debate is how Australia charts a path with our key security allies at a time when Australians see an ongoing threat from China,' said Ryan Neelam, director of public opinion and foreign policy at the Lowy Institute think tank in Sydney.
READ MORE
Albanese and his conservative opponent, Liberal Party leader Peter Dutton, are both trying to appeal to Chinese-Australian voters, who have a heavy presence in a clutch of closely contested seats that could prove pivotal in a tight race.
Australia's Liberal Party leader Peter Dutton. Photograph: David Gray/AFP via Getty Images
China loomed over Australia's last election in 2022, when the incumbent Liberal-led coalition adopted an ultra-hawkish approach to Beijing. A large swing in seats with a high proportion of Chinese Australians helped deliver victory to Albanese's Labor Party, which took a more conciliatory line.
The Liberals' 2022 anti-China stance was 'a real misread', said Osmond Chiu, a research fellow at the Per Capita think tank.
Dutton, a combative former defence minister who three years ago told Australians to 'prepare for war', has since dramatically softened his tone. He now describes himself as 'pro-China', and also visited Box Hill, where he pledged to provide A$250,000 (€140,000) to future lunar new year fireworks celebrations.
Dutton was trying to 'swing the pendulum' of Chinese-Australian voters back to his party, Chiu added.
'In 2022, the [then governing Liberal] coalition tried to put national security as the major issue,' he said. 'But in 2025, it is more about the US. It's a different dynamic.'
Trump's hostility to allies including Canada, Ukraine and Greenland, and barrage of tariffs have rattled Australians and transformed the vote into a test of how smoothly the country can manage relations with Washington.
His aggressive stance on China – maintaining tariffs of 145 per cent even as he has suspended levies elsewhere – have also created an uncomfortable situation for Australia, which relies on Beijing to take more than 25 per cent of its exports.
A Lowy poll this month found voters were split on whether Albanese or Dutton would be better at handling Trump, but 41 per cent preferred the Labor leader on foreign policy, compared with 29 per cent for Dutton.
Overall, voters' trust in the US to act responsibly had dropped to a 20-year low.
Strikingly, Albanese has a sizeable lead over Dutton in dealing with China's leader Xi Jinping.
One of the biggest achievements of the Labor prime minister's term has been a rapprochement with Beijing, which has lifted punitive tariffs on Australian goods including coal, wine, barley and rock lobsters that were imposed in 2020 after a Liberal administration called for an international investigation into the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic.
Tensions have jumped recently, however, after the Chinese navy conducted live-fire tests off Australia's east coast. Public debate has also picked up steam over a Chinese-owned company controlling the port in Darwin, where US soldiers are based.
Nowhere is that pressure more felt than among Chinese Australians. About 5.5 per cent of the population is of Chinese ancestry, drawing on the descendants of immigrants during the gold rush in the 1800s as well as newer arrivals from mainland China as well as Hong Kong, Taiwan and Singapore.
The community is particularly strongly represented in some of the country's most closely contested seats in Sydney and Melbourne that could help determine the balance of power.
Wanning Sun, deputy director at the Australia-China Relations Institute at the University of Technology Sydney, said many Chinese-Australian voters might prioritise economic concerns, but there was still a 'very vivid memory' of hostility towards the community during the pandemic.
Dutton's bellicose rhetoric had made an impression, she added, forcing the opposition leader into 'damage control' in an effort to win back Chinese-Australian voters' trust.
Chiu at Per Capita said 'concern about China' had been a 'red meat' issue for the Liberal party's base in recent years. But the backlash in the 2022 campaign demonstrated that such a hardline attitude could tip the result in marginal urban seats.
'Chinese-Australian voters will be pivotal and could determine whether it's going to be a majority or minority government,' he said. − Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2025
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Irish Times
2 hours ago
- Irish Times
The Irish Times view on turmoil in Los Angeles: a key test of Trump's power
The Trump administration says that the US is being 'invaded' and a rebellion or insurrection is thus jeopardising its very existence. Even by the standards of Trump's hyperbolic rhetoric these inflated claims are extraordinary. They are necessary, however, for the president to invoke emergency powers to federalise California's National Guard and deploy 2,000 of its members against protesting Los Angeles citizens, contrary to the wishes of its commander, state governor Gavin Newsom. The latter describes the deployment as 'purposefully inflammatory' – it is the first time in 60 years that a president has mobilised the National Guard against the wishes of a state governor. The president justified his move on Sunday with incendiary language: 'A once great American city, Los Angeles, has been invaded and occupied by illegal aliens and criminals.' White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller posted that 'this is a fight to save civilisation.' And vice president JD Vance said the spectacle of 'foreign nationals with no legal right to be in the country waving foreign flags and assaulting law enforcement' could be defined as an invasion. READ MORE Sufficient justification, it appears, for invoking Title 10 of the US Code on Armed Services which allows federal deployment of National Guard forces if 'there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States.' That notional immediate threat to the security of the US has also previously been used by Trump to justify his right to deport migrants without congressional or court approval; multiple cases challenging his increasing, deliberate , autocratic stretching of the constitutional boundaries of presidential power are working their way through the legal system. Newsom says he will also test his latest actions in the courts. In LA the deployment of the National Guard came after local police insisted that they had already restored order, and served only to provoke new protests in the city and elsewhere. Democratic governors across the US have also rallied against what they see as a serious violation of states' rights and autonomy. Trump clearly believes that the deployment will be strongly supported by an electorate which backs his flagship migrant deportation policy, and that it will send a warning signal about his ability to use the full weight of the federal state to enforce his agenda. California, a predominantly Democratic state, had already been in his sights, its funding threatened for allowing trans athletes to compete in women's sports, and its major rapid rail modernisation losing $4 billion in federal funding. The huge, wealthy state's capacity to fight back has yet to be tested. It will be a key test of the limits of Trump's authority to impose his malign immigration agenda.


RTÉ News
2 hours ago
- RTÉ News
China and US resume trade talks in London
Top US and Chinese officials were meeting in London today to try to defuse a high-stakes trade dispute that has widened beyond tit-for-tat tariffs to restrictions over rare earths, threatening to cripple supply chains and slow global growth. Officials from the two superpowers were meeting at the ornate Lancaster House to try to get back on track with a preliminary agreement struck last month in Geneva that had briefly lowered the temperature between Washington and Beijing. Since then the US has accused China of slow-walking on its commitments, particularly around rare earths shipments. US economic adviser Kevin Hassett said that the US team wanted a handshake from China on rare earths after Presidents Donald Trump and Xi Jinping spoke last week. "The purpose of the meeting today is to make sure that they're serious, but to literally get handshakes," Hassett, director of the National Economic Council, told CNBC in an interview. He said the expectation was that immediately after the handshake, export controls would be eased and rare earths released in volume. The talks, which could run into Tuesday, come at a crucial time for both economies, with investors looking for relief from Trump's cascade of tariff orders since his return to the White House in January. China's export growth slowed to a three-month low in May while its factory-gate deflation deepened to its worst level in two years. In the US, the trade war has put a huge dent in businessand household confidence, and first-quarter gross domestic product contracted due to a record surge in imports as Americansfront loaded purchases to beat anticipated price increases. But for now, the impact on inflation has been muted, and the jobs market has remained fairly resilient, though economists expect cracks to become more apparent over the summer. Attending the talks in London will be US TreasurySecretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, and a Chinese contingent helmed by Vice Premier He Lifeng. The inclusion of Lutnick, whose agency oversees export controls for the US, is one indication of how central rareearths have become. China holds a near-monopoly on rare earth magnets, a crucial component in electric vehicle motors. Lutnick did not attend the Geneva talks at which the countries struck a 90-day deal to roll back some of the triple-digit tariffs they had placed on each other. The second round of meetings comes four days after Trump and Xi spoke by phone, their first direct interaction since Trump's January 20 inauguration. During the more than one-hour-long call, Xi told Trump to backdown from trade measures that roiled the global economy and warned him against threatening steps on Taiwan, according to a Chinese government summary. But Trump said on social media the talks focused primarily on trade led to "a very positive conclusion," setting the stage for Monday's meeting in London. The next day, Trump said Xi had agreed to resume shipments to the US of rare earths minerals and magnets and Reuters reported on Friday that China has granted temporary export licenses to rare-earth suppliers of the top three US automakers. China's decision in April to suspend exports of a wide range of critical minerals and magnets upended the supply chains central to automakers, aerospace manufacturers, semiconductor companies and military contractors around the world. White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told the Fox News program "Sunday Morning Futures" that the US wanted the two sides to build on the progress made in Geneva in the hope they could move towards more comprehensive trade talks. The preliminary deal in Geneva sparked a global relief rally in stock markets, and US indexes that had been in or near bear market levels have recouped the lion's share of their losses. The S&P 500 Index, which at its lowest point in early April was down nearly 18% after Trump unveiled his sweeping "Liberation Day" tariffs on goods from across the globe, is now only about 2% below its record high from mid-February. The final third of that rally followed the US-China truce struck in Geneva. Still, that temporary deal did not address broader concerns that strain the bilateral relationship, from the illicit fentanyl trade to the status of democratically governed Taiwan and US complaints about China's state-dominated, export-driven economic model. While the UK government will provide a venue for Monday's discussions, it will not be party to them and will have separate talks later in the week with the Chinese delegation.


Irish Examiner
4 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Why the Musk and Trump relationship has broken down — a psychologist explains
It is not a good break-up. These were always two big beasts used to getting their own way. Two alpha males, if you like the evolutionary metaphor, trying to get along. And now the Donald Trump and Elon Musk relationship is in meltdown. Who could forget that iconic image from just a few short weeks back? Elon Musk standing behind the seated US president, Donald Trump, in the Oval Office, towering over him. Trump, his hands clasped, having to turn awkwardly to look up at him. That silent language of the body. FILE - Elon Musk, joined by his son X Æ A-Xii, in the Oval Office. Musk accompanied by his four-year-old, a charming and informal image, or that great evolutionary signal of mating potential and dominance, depending on your point of view. These were also clearly two massive narcissistic egos out in their gleaming open-top speedster. Musk was appointed special advisor to Trump, heading the Department of Government Efficiency, cutting excess and waste. The backseat driver for a while. There were a lot of bureaucratic casualties already, road kill at the side of the highway as the sports car roared on with frightening speed. But things were always going to be difficult if they hit a bump in the road. And they did. Perhaps, more quickly than many had imagined. There were differing views on what caused the crash. Many pointed to the dramatic fall in Tesla's sales — a 71% fall in profits in one quarter — and the inevitable impact on Musk's reputation. Since the break-up, Tesla's share price has also dropped sharply, as investors have panicked. The attacks on Tesla showrooms couldn't have helped either. Others pointed to Trump's proposed removal of the tax credit for owners of electric vehicles, or the political backlash in Washington over Space X's potential involvement in Trump's proposed 'golden dome' anti-missile defense system. 'Everything changed' However, according to former White House strategist Steve Bannon, what really caused the crash was when the president refused to show Musk the Pentagon's attack plans for any possible war with China. There's only so far being the president's best buddy can get you. Bannon is reported as saying: 'You could feel it. Everything changed.' That, according to Bannon, was the beginning of the end. So now we watch Trump and Musk stumbling away from the crash scene. One minute Trump is putting on a show for the cameras. He's beaming away and introducing the 'big, beautiful bill', a budget reconciliation bill that rolls together hundreds of controversial proposals. Next, he is accusing Musk of 'going crazy' and talking about withdrawing government contracts from the Musk empire. Musk is unhappy too. 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination,' he wrote on X. 'Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong.' 'Disgust' He says he's disgusted by the bill. Disgust is one of the most primitive of all the emotions. A survival mechanism — you must avoid what disgusts you. He's social signalling here, alerting others, warning them that there's something disgusting in the camp. Musk is highly attuned to public perception, perhaps even more so than Trump (which is saying something). With his acquisition of X (formerly Twitter), Musk was able to direct (and add to) online discourse, shaping public conversations. Psychologically, Musk's rejection of Trump is an attempt to simultaneously elevate himself and diminish the man behind the bill He can call out the president's action like nobody else. He is positioning himself anew as that free thinker, that risk taker, innovative, courageous, unfettered by any ties. That is his personality, his brand — and he's reasserting it. But it's also a vengeful act. And it's perhaps reminiscent of another political insider (and geek), former Downing Street adviser Dominic Cummings, who was sacked by the then British prime minister, Boris Johnson, in 2020. Cummings was accused of masterminding leaks about the social gatherings in Downing Street. He went on to criticise Johnson as lacking the necessary discipline and focus for a prime minister as well as questioning his competence and decision-making abilities. The revenge of a self-proclaimed genius. And revenge is sweet. In a 2004 study, researchers scanned participants' brains using positron emission tomography (PET) — a medical imaging technique that is used to study brain function (among other things) — while the participants played an economic game based on trust. When trust was violated, participants wanted revenge, and this was reflected in increased activity in the reward-related regions of the brain, the dorsal striatum. Revenge, in other words, is primarily about making yourself feel better rather than righting any wrongs. Your act may make you appear moral but it may be more selfish But revenge for what here? That's where these big narcissistic egos come into play. Psychologically, narcissists are highly sensitive to perceived slights — real or imagined. Musk may have felt Trump was attempting to diminish his achievements for political gain, violating this pact of mutual respect. This kind of sensitivity can quickly transmogrify admiration into contempt. Contempt, coincidentally, is the single best predictor of a breakdown in very close relationships. Disgust and contempt are powerful emotions, evolving to protect us — disgust from physical contamination (spoiled food, disease), and contempt from social or moral contamination (betrayal, incompetence). Both involve rejection — disgust rejects something physically; contempt rejects something socially or morally. Musk may be giving it to Trump with both barrels here. Break-ups are always hard, they get much harder when emotions like these get intertwined with the process. But how will the most powerful man in the world respond to this sort of rejection from the richest man in the world? And where will it end? Geoff Beattie is Professor of Psychology at Edgehill University. (c) The Conversation Read More Terry Prone: Abuse of nursing home patients has been going on for decades