Re. Title - haha, just kidding .
I know that I should provide a comment, but I don't have much to say beyond that I hope that more emerges even though, as it's reported, it isn't that serious an issue as such. If anything, it's another insight into how the Government manages to maintain cordial reltions between itself and China and the US.
Interesting. If anyone happens to be wondering, the halibut is a type of flatfish found in the North Pacific and the North Atlantic.Australia declines invitation to US forum on China
AM - Tuesday, 28 June , 2005 08:00:00
Reporter: Leigh Sales
TONY EASTLEY: An American invitation to participate in secret meetings on how to deal with the rise of China, was rejected by Australia, because Canberra was worried about hurting Chinese feelings.
The ABC has learned that the latest meeting was held in January this year to which the US Government had invited a number of "like-minded" countries.
But Australia told the United States it preferred not to participate, because it was worried about China's reaction and that the Government in Beijing might feel as if it was being "ganged-up on".
Washington Correspondent Leigh Sales has the story.
LEIGH SALES: In June 2003, the Bush administration decided China's expanding role on the world stage required more consideration. It decided to hold an annual forum to discuss issues surrounding China, and invited the UK, Canada, New Zealand, Japan and Australia to participate.
The meetings were kept ultra-secret, in order to create an atmosphere open to frank discussion. Issues were to range from China's militarisation to how to protect the integrity of diplomatic pouches.
At the first meeting, those attending decided to call themselves the Halibut Group. The name grew out of an in joke – none of the China experts there could work out how to say "halibut" in Mandarin.
When the Halibut Group started, the Deputy Secretary of State at the time, Richard Armitage, rang the Australian Ambassador in Washington, Michael Thawley, to invite Australia to participate.
But there were conflicting thoughts in Canberra about whether to get involved. Some saw it as a good chance to catch America's ear on China; but the prevailing view was that Australia would gain more through individual talks with the US, and at the same time, avoid any offence to Beijing. So Australia told its best friend it preferred to not participate.
It's understood the US noted Australia's decision, but wasn't overly concerned because of the currently excellent bilateral relationship between the two countries.
Dr Alan Tidwell is the Director of the Centre for Australian and New Zealand studies at Georgetown University and he finds the decision puzzling.
ALAN TIDWELL: I am a bit surprised about the Howard Government's decision not to participate in the talks. They do seem to be talks that are occurring at a mid-level in many respects, so it doesn't make much sense from one perspective why the Government would decide not to participate.
LEIGH SALES: The view that prevailed was that the Australian Government felt that it could gain as much just through bilateral talks with the United States. Do you think that is the case?
ALAN TIDWELL: Well, certainly the Australian Government could gain a great deal in those bilateral talks, but they could get even greater benefit by having the multilateral talks with the United Kingdom, Canada, Japan. Bouncing ideas around amongst those countries and their representatives would gain great benefit and insight for the Australian Government.
You could almost argue that the Australian Government would have had greater impact through those multilateral talks because they might find allies in wanting to push a particular line with Washington.
LEIGH SALES: Do you think that Australia's decision would have worried the United States?
ALAN TIDWELL: No, not really, I think that the Government here in Washington would certainly understand that the Howard Government may have taken a decision that was largely for domestic consumption.
I think that the Howard Government has been under considerable pressure on their seemingly… being overly compliant with Washington on foreign policy matters. The Howard Government can point to this particular issue and say, you know, here we're not in lock step with Washington.
LEIGH SALES: The ABC contacted various officials to ask about the Halibut Group.
James Kelly was in charge of the State Department's Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs until January this year. He says if there was such a meeting, he wasn't invited.
One of his deputies was Randy Schriver, who also left the State Department and is a partner with Richard Armitage's consulting firm, Armitage International.
Mr Schriver said he was not willing to discuss the Halibut Group in detail.
Another former senior Bush administration figure describes Australia's non-participation as "disappointing".
Officials at the Australian Embassy in Washington have declined to comment.
This is Leigh Sales in Washington for AM.
TONY EASTLEY: And AM was unable to contact the Foreign Minister, Alexander Downer to respond to that story this morning.
I know that I should provide a comment, but I don't have much to say beyond that I hope that more emerges even though, as it's reported, it isn't that serious an issue as such. If anything, it's another insight into how the Government manages to maintain cordial reltions between itself and China and the US.