No doubt Australia’s Labor Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was hoping for a Kamala Harris victory in the US presidential election. But not just for the obvious ideological reasons.
Back in 2017 Albanese, a shadow minister at the time, was involved in a videoed panel discussion about then President Donald Trump. When asked how he would deal with Trump, Albanese’s response was ‘with trepidation’.
He explained that Trump ‘scares the shit out of me’ and expressed concern that 'the leader of the free world thinks that you conduct politics through 140 characters on Twitter’.
Albanese probably isn’t the only world leader who holds these views, but he may be the only one foolish enough to have knowingly shared them on camera.
Unfortunately, he won’t be able to rely on the Australian ambassador in Washington to smooth relations with the Trump administration. That ambassador is Kevin Rudd, a former Labor Prime Minister who has previously tweeted that Trump is ‘nuts’, ‘a traitor to the West’, ‘a problem for the world’, and ‘the most destructive president in history’.
Whether Rudd will remain in Washington as ambassador is another question. Earlier this year, Trump was asked about Rudd’s impolitic tweets (since deleted). In his inimitable style – part derision, part threat – Trump replied ‘I hear he's not the brightest bulb, but I don't know much about him. But if he's at all hostile, he will not be there long.’
Albanese rang Trump on Thursday morning to congratulate him. It’s not known whether the latter made any reference to the previous ill-advised comments of the PM or his ambassador.
Of course, those comments are the least of the Australian PM’s problems arising out of Trump’s victory. With an Australia election due in the next six months, Albanese will be particularly troubled by one feature of the US presidential election – the negative impact that the cost-of-living crisis appeared to have on the incumbent.
Two other issues that may be relevant in the Australia election were immigration and the culture wars. While those issues may present differently down under, the rightward shift reflected in the US results would be potentially damaging to the electoral prospects of a centre-left government like Albanese’s.
Going forward, a Trump presidency will create a raft of economic, security, and environmental challenges for Australia.
The President-elect once described ‘tariff’ as ‘the most beautiful word in the dictionary’. That spells trouble for a trading nation like Australia.
Trump campaigned on a policy of 60% tariffs on Chinese imports. If implemented, these tariffs would have an adverse impact on the Chinese economy. That would flow through to Australia as a major supplier of iron ore, coal, and other raw materials used by China to manufacture its exports.
In a worst-case scenario, US tariffs on Chinese imports could lead to a full-scale trade war between two of Australia’s largest trading partners with significant repercussions for the domestic economy.
Australia has a Free Trade Agreement with the US. Hopefully that would protect it from tariffs on most of its $20 billion a year plus exports to the US. However, Trump is a keen protectionist, and nothing can be ruled out. Australia used its close relationship with the US to avoid tariffs on steel under the first Trump administration but there are no guarantees that outcome can be repeated.
These concerns may help explain the dramatic drop in the Australian dollar during Wednesday as Trump’s triumph became apparent. Interestingly, most of that drop has subsequently been reversed.
The other immediate effect on Wednesday of the Republican victory was a rise in Australian bond rates. Many of Trump’s policies, including tax cuts and the imposition of tariffs, are expected to be inflationary which puts upward pressure on interest rates.
However, which policies will actually be implemented by the new President, and when, is impossible to predict. That adds to market volatility.
Trump’s unpredictability is also a feature of his geopolitics. That creates uncertainty for Australia in the Indo-Pacific. What will Trump do if China invades Taiwan? Where does Trump stand on the ‘Quad’, Australia’s diplomatic partnership with the US, Japan, and India?
Australia has gone all in on AUKUS, a security partnership with the UK and US. That includes a $368 billion deal to acquire US nuclear submarines. Are those arrangements secure or will Trump, a noted dealmaker and isolationist, look to renegotiate or even abandon them?
The President-elect claims he will resolve the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 24 hours. That could only be achieved through a major loss of territory for Ukraine. Where would that leave Australia which has been a staunch defender of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity, and which has given the country more than $1.5 billion in various forms of aid?
Trump has also indicated that he will disengage from global climate initiatives and pursue a policy at home of ‘drill, drill, drill’. That would almost certainly be a disaster for concerted global action on climate change and trigger tremendous pressure within Australia to once again harvest the nation’s abundant carbon fuel resources. Where would that leave Australia’s climate policy?
Trump will take office next January. Between then and Australia going to the polls in May, he may have created no end of trouble for Prime Minister Albanese’s reelection campaign. The PM’s injudicious comments back in 2017 may prove very prescient.
*Ross Stitt is a freelance writer with a PhD in political science. He is a New Zealander based in Sydney. His articles are part of our 'Understanding Australia' series.
35 Comments
"Two other issues that may be relevant in the Australia election were immigration and the culture wars."
Despite a country of ~30% immigrant population, the Dutton Opposition has no qualms about stoking the xenophobia at every opportunity. The Labour govt's decision this week to ban <16s from social media (with no specific penalties just a please behave appeal to providers) is highly likely to be honoured in the breach: Aussies generally don't take well to "authorities" telling them what to do..
About the ban of under 16's from social media. Part way through reading The Coddling of the American Mind by Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff ( and wanting to read his next book - The Anxious Generation) where they make the case for less social media for people under 16. The world has been changed by social media and not necessarily for the better. I would rephrase the saying
“England and America are two countries separated by a common language” George Bernard Shaw
"The left and right are two tribes separated by a common language "
In a proposal for a new book Jonathan Haidt writes
"Since 2015 we are living in the post-Babel era. Many of the old rules no longer apply but most people––especially the older ones who lead our institutions––don’t know it. We are increasingly cut off from all that came before, from objective reality, from reliable means of finding objective reality, and from each other. We have a weakened younger generation, an epistemic crisis, a trust crisis, a mental health crisis, a moralism crisis, and an institutional crisis. It feels like we are living in a hurricane within a hall of mirrors, and it might be this way for the rest of our lives. We can never go back to the pre-Babel era, so how can we adapt to our new world? "
While I'm not so pessimistic and hope that the world can find it's way back to a "pre-Babel" world I fear that that optimism is misplaced and the human race is doomed to destroy the planet's ability to support human life. The only saving grace maybe the decline in the world population to the point where what if left of the human race can survive.
Trump could end the war in Ukraine in 24hrs, all he needs to do is tell them no more money or arms and they will be forced very quickly into negotiation before they run out of ammo and get overrun and shot. Its likely now that Russia will get all of Ukraine or at least half of it.
Possible but major assumptions. Russia has several major problems.
Firstly the land area versus population. Russia is big and I mean really big but most of the country is not hospitable to human habitation and does not have the population to defend the border.
Secondly Russian population is declining
"United Nations scenarios project Russia’s population in 2100 to be between 74 million and 112 million compared with the current 146 million. The most recent UN projections are for the world’s population to decline by about 20 percent by 2100. The estimate for Russia is a decline of 25 to 50 percent."
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/content-series/russia-tomorrow/a-russia….
I would argue that the war has accelerated that decline.
Thirdly Russia relied heavily on it's stockpiles of Soviet era equipment - much of that is now gone.
Lastly even with the loss American support it doesn't mean the end of European support.
Support from Europe is not going to happen. Next up it would be Germany filling the void and they are in a financial downward spiral as well plus Trump seriously believes he is now running the whole world not just the USA so he will be able to put huge pressure on Germany not to assist. The German automotive industry is already going down the toilet and companies like VW would be in serios trouble with huge tariffs on their cars. I can see the whole of Ukraine going back to Russia in no time. Sorry but it all boils down to money and the USA just put a dictator in the Whitehouse.
You sound worried that Europe could make a decision by itself . The tariffs I suspect will come no matter what Germany or the rest of Europe does. Additionally it is not as if the US is exactly in a good financial position itself ( I would argue that the US never really recovered from the GFC). Like the rest of the world the US is running a deficit and that is not projected to change.
" In CBO’s projections, the federal budget deficit in fiscal year 2024 is $1.9 trillion. Adjusted to exclude the effects of shifts in the timing of certain payments, the deficit amounts to $2.0 trillion in 2024 and grows to $2.8 trillion by 2034. "
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/60039#:~:text=The%20Budget%20Outlook,-D….
Additionally it still doesn't solve the problem of Russia's population decline.
That's not true - not all non African nations are losing population. For New Zealand
https://www.stats.govt.nz/information-releases/national-population-proj…
In the short term, the projections indicate:
- annual population growth has a 50 percent probability of being between 0.1 and 0.7 percent in 2023 and between 0.5 and 1.2 percent in 2028
- New Zealand's population (5.13 million in 2022) has a 90 percent probability of increasing to between 5.17 and 5.55 million in 2028 and to between 5.28 and 5.85 million in 2033.
In the long term, the projections indicate:
- increasing numbers and proportions of the population at the older ages
- the population aged 65+ (0.79 million in 2020) has a 90 percent probability of increasing to between 1.34 and 1.46 million in 2048 and to between 1.65 and 2.06 million in 2073
- the proportion of the population aged 65+ (16 percent in 2022) has a 90 percent probability of increasing to between 21 and 25 percent in 2048 and between 24 and 32 percent in 2073
- the population aged 85+ (93,000 in 2022) has a 90 percent probability of increasing to between 251,000 and 305,000 in 2048 and to between 322,000 and 491,000 in 2073
- population growth will slow as New Zealand’s population ages and the gap between the number of births and deaths narrows
- New Zealand's population (5.13 million in 2022) has a 90 percent probability of being between 5.55 and 6.65 million in 2048 and between 5.62 and 7.86 million in 2073.
or the US
The U.S. population is projected to reach a high of nearly 370 million in 2080 before edging downward to 366 million in 2100.
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2023/population-projecti…
However as noted above Russia is expected to decline by 25 to 50 percent by 2100.
( there is a projection that by the year 3000 Japan will have 65 inhabitants) .
You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about natural resource depletion when it was nowhere in the discussion.
Zwifter made the assertion that Trump could end the war, My reply pointed out that Russia has some serious issues which it hasn't addressed and that the war has only exacerbated those problems and maybe Putin will want to end the war.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-is-ready-talk-trump-his-ukra…
While the article hints that Putin's demands remain the same - the fact that he has made the statement that he is willing to talk I would argue puts Putin at a disadvantage - he made the first move. Putin is goading Trump as Trump has to call him ( perhaps Putin believes he can manipulate Trump - which wouldn't surprise me).
Early on when he was still alive and in action Prigozhin revealed a timetable that indicated securing the east bank of the Dnieper was the prime objective and then establishing a defended hard border, east to west, to the north in suitable preferably reasonably empty topography. That makes sense. The Dnieper is a natural boundary that caused great difficulty to both Napoleon and Adolf, on the way in and on the way out. Such territory captures the industrial urban belt and guarantees the security and supply of the Crimean peninsular, especially water. If that is actually too Putin’s objective that likely will be how it will finish up if Trump. as per Biden in Afghanistan, says enough is enough and the European NATO lot are not prepared to up the ante by themselves.
Still doesn't solve the problem of a declining population. It may buy some time and a bunch of broken land and cities but water for Crimea - nope that went with the destruction of the Kakhovka dam. Water for Crimea was fed from canal near the dam and that water stopped when the dam was destroyed. It is unlikely that that dam will be rebuilt any time soon and without the reservoir I doubt there will be enough water for Crimea or Kherson oblast south of the Dnieper ( the area is a dust bowl without water).
But what happens if Europe is prepared to "up the ante by themselves".
.
Good question. Russia through this adventure, has lost significant strength, economically, socially and militarily. The UK, Germany, France, Italy have economies of around the same size as Russia. Throw in the rest of them and Russia is dwarfed. Kharkov is the key to south east Ukraine. That is why, but seemingly forgotten, the Wehrmacht and the Red Army fought four major battles there. If the European nations decide there is a need to stop Russia, and it is preferable to fight in Ukraine rather than inside their own borders, then Kharkov again is the key point to contest, as that means the west can be approached from the north, bypassing the Dnieper. That though means putting boots on the ground doesn’t it and from that point all bets are off.
Better not to believe that Trump will attempt to do all that he promised or said he would do, for campaign purposes and for winning the election. He is always good at saying outlandish things like that ,which are lapped up by his followers. Those promises have achieved the results he wanted and are already forgotten. His attention will go elsewhere now.
Not to worry, Labor will be gone after May 2025. Then Trump will announce a "new beautiful friendship" with Dutton. Australia will thrive under the Coalition, while also being able to give a big fat finger to China in retaliation to all the tariffs China imposed on Australian exports.
Dutton is a piece of work - mind you, I lived in Queensland in the Russ Hinze era - now there was an animal.
But we need to separate what is happening, from the persona involved. Everyone is getting angsty about their future - some see it in money terms, some existentially, some just sense things are unwinding. Theay are all correct - but voting for psychopathic alpha males is not going to change the physics of the predicament. Nor is changing which 'party' is in power.
That's a good insight. On the money.
However I suspect the people of those sovereign nations who do install psychopathic alpha males will suffer greater effects as the physics of the predicament comes to pass.
If you look at the many climate-related disasters currently levelling whole communities (not to mention the high temperatures making many densely populated areas inhospitable/incompatible with human life), I don't see re-building to being viable (let alone thriving) in future. Abandonment will be the trend.
But, I know you know that as well!
Albo won’t have to worry. He is loser, very unpopular, Trump gets the gig in January and Albo gets kicked out in May, so he need not worry too much about how to deal with trump because he won’t be around. Same for the idiot in charge of Canada, he’s a goner too. Don’t know the date though. Hope it’s soo .
Leonard Cohen "You want it darker?"
Albo is just another leftist loser. Why is it they always seem to leave the place in a worse condition than what it was when they arrived? Look at South America. Look at the USA for goodness sake. And remember our very own Jacinda. F........ useless. Trudeau is another. Starmer I fear will be another one. The left led coalition in Germany is also falling apart very fast. Elections there next year too.
Global affairs are moving very quickly now. Too fast for some & I include Putin in this. He is just a bully & a thug, & not necessarily in that order. The question is, how will the west fare from here? The current bloke in the white house oversaw the Ukraine/Russia fiasco & the middle east on the verge of blowing up in his face. Whatever Trump does from here will not be that bad. Surely.
PS: Have a look at what is brewing under Trump. There is a serious gathering of young talent which I hope he can harness & grow. If he can do this job well, he may not only leave a legacy worth remembering, but perhaps a western world still calling [most of] the shots in 20 years time.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.