Herding Cats - Uniting Politicians In The China Negotiation (All 4 docs - abbreviated)
The lines between foreign policy and elements of domestic policy are now blurred. This article combines the previous series into one document, edited and reduced.
Over recent months we have seen various examples of new and established politicians undermine Australia’s negotiating position with China by working to amplify the CCP message to Chinese Australian voters or the population at large.
Tim and Mark:
In early July Tim James (Member for Willoughby, NSW lower house) and Mark Coure (Member for Oatley, NSW Lower House) attended a 25th anniversary celebration of the PRC resumption of control of Hong Kong, run by the Hong Kong Economics and Trade Office (Sydney). The following picture was posted on the HKETO website
Ambassador Xiao Qian has Mark Coure to his immediate right, and two to his left, is Tim James. The CCP propaganda department know a picture is worth (at least) a thousand words, and the photo op is the key reason the two are there, to show Chinese in Australia that the NSW Liberal party supports the CCP crushing of the democratic resistance and the abrogation of the “One Country / Two Systems” policy. 1C2S, if it had been honoured, would have “guaranteed” a high degree of semi democracy, freedom of speech and other freedoms compared to China.
Tim James and Mark Coure are effectively toasting the crushing of those who wanted freedom, many of whom have subsequently moved to Australia and vote. The link below directs to a twitter feed showing who they are really lining up with.
Taking sides with the bad guys
Mark and Tim are also undermining the messages of the former Federal Liberal Government in support of Hong Kong’s lost freedoms. They are effectively acceding to the 求同存异 (qiu tong cun yi) demand, the second of the latest four demands, to set aside past differences to focus on shared future goals. This is not it our strategic interests since we have two Australian citizens effectively held hostage (Cheng Lei and Yang Heng Jun) and trade and cyber attacks and a host of other bullying issues that have not been resolved.
Kylea and Nicolette:
Prior to the Federal election, Kylea Tink and Nicolette Boele attended and spoke at a function sponsored by the leading United Front organisation, Australia China Economics Trade and Culture Association (ACETCA) which has taken the role previously exercised by the Australian Council for the Promotion of the Peaceful Reunification of China in engaging with Australian politicians.
Quoting from the SMH: SMH coverage Tink/Boele 2022
Tink told the audience:
We want to change the government. We want to change the relationship between China and Australia. We need your vote and we need your support.”
China has aggressively bullied our nation and we have made mild and inadequate steps stand up for ourselves, which have led to massive disproportionate escalation, in trade, in the kidnapping of our citizens (Cheng Lei and Yang Heng Jun), in cyber attacks that have cost hundreds of millions, and in other ways.
Boele went further:
Boele said there was fault on both sides in the breakdown of Australia-China relations but “in my opinion, the government is unable and unwilling to pick up the phone to Beijing”.
“Australia needs to establish a relationship with China built on mutual respect. You can’t talk about China unless you can talk to and with China,” she said.
“Australia and China have had strong relationships in the past – in fact this is the 50th year of our relationship, and we can have strong relationships again, we just need the political will.”
Fault on both sides ? Please explain ? Because we introduced the anti interference laws ? Because we exercised our right to not buy Huawei equipment ? We deserve to be attacked for what exactly Nicolette ? Mutual respect ? Has any Australian government representative ever called a Chinese official a “rabid Kangaroo” or a “running dog” ? (As CCP controlled media has described us).
Boele dug an even deeper hole:
“There is fault on both sides. China is not going away. Its size, military, economic and cultural power are realities with which we need to deal,”
We absolutely do need to deal with these realities, but with one voice, as a nation united.
WeChat and CCP controlled social media:
Both Tink and Boele made extensive and shameful use of the CCP controlled Wechat social media app in the campaign, undermining Australia’s negotiating position, by telling a portion of the voting public (pro dictatorship anti Australia Chinese voters) what they want to hear, in a controlled media environment where only a CCP friendly message can be told. By embracing WeChat, they are loudly announcing acceptance of censorship and CCP control of the discourse weapon.
They claim the $128 a head dinner did not involve sending funding their way. The dinner was sponsored by ACETCA (Australia China Economic, Trade and Culture Association), whose function is largely to engage with Australian politicians to further CCP aims in Australia, and who are on record as financial donors to political parties.
SMH Coverage ACETCA donations (2019)
Jonathon O’Dea and Chris Minns:
While Jonathon O’Dea (Liberal MP Davidson NSW) used to be involved with Australian Council for the Promotion of the Peaceful Reunification of China, he has now, like Chris Minns (NSW Labor Leader) become a patron of ACETCA.
ACETCA has traditionally favoured the Liberal Party in its donation patterns, but Labor has been well looked after. No doubt Simon Holmes A’Court’s wallet is not limitless and Teals want their share of pro CCP funding. ACETCA no longer make direct political donations, so multiple donations from others directed by them would be expected to be their current strategy. Or maybe there is no longer any political donation activity by this group🙄
Screenshot from SMH 2019 ACETCA article
O’Dea and Minns would no doubt argue that the transaction of support for ACETCA and the funding that flows from it is part of being involved with local community groups. This is awkward where China is concerned because while a Chinese community group may begin independent of the CCP, it cannot stay that way for long. The expectation is that whatever their purpose, they must act and associate with the United Front, and avoiding this, and acting independently could result in punishments for relatives in China or harassment in Australia.
Exceptions that come to mind are the Fa Lun Gong who have tight social management (and are avowed enemies of the CCP), and some of the organisations created by Jason Yet Sen Li (NSW State Labor MP), who have no explicit United Front connection, but do the kind of work you would expect of a United Front organisation, such as organising current and potential Chinese politicians to form a network, share information and work together - despite joining different political parties !
This is in stark contrast to the antics of an oaf like Huang Xiang Mo (黄向墨） which were a strategic gift to those of us trying to get our heads around the United Front work that’s been going on behind our backs for so long.
The link below leads to an AFR article about Huang complaining his money was not buying influence !
Australian Politicians not delivering bang for his buck
NEXT: Part 2 of 4. How Should Politicians Deal with CCP Related Organisations ?
How Should Politicians Deal With CCP Related Organisations ? Part 2 of 4
Developing a Code of Conduct for MP’s Dealing With Different Categories of Influence. Part 2 of 4. Published 29 July 2022.
Politicians must counter CCP influence and support our comprehensive national policy (foreign policy, sovereignty protection, and much more), and recognise that China policy is not something external directed from Canberra, it is substantially domestic and they are not divorced from it, but are on the front line.
A discussion of influence is beyond the scope of a short article but the actions politicians should take relate to the specific form of influence they are dealing with.
Below are four main categories of Chinese Influence that a politician might encounter, and initial proposals for a Code of Conduct for individual political representatives. The code of conduct for individual politicians should flow from an overall strategy implemented through parties and their representatives at all levels of government. This strategy should as a default support the foreign policy determined by the governing party and not seek to undermine it for party political gain, a party or individual representative should only contradict the “national negotiation” led by the government in exceptional circumstances. Ultimate responsibility for “herding cats”, making representatives sing from the same hymn sheet, should lie with the Party Presidents at Federal level, assisted by Party Presidents at state level.
The problem with that of course is the history of connection with United Front organisations that most Party State Presidents have, eg Phillip Ruddock of the NSW Liberal Party. Members will have to vote for new leadership that has a clear position on how they will engage with CCP influence. They will also need to look for new sources of funding, even (gasp !) consider making their organisations more member friendly and attracting more new members who pay fees and attend fee charging events instead of keeping parties small and cliquey and surviving financially by shopping influence for cash.
Four Main Categories of CCP Influence:
1 Official Representation:
This refers to activities that are formally and openly organised by the representatives of the Chinese government in Australia, which would include events like the HKETO celebration of the crushing of freedom in Hong Kong. It is normal for foreign governments to hold such events, the complicating factors are:
Permanent differences - China is run for and on behalf of one party, and the CCP has always been and will always be hostile to countries and organisations it does not control.
Current problems - Our attempts to resist influence and interference have been met with extreme aggression and some pundits still think a return to the pre 2017 status quo is possible. History shows no-one has ever successfully surrendered to the CCP, that is to say, we cannot simply back down, whatever concessions are made, more will be required. Resistance is difficult, but surrender is futile. Nevertheless, at some point in the future, the current hostilities may decrease somewhat and more normal interactions may for a time become possible, despite the permanent differences that will ensure hostility will resume periodically.
Code of Conduct For Dealing With PRC Official Local Representation:
Individual MP’ s should always avoid being used as a CCP sock puppet, with their passive attendance used to imply official party or government consent of CCP policy or actions, for example attendance at a celebration of the CCP’s trashing of liberty in Hong Kong.
In the current environment no official events should be attended by political representatives, the “求同存异 - qiu tong cun yi - setting aside differences” concession should not be made by rogue MPs acting unilaterally to undermine the nation while the federal government negotiates the current outstanding issues.
A potential exception is where the opportunity to address an audience is given. In the context of the dinner celebrating 25 years of Hong Kong under CCP rule, a speech excoriating the actions of the CCP and consistent with Australia’s official position would be appropriate, if uncomfortable and unwelcome by the hosts.
2 United Front Groups:
United Front Groups are coordinated by the United Front Work Department in Beijing. The purpose is to use Australian Citizens loyal to China to serve China in Australia. For the average organisation member, however, these organisations probably just feel like harmless social clubs. Most members probably like Australia and want to help Australia by making it do what China wants which they think would be good for us. They are often pleasant and kind people. They vote.
Code of Conduct For Dealing With United Front Groups:
MP’s must never passively attend a study session (as Minns and O’Dea appear to have - photo and news link currently unavailable). Pen and paper in hand, listening to a monologue, reminiscent of Party meetings shown on Chinese state media. MP’s should only attend as a speaker, and speak boldly to reflect Australia’s ambitions and interests in line with the federal governments message. For many in the audience, it is the only way they will ever hear Australia’s side of the story due to the stranglehold on Chinese language media and their “programming” through the Chinese educational system and “patriotic education”. This will probably not facilitate a second invitation, and will cost votes and funding.
3 Chinese Language Media:
Radio, print and online Chinese language media, with the exception of Fa Lun Gong publications, all have CCP links and supply Chinese state media sourced news and commentary, as well as recycling mainstream Australian media news, but crucially with editing of information that does not fit the CCP narrative and “新闻舆论管理 - xinwen yulun guanli - public opinion management” rules. Their own journalists create articles that (where relevant) support CCP information warfare goals.
Wechat and Weibo Chinese social media apps are explicitly subject to the propaganda guidelines of the CCP, thus when an Australian Prime Minister (Morrison) tried to put the Australian government’s point of view forward, to persuade Chinese language readers of his viewpoint, first individual articles were censored, then his entire account was removed. The legal means by which this occurred is convoluted, but the system was set up to achieve this power.
Kevin Rudd on the other hand is free to hide behind CCP controlled Wei Bo to vent one-sided attacks on the Liberal party and the Australian government, aided and abetted by CCP censorship, on his 700 000 follower WeiBo account. There is no way to insert a rebuttal comment into the feed, since a pro-Australian viewpoint would be censored, and it is flooded with vile anti Australian vitriol from his followers. This undermines our nations efforts to build support for the Australian case among migrants from China, and Chinese in China who may have interest in our issues.
The strong stepping up of Chinese language media by ABC, SBS, and The Australian newspaper should be applauded and supported. Advances in machine translation and hiring of more bilingual journalists makes making a Chinese language version of mainstream media more viable, and could help challenge the PRC / CCP narratives of events, people and situations. In the meantime most Chinese language media is effective at shaping and enhancing political and social barriers between new migrants to Australia from the PRC and the wider population, and the CCP and opportunistic Australian politicians can benefit by pandering to the CCP’s false narrative.
Code of Conduct For Dealing With Chinese Language Media
No one in public life should use Wechat or Weibo. To do so is to endorse the CCPs “right” to control, monitor and restrict public discourse. Wechat censored a PM. That should have led to the immediate blocking of all forms of Chinese controlled social media in Australia. Perversely it got little reaction, but it is high time for some solidarity. If Chinese in Australia want to interact with politicians using social media, this can be done with a secondary account using Chinese language on Facebook or Twitter.
When giving interviews with Chinese language media, stick to the national script, and avoid undermining national policy. Afterwards check what was written and how it was reported. Remember you are unable to use Chinese social media to engage with this audience if you are not parroting the CCP line. You can at least use other forms of media to highlight how you have been misrepresented and defend yourself before others spot it. And we plan to spot it (see article 4 in this series).
4 Think Tanks
ACRI:
Prairie Fire blasted ACRI in our July 8 document on discourse power and Ambassador Xiao Qian. The Australia China Relations Institute was set up with a $1.8 million grant from now expelled United Front figure Huang Xiang Mo (黄向墨）， and we previously asserted that much funding came from Chinese state enterprises operating in Australia and companies with business in China, which is not entirely correct. The last three annual reports shows more than 80 % of annual funding comes from the UTS directly. This creates the potential for ACRI to one day become relatively financially independent of Chinese influence, but that would require the UTS itself to be independent of CCP influence, and require a wholesale replacement of staff particularly at the top and a dramatic reform process. An analysis of the reports ACRI have completed in the past demonstrates they echo the CCP narrative and work to undermine Australian unity and confidence in our ability to work to frustrate China’s bullying and interference.
China Matters:
China Matters appears to be a Labor / CCP leaning organisation, which is primarily funded by Australian private sector donors and until 2019 received some Federal government funding. They were planning to take Federal Senator James Paterson and WA MP Andrew Hastie on a trip to China to meet with CCP controlled think tanks (there are no other kind inside China), but they were subsequently denied visas. In any case all their discussions would have been with CCP ideologues who would have repeated the party line that can be read in the People’s Daily, daily.
To get a flavour of China Matters activities, you can listen to this 2018 podcast (Festival of Dangerous ideas) where Jason Yat Sen Li brings his pal, Zhao Hai, a professional propagandist from China to sell the idea to the Australian public that Australia should dump the US and join team CCP. Linda Jakobsen claps along while Adam Ni wrings his hands a bit. An example of the asymetrical nature of information warfare where China can influence Australian audiences but we can’t do anything like that in China.
Code of Conduct For Dealing with Think Tanks
ACRI and China Matters are probably best for politicians to ignore entirely, don’t give them respect or credibility. If it seems like a chance to bat for Australia, MP’s could participate in their events as speakers, bringing a feisty fighting spirit and support for sovereignty, freedom, and democracy. The CCP call it information warfare for a good reason - if you don’t fight you lose. A rule of thumb is that if Australians can’t do something in China, China and it’s allies should not be permitted to do it here.
next: article 3 of 4 discusses how to get politicians aligned in the national negotiation.
Politicians and The Prisoners Dilemma: Part 3 of 4
The incentives for the individual politician and any single party are not aligned, indeed are in conflict with the national interest. Article 3 of 4 Published 29 July 2022.
The Code Of Conduct recommendations apply to individuals. But that leads to a critical element of the problem. You can’t fight a tightly centrally organised system (the Leninist CCP) by having a fragmented organisation where there are incentives for different actors to undercut the common interest, a form of “prisoners dilemma” where caving in to CCP actors benefits the individual to the detriment of the nation.
Prisoners dilemma diagram and discussion.
The term “prisoners dilemma” refers to the problem of two actors (rival politicians or rival parties in the example depicted above) who stand to benefit if they take an action that the other does not, but have no trust or communication between themselves. The results are generally that they both lose by not coordinating their action and attempting to pursue their self interest.
In Australia’s situation, we all benefit if all parties and political representatives stand united against coercion and influence, but an economist would predict, based on the game theory prisoners dilemma model, that the odds of this happening would be low, as different parties
Compete with each other
Distrust each other
Don’t communicate with each other
Plan on short term timetables (electoral cycles)
The timeframe problem may be important as in a repeated game, players sometimes learn to collaborate. In a one shot game (ie a first attempt at winning a seat in government) players are expected to seek personal gain above all else.
How then can we construct mechanisms to herd the cats in the right direction, or resolve the prisoners dilemma of disunited political actors. This is discussed below and in the final article four that concludes this series.
Start with Parties:
The Liberal party exists as different parties in different states bearing the same name. Even individuals in the same state Liberal party seem to be acting independently. Labor appears to have factions with different strategies, and the Greens are a collection of individuals with no common view on much at all.
Strategy:
Parties need to find a way to discipline their elected and administrative officials, to work cohesively to implement the party strategy on China. Foreign affairs is no longer foreign. It is playing out inside Australia and China affects every field; trade, investment, migration, education, environment, even concerning foreign relations with nations other than China, China is the biggest issue. This plays out at every level of government and other levels of society (not dealt with in this discussion). Domestic focused China Strategy is more than just resisting influence, proactive strategies need to be implemented to counter the CCP and take the initiative.
Parties need an integrated and centralised strategy for how they implement China strategy in the local environment, and it must be enforced across Federal, State and Council levels. The days when individuals could do their own thing must end. Opposition leaders must work with Prime Ministers to resolve any disagreements on China strategy behind closed doors, and in general, all parties should speak the same message with their different voices, at all levels.
Responsibility:
Currently no-one in any of the Australian political parties is in charge of managing China policy at a party level. There needs to be a team. There probably are individuals or teams who think about getting Chinese community votes and funding. This needs to be the same team, but the priority has to be the national interest.
Ultimate responsibility and reporting needs to be to Party State and Federal Presidents. Up until now, politicians could pander to CCP related interests and there was no cost, only benefit in votes and funding if they got the formula right. This needs to change. If they sell out the nation, then there need to be costs, in lost votes, lost funding, from other parts of the community, and lost preselection.
Article 4 in this series (below) outlines strategies for ordinary people to make a difference in getting the right behaviours from our politicians.
Sticks, Clubs and Carrots: Part 4 of 4
Punishment and Incentives to Produce Patriotic, Unified Conduct From Our Political Representatives. Disrupt Dastayardly Deeds. Article 4 of 4. Published 30 July 2022.
Link to Dastayari story SMH 30 Nov 2017
Screenshot from SMH 30 Nov 2017: I would title it, “CCP appointed self described Governor General of the Chinese in Australia, Huang Xiang Mo and Sock Puppet Sam Dastayari at a press conference for the purposes of exposure in Chinese media to create the impression Huang is equally important to an elected official and is recognised as such by the Australian government”.
Fighting China’s influence and interference in Australia is a complex issue and will involve evolving the strategies as we make efforts - Learning while doing, feeling the stones while crossing the river. When governments fail the people must prevail. The following are four initial steps that Freedom Alliance members will take.
1) Education and Communication.
Ideally ASIO or another government body would brief new politicians on influence and interference issues subsequent to being elected, on a regular basis, and as events or their own actions require. The extent to which this may already be happening is not publicly known. There is also a counter argument that the security services should serve the people based on the delegated authority of democratically elected representatives, and should not be telling MP’s what to do or who to meet with.
To fill the gaps and apply pressure, Freedom Alliance members should request to meet with newly elected MP’s or candidates in the run up to an election to voice concerns and persuade MP’s to adopt (formally or informally) the code of conduct for engaging with Chinese official representation, United Front Groups, Chinese Language Media, and Think Tanks. Play nicely, hope for the best, remove ignorance as an excuse, let them know we are watching.
2) Monitor, Publicise and Discuss:
Groups within Freedom Alliance should be formed to monitor their local members at State and Federal level, and representatives at council level, through traditional and social media. This is not hard work, it’s basically reading the news but keeping an eye out for what your local representative is up to. When inappropriate behaviour is spotted, a well written less than one A4 page letter to the offending MP clearly outlining the problems with what they have done may help, especially if ignorance is the cause.
A good roasting on social media may also be strategically beneficial. When we say “roasting” we mean making clear what has been done wrong, in a way that loses votes and support for the offenders. Politicians engage with CCP proxies and allies for funds and votes. They must learn that in chasing these benefits there are costs attached, the loss of funds and votes from enemies of the CCP (aka “the good guys”), voters who will no longer be taken for granted. Historically language barriers made following Chinese language media reporting hard, we can recruit highly motivated members with strong Chinese language skills, and machine translation is already great and will continue to improve. It is no longer possible for politicians to hide behind language barriers when their meetings or communications are only reported in one language through a limited media circulation.
3) Political Action:
Plan A: Joining Existing Political Parties:
CCP members enthusiastically join all major parties in Australia to further the CCP cause. Ironically this eventually might get some of them to appreciate democracy. In the meantime, however, to counter their influence, Freedom Alliance members should join political parties and make noise internally. Raise issues in party meetings, through questions, motions and if relevant, objecting to preselection of candidates with collaborationist leanings or behaviours. All political parties are likely to already have current members who will be sympathetic to the cause of Sovereignty, Freedom and Democracy. The problem is that they take the political trinity for granted, not appreciating how much has already been lost and how much worse it can get.
Plan B: Democratic Alliance Candidates:
Democratic Alliance (DA) exists as a registered political party with candidates and support teams who have campaign and media experience, an understanding of the rules and regulations governing political campaigns and the processes attached. In lower house electorates where the sitting members or candidates are clearly in the CCP camp and who’s electoral success would yield strategic advantage to the cause of advancing CCP interests in Australia, it will be necessary to run DA candidates. A candidate can participate in public candidate debates, and expose the wrong actions and intentions of the other candidates. They can get media attention to the cause in multiple ways, and they can get votes and shift preferences. They may even win. More realistic in the short term is the damage they can do to politicians who undermine the national negotiation led by the Federal government, and the publicity that can assist getting upper house representatives elected under the Democratic Alliance banner.
4) Direct Action / Protest:
An event like celebration of 25 years of CCP control of Hong Kong, now, after the introduction of the national security law is offensive to decent human beings. Appropriately conducted physical protest might have raised it’s profile and reminded the public of the CCP’s wrongdoing, as well as bringing substantial embarrassment to Australian politicians who attended. Building the capacity to field adequate numbers of the right type of protestors at short notice, (ie people who can be relied upon to behave responsibly) is an important asset that needs to be built as the struggle intensifies and the public get tired and jaded on this issue. This will also require research and information gathering to know about offensive events with sufficient time before they happen.
Malcolm Turnbull said “Australia has stood up”. This was presumptuous. Some laws were passed, it was a start, but it requires a whole of community effort to truly stand up and stay up. Many of their advances of the last decades need to be unwound. The struggle against China will be a normal part of the existence of Australia going forward, and the kind of nation we become will be the result of how successfully we unite and fight. Chris Minns once said every student should learn Mandarin. He’s on the right track there, ironically. We need to learn more about China, to move beyond “你好”，(ni hao / are you well) , “吃饱了没？” (Chi bao le mei / have you eaten? ) and graduate to 澳洲万岁！民主不败 ！
Look it up, it's time we all knew it, believe it and live it.
Malcolm Turnbull Standing Up For Australia (link to video)
