Globalisation's still not a bad thing
Originally published in the Australian Financial Review.
COVID-19 signals the end of peak globalisation. Borders have hardened. Tourism has withered. Medical supplies have been blocked at ports. Citizens have been prioritised while foreigners were sent home.
Globalisation has been much maligned in recent years – already struck by the financial crisis and the US-China trade war. Growing hostility towards global institutions and trade competition has characterised politics of several countries. And with concern about so-called globalism came attacks on the so-called globalists: “The future does not belong to globalists, the future belongs to patriots,” said President Donald Trump at the United Nations General Assembly last year.
Australians, by contrast, have remained largely immune to these trends. New Lowy Institute polling finds seven in 10 Australians say globalisation is mostly good for our country, unchanged from 2019. While the United States has succumbed to protectionism and negativity towards migrants, Australians have remained supportive of free trade. Anti-migration sentiment has always lurked in Australia, but years of polling show that most Australians agree that immigration makes our country stronger and wealthier and contributes to our national character.
Ongoing struggles in Australia’s relationship with China, our largest trading partner, could fuel further distrust of globalisation. Disputes over beef and barley exports could just be the beginning. Most Australians already say we are too economically dependent on China, and the recent ambiguous threats of economic coercion against Australian exports will only deepen that concern.
Although Australian distrust of China was on the rise even before this crisis, the economic relationship has always been a priority. There would be little support in the Australian community for threats like President Trump’s to “cut off the whole relationship”. Having said that, Australians are sceptical of China’s efforts to reframe its COVID-19 response.
Beijing would prefer the world today focused on its strong recovery and so-called mask diplomacy. But this new research indicates that the earlier stories of a cover-up and repression in China may have made more of a mark: most Australians (68 per cent) feel less favourably about China’s system of government when thinking about its COVID-19 handling. And only one in three say China has handled the crisis well.
By contrast, almost all Australians (93 per cent) say we have done well in handling this crisis, but are disappointed by the responses of others. The United States and United Kingdom stand out: these are countries that Australians identify with, share values, political institutions and intelligence with, and fight wars alongside. But only one in three Australians say the United Kingdom has handled the crisis well, and the report card for the United States is even worse. A staggeringly low 10 per cent say the United States has handled the pandemic well.
In some ways, this is unsurprising. The popularity of these leaders, some of whom came to power keen to reinforce borders and build walls, has not been matched by competence in the face of the pandemic. COVID-19 responses from leaders of the United States and United Kingdom, and others like Brazil and Mexico, elected with a populist message, have been found desperately wanting.
The tragedy unfolding in the United States is particularly hard to believe. Almost 1.5 million are infected, and 85,000 have perished. You couldn’t blame a public for turning inwards: in the face of this virus, building walls sounds more appealing than ever. But flailing populists have not been able to rely on demagoguery to counter the virus; instead blame is thrown in all directions. This approach has fed into existing prejudice: Asian-Americans have unacceptably been collateral damage in this tragedy.
To the credit of Australian leaders, the instinct to blame others – China, the World Health Organisation, anyone really – has been largely avoided. Nevertheless, Australia has not been immune to troubling racist attacks on Australians of Asian background.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has forayed into criticism of international institutions in the past, for example with the "negative globalism" speech at the Lowy Institute Lecture in 2019 and the recently concluded review into Australia’s participation into multilateral institutions. But not in this crisis: Australia did not follow suit when the United States halted funding for the World Health Organisation.
Australia taking responsibility for its COVID-19 response has been rewarded by the public: Australians polled offer high votes of confidence to their governments and chief medical officers, and even to the World Health Organisation, for their handling of COVID-19.
And as much as the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed vulnerabilities and deep rifts in the globalised world, Australians are calling for more global co-operation. Rather than every country going it alone, as has been largely the case in this crisis, most Australians (53 per cent) told the Lowy Institute “we need more global co-operation, rather than every country putting their own interests first”.
This may be a lonely position in the future. US-China relations are falling off a cliff, and Australia-China relations could be in a similar path. There are estimates that world goods trade will shrink up to 30 per cent this year. Supply chains are fractured, and even Australia will be thinking about sovereign manufacturing.
Globalisation may have been dealt a grave blow by this virus, and Australia can’t save it alone. As a trading nation, that only succeeds by embracing globalisation – even the devastation of COVID-19 hasn’t yet shaken our fundamentals. It may well do so, deep into a global economic slowdown. But to date, Australians have leaned into their national character, and continued to show resilience in the face of populism and protectionism.
Natasha Kassam is a research fellow in the diplomacy and public opinion program at the Lowy Institute.
