APEC blame game: a case of two-level games or lack of knowledge?

-


Many Papua New Guineans have blamed the Prime Minister Peter O'Neill for the 'no communique' issue. The notable Facebook post above is from the Member for Madang Bryan Kramer. He is one of the many.

Like Kramer, the critics think the special treatment given to China was a contributing factor. O'Neill should have politely declined the Chinese President's request in July to meet with him and other Pacific leaders a few days before the APEC leaders summit. If he had done that then the US will not act the way they did.

Kramer talked about O'Neill's divide and conquer tactic. He likened his domestic political maneuver to the way he courted China before the actual APEC summit. O'Neill used the state visit to make a profound statement that we will work with China to develop our country. Critics believe that this ignited a series of events that led to the 'no communique' issue.

Furthermore, the alternative government in a formal statement reiterated the 'China early state visit' reason. They said he was unable to get countries to reach a consensus because he played China against the US and its allies. They said we missed the opportunity to bring China and the US together to agree on a way forward for trade between countries.
   
O'Neill said most of the economies agreed with the full text and only a small number had alternative or additional views on a couple of sentences. Officials from China and the US clashed over whether the communique should include language which criticized Beijing's trade practices, as well as World Trade Organization.    

Minister Pato also made another interesting statement. He said conflicting visions for the region made it difficult to draft a summit communique. The US and China had competing ambitions for the region.

The China-US trade war is a really complex issue. O'Neill or any other leaders of APEC member economies will find it very difficult to bring both parties together to reconcile their trade differences. Only the leaders of both countries have the power to discuss in order to come to a compromise.

We are at a pivotal moment in our history where the rules and practices of the international system is changing because of China's rise. President Xi outlined China's development well in his speech in Port Moresby. China has changed miraculously in the last 4 decades.



Whether directly or indirectly as China grows it will influence change in the rules and practices of the international system. For so long, the US has enjoyed this position in world politics, and has created the current rules and practices. Hence, China has benefit from what the US and its allies have established.

We have a unique situation where a developing state in the international system has used the rules based system to foster economic growth and change. The rate of economic growth and change is historic in a short space of time causing the state to increase its material and non-material power capabilities.

President Xi's 'One Belt One Road' policy has opened a new chapter in our ancient book of international politics. The proposal to move around the world and help both developing and developed states with their infrastructural needs is widely debated.

Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews and Chinese ambassador to Australia Cheng Jingye finalized a memorandum of understanding which made Victoria the first and only Australian state to support President Xi's policy. This is in contrast to the Federal Government's stance. Earlier this year, the immigration and defence departments spoke against the policy by advising the former Turnbull Government not to join.

Fiji, Tonga and Vanuatu have joined PNG by signing up to the 'One Belt One Road' policy. These new developments confirm the statement made by Pato, and gives us a clear picture of what he refers to as 'conflicting visions'.

O'Neill's office made a valid point that the alternative government has no understanding of international politics and how APEC operates. Their statement was focused on point scoring in domestic politics which illustrated the logic of two-level games.

The debate has made it clear that both sides of the house need to throw bipartisan support behind the creation of a research center, or a research grant program for universities to help create a pool of PNG researchers and academics. These researchers and academics will help provide current and contextualized information to support foreign policy decision making.

Australia's Lowy Institute for International Policy, the Australian Institute of International Affairs, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute and university research centres are examples. We need to better inform the next generation of leaders about international politics if we want to see change.    

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

FPA: Organizational Process Model

-
This model centers on the fact that different bureaucracies have different standard operating procedures. These procedures are made in order to allow day to day operations to be carried out. Thus, a foreign policy decision is made based on these standard operating procedures. It is hard for a bureaucracy to make a decision or let alone function out of character or contrary to their standard operating procedure. The reading Chapter 4: Foreign policy shares a straight forward explanation of the OPM: "An alternative to the rational model of decision making is the organizational process model. In this model, foreign policy decision makers generally skip the labor-intensive process of identifying goals and alternative actions, relying instead for most decisions on standardized responses or standard operating procedures. For example, the U.S. State Department everyday receives more than a thousand reports or inquiries from its embassies around the world and sends out more than a ...
Read more

Commercial liberalism and the six norms

-
Image
Liberal internationalism is defined by Griffiths, O'Callaghan and Roach (2008, p.190) as a project to transform international relations so that they conform to models of peace, freedom, and prosperity allegedly enjoyed within constitutional liberal democracies. The same scholars go further by dividing liberalism into three distinct groups. They say these are the three ways to implement the project. The way they present liberal internationalism as a project makes their work interesting. Three distinct groups Firstly, commercial liberalism is about free trade between states. States bilaterally or multilaterally via a platform like APEC pursue the goal of trade liberalization. Griffiths, O'Callagahan and Roach (ibid.) argued that economic interdependence would decrease the likelihood of going to war. Republican liberalism is about democratic peace. The scholars argued that the spread of democracy among states so that governments will be accountable to their citizens makes it di...
Read more

Allison's rational actor model

-
There are 3 common models of foreign policy decision making according to Graham Allison: rational actor model organizational process mode government politics model.  We will discuss the 3 models and compare them with the 3 levels of analysis. However, I challenge you to use your own initiative to learn about the other models of decision making. This will help you as future decision makers or analysts to understand how decisions are made and the processes. When one wakes up from bed he or she decides whether or not to brush their teeth, comb their hair and have a shower. These decisions are paramount, they affect and influence how the individual interacts in a social setting. This highlights the fact that as human beings we make decisions every day. Decision making is defined as the thought process of selecting a logical choice from the available options. In the case of the ‘Kibung peles boy’ analogy; the male student had a choice of approaching the girl to ask he...
Read more