China Targets Australia with Economic Coercion and Diplomatic Pressure

"Do Australians see themselves as part of the Asia‑Pacific family?" wrote Chinese Ambassador Liu Jinsong in an op‑ed carried in The Australian, directly addressing Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Australian delegation ahead of APEC and a visit to Beijing.

Chinese Ambassador Liu Jinsong's instruction to Australia

The op‑ed did not read like a neutral analysis; it read like a set of instructions. According to the source, Ambassador Liu posed questions about Australia’s place in the region and then answered them by urging closer engagement with what he framed as a China‑led Asia‑Pacific. Liu cited President Xi Jinping and argued Australia should “concentrat[e] on promoting economic growth and improving people’s lives,” urging “further open[ing]” to cooperation with China on frontier technologies and clean energy. He warned that “the relationship is at a crossroads – pressure to fall back on one side, momentum to move forward on the other.”

Framing APEC as a China‑led ‘Asia‑Pacific’ and avoiding the ‘Indo‑Pacific’ label

The op‑ed repeatedly conflated the Asia‑Pacific with a China‑shaped regional architecture, the source notes, and “studiously avoided” the term “Indo‑Pacific.” The piece also downplayed APEC’s geographic and political diversity: the source lists APEC members on the Pacific’s eastern littoral — the United States, Canada, Mexico, Peru and Chile — whose interests the ambassador’s framing effectively sidelined. The central message, as reported, was that Australia “thrives through its engagement with an economically vibrant and China‑led East Asia.”

Economic carrots and technological cooperation: AI, biotechnology and clean energy

Liu foregrounded economic incentives as the lever for influence. He urged Australia to focus on livelihoods and growth and to expand “frontier cooperation with China in artificial intelligence, biotechnology and clean energy.” The op‑ed presented those partnerships as the practical route to prosperity and as an alternative to strategic alignments the source frames as threatening to economic well‑being.

Parallel messaging: Global Times, Peter Drysdale, and China Daily on AUKUS and the Australia–US alliance

The source documents coordinated echoing of Liu’s argument across Chinese state and state‑adjacent media. The Global Times published an op‑ed by Australian economist Peter Drysdale titled “APEC offers major multilateral platform to take China–Australia ties to next stage,” while China Daily ran an editorial on 5 November that referenced the publication of the so‑called Independent AUKUS Public Inquiry Report. China Daily concluded that the AUKUS agreement “runs counter to Australia’s national interests,” adding that “staggering costs divert resources away from essential public needs” and that “dependent military arrangements will only compromise Australia’s strategic autonomy and increase the country’s security risks.” Liu’s op‑ed, the source argues, repeats the same theme behind a veneer of economic argument.

How the Australian government, Australian economists, and allied policymakers are positioned

• The Australian government (and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese): The op‑ed was framed as direct guidance to the government’s APEC delegation and its subsequent visit to Beijing, urging choices that align with China’s conception of regional order rather than with alliances with outside partners.
• Australian economists and business leaders (exemplified by Peter Drysdale): The messaging emphasises economic opportunity — trade, growth and cooperation on AI, biotech and clean energy — offering a palette of incentives aimed at domestic constituencies focused on livelihoods.
• Allied policymakers and the United States: The source describes the op‑ed and companion editorials as part of a sustained effort to divide Australia from the US and to oppose AUKUS and the Australia–US alliance, framing alliance cooperation as the source of “pressure to fall back.”

The source traces these tactics back at least to a 2013 Australia–China Forum in Canberra, where a Chinese delegation led by Li Zhaoxing criticised Australia’s comments on China’s air‑defence identification zone and blamed “unwarranted intrusion” on Australia’s close alliance with the US. It also quotes Jason Van der Schyff describing China’s long‑term preference for “vassals” rather than partners and cites a historical precedent for economic coercion when Australia criticised China over Covid‑19 in 2020, which, the source says, preceded Chinese trade restrictions.

Even the op‑ed’s messenger is part of the message. The source records that Liu “has been anxious to publicly telegraph China’s policies and intentions,” noting that “from his day of arrival in Australia in August, when he posed at Sydney airport with two prominent united front figures, Liu has been anxious to publicly telegraph China’s policies and intentions.” The source further quotes former US ambassador to China James Lilley: “China telegraphs its punches.”

Whether Canberra will follow the economic path Liu prescribes, resist the political pressure he describes, or try to balance both remains the practical question the source leaves foremost. The op‑ed and companion editorials make plain the objective: shape Australia’s choices on trade, technology and security to align with China’s regional vision — and to do so by combining economic enticement with pointed critique of alliance ties.

Original article