We need a new plan A because ANZUS and AUKUS will never be the same

A week ago, we witnessed the spectacle of two vulgarians berating President Zelenskyy as he struggled in his third language to put the case for his country.

The White House meeting was the lowest point in a fortnight of fraught dealings between the Trump Administration and Europe - on top of Trump’s ramblings on Canada, Greenland, Panama and Gaza.

The Kremlin enjoyed it. The Chinese would have seen advantage in Western disunity and dysfunction. The Europeans are struggling to put NATO together again.

In Australia, there is support for some of the nativist, anti-woke aspects of Trumpism. However, there is no wellspring of respect for Trump the man - nor for what we know so far of his external policies.

If there is such a thing as an Australian perception of Trump’s external outlook, it is that his stated ambitions on Greenland and Canada are weird; his ideas on Gaza are cruel and unworkable; and that he is wrong on Ukraine given that Russia is the aggressor.

There is unease here about how Trump will handle China. Could he throw in the towel on Taiwan? Could he work towards a G2 relationship with China that would leave us in a Chinese sphere of influence? And could ANZUS go the same way as NATO?

Some in Australia take solace in bi-partisan American concerns about China and the anti-China badging of some in the Administration including Secretary of State Rubio and Secretary of Defence Hegseth.

A few Australians believe that America has a special place in its heart for Australia. Maybe, just a bit, because many Americans imagine we are like them. But then Americans generally like Canadians as well and look what’s happened to that bilateral relationship since Trump returned to power.

Some in this country argue that if America is free of Europe, it will be better able to focus on the Asia-Pacific. Or even that Russia could be persuaded to turn away from China. Want to bet?

But there is only a nascent awareness in Australia that it is time to reassess the nature of our relationship with the United States and where it fits within our wider national interest.

Since the Second World War our external policy has had three principal foci: our security relationship with the United States; our region; and the international machinery designed to help keep the peace and engender global prosperity.

There has been a disequilibrium in this outlook, particularly in the past decade. This is because we have placed too much emphasis on the ANZUS alliance - to which our fidelity has become an obligatory national mantra, the reflex of a frightened country - and too little on our other two priorities.

The efficacy of alliances depends on two things. A reciprocated interest in the security of the other party or parties; and a level of trust which is engendered both by experience and a measure of common values.

Trump has demonstrated that integrity and trustworthiness are not his strong points. Moreover, insecurity and hubris, both of which Trump has in abundance, are a combustible and dangerous mix in a political leader.

This means that despite the security structures we have in place and the bluster about mateship and the like, the alliance no longer has the same solder binding it.

What, then, do we do?

There is no easy answer. However, after the federal election, the winner should take a good hard look, involving the main agencies responsible for external policy, at what sort of world and region we want and how to go about it. This should not be a Plan B but rather a new Plan A - with the A standing for Australia and not ANZUS, let alone AUKUS. If this can be a bi-partisan endeavour, all the better.

A good starting point would be to consider what we want from the American alliance. Whatever our concerns about Trump, we need the American presence in the region to balance China. Moreover, while Trump’s win reflects the change in the way which Americans look at the world and is not just an unhappy interlude, it does not necessarily rule out a future partial reversion to American attitudes of yore.

We also need to consider how to build our own defence capability to include substantial self-sufficiency. At a regional level, we will need to figure out how to structure a major effort, possibly in conjunction with Japan, to help build the resilience of Southeast Asian and Pacific Island countries.

Australia has many friends both close by and further afield and we will have to work with them to save or restructure what is left of the international machinery that the Trump Administration seems keen to destroy.

All of this will require resources and imaginative, skilful diplomacy. We can only succeed if the political class makes clear that management of our external environment is as much a national priority as the economy, defence or social welfare.

Daunting, yes. But there is much at stake.

John McCarthy AO is Senior Adviser at Asialink and former Australian Ambassador to the US and several Asian countries.