this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2025
36 points (95.0% liked)

Australia

4277 readers
158 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Archived

Something interesting is happening in how Australians think about their own country’s influence in the Pacific. According to the Lowy Institute’s 2025 poll, 39 per cent of Australians now see Australia as the most influential power in the Pacific Islands, a notable increase from last year’s result of 31 per cent.

Australia has overtaken China, previously seen by Australians as the dominant player, which holds steady at 34 per cent.

These figures suggest a shifting perception domestically, perhaps reflecting Canberra’s energetic “listening” diplomacy, through which Australia has ramped up diplomatic effort and significantly increased financial assistance to the Pacific over the past three years. Canberra’s approach of marrying generous aid packages with not-so-subtle diplomatic leverage on security matters appears to have resonated at home.

[...]

While Australia is undeniably the largest aid donor in the region, and uniquely maintains a diplomatic presence in every PIF member state, Beijing’s bare-faced influence-building is plain as day.

The China-Pacific Island countries Foreign Ministers’ meeting last month foreshadowed increased Chinese presence in security and policing, development, and stronger economic ties with those Pacific countries that recognise China over Taiwan. Beijing’s blend of visa-waivers, economic incentives, infrastructure financing, and diplomatic duchessing, ensures its presence is both felt and appreciated across island capitals.

In 2024, China registered 26 Coastguard vessels with the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, signalling a more assertive regional maritime presence. It is not clear how China intends to deploy its more than two-dozen vessels, but if the dynamics in the South China Sea are any indication, it will likely result in Chinese vessels harassing other countries, while protecting its own fishing fleet – widely understood as often responsible for illegal fishing in the Pacific Ocean.

[...]

To Canberra’s chagrin, plenty of Pacific countries are evidently happy to buy what China is selling, even while some countries including PNG and Fiji are aligning more closely to Australia’s worldview.

Therein lies the rub: while perceptions do matter, it is Pacific countries’ own strategic choices that will ultimately be the deciding factor in who has influence and how the regional balance of power is shaped for decades to come.

top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

As an Australian, I don't have a lot of faith in Australian's understanding of global politics generally.

[–] Salvo@aussie.zone 2 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Especially when it is published by the this "disgraceful propaganda campaign".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lowy_Institute

[–] Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

@Salvo@aussie.zone

How is a simple poll a "disgraceful propaganda campaign"? (And how gives your link proof of that?)

If not Australians, which people do you have more faith in?

@null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com

[–] Salvo@aussie.zone 2 points 7 hours ago

I was just quoting Jim Green, as per the Wikipedia entry for the Lowy Institute.

Some of their “polls” have been very biased, especially the recent one saying that Australians trust the NZ PM, even though no Australian has ever heard of him.

[–] shirro@aussie.zone 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Criticism of the Chinese government is sometimes warranted but the volume of posts from Hotznplotzn on the topic across the lemmyverse is massive and on a small instance with very low traffic the posts tend to overwhelm the discourse. I think it gives a very unbalanced view of Australian-Chinese relations and I wish it could be rate limited to fit the community as this sort of in your face proselytizing is a large part of the reason I don't use other social media.

[–] randomname@scribe.disroot.org 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Criticism of the Chinese government is sometimes warranted ...

How is it "criticism of the Chinese government" if Australians view their own country as the most influential power in the Pacific Islands?

Australians also think they are more influential than the U.S. according to the poll. Is it also criticism of the U.S. then? Should we rate limit such posts because they don't reflect Australian-U.S. relations, especially as there is much more criticism of the U.S. since the Florida man is at the helm?

[–] shirro@aussie.zone 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

The account posts a large volume of articles critical of China in some way and the angle doesnt have to be as obvious as Uyghur genocide or conflicts in the South China sea. It could be criticism.of deepseek or surveys of regional influence or whatever else comes up on their media filters as China related. You have to be aware of the volume of posts over time and not look at a single post.

I don't have a problem with criticism of China or the USA or any other government including Australia's. It is really a question of balance and volume of posts. It's either one hell of an obsession or an organised campaign to shape opinion.