• Posted on 4 Jun 2025

By Michael Clarke

This article was published in International Politics. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-025-00696-8.

Abstract

Responding and adapting to China’s economic, strategic and political weight is a defining challenge for Australian national security and public policy, but how this came about remains contested. This paper provides a critical examination of the way in which the Hawke (1983–1991), Keating (1991–1996) and Howard (1996–2007) governments both conceived of the strategic challenges posed by a rising, authoritarian China, and framed their responses to it. It presents two arguments here. First, that the approach of these governments was consistent with neoclassical realist explanations of how secondary states often hedge in response to rising great powers through pursuit of ‘risk contingency’ strategies that simultaneously seek engagement and risk management vis-à-vis a potentially threatening or powerful state. Second, that this was a prudent approach under the structural conditions then prevailing in Australia’s strategic environment.

share_windows Read the article online here. (Access may require purchase or subscription).

Share

AUTHOR

Michael Clarke

Adjunct Associate Professor, Australia-China Relations Institute, UTS and Associate Professor, Deakin Centre for Future Defence and National Security, Deakin University

Recent research and opinion

News

Australia-China weekly brief: June 2026 issues

The Australia-China Weekly Brief by the Australia-China Relations Institute at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS:ACRI) tracks key developments in...

News

PERSPECTIVES | Hanson’s new rise reopens old questions for Chinese-Australians

This article appeared in UTS:ACRI's Perspectives on June 23 2026. Perspectives is the commentary series of the Australia-China Relations Institute at the...

News

The hidden Chinese history of Australia

share_windows This article appeared in The Australian's Culture on June 20 2026.

News

The risk of collaboration with China is smaller than the cost of curbing it

National security is not strengthened by making Australia smaller and less attractive to scientific talent, say James Laurenceson and Wanning Sun.