November 17th marks the sticking point of six years of negotiations for both counterpart prime minsters, Scott Morrison and Yoshihide Suga, regarding the Reciprocal Access Agreement (RAA), upon which they seek to facilitate Japanese and Australian inter-operability and cooperation, via allowing mutual defence forces to train in each other’s territory. Prior to allying with Australia, Japan only signed one such deal in 1960 with its leading ally – the United States. Indeed, for Japan, Australia appears as a crucial player in the containment of China in the Indo-Pacific. Nonetheless, such a bilateral relationship does not prevent the potential of proliferation. The wide-ranging influence of the two nations could still hinder the region’s security and lift geopolitical tensions. 

Despite the various discourses of other actors in the region, Morrison assured that this landmark defence treaty was in line with “a significant evolution of the relationship between Canberra and Tokyo, but there’s no reason for that to cause any concern elsewhere in the region.” Still, Chinese state media has warned that Australia and Japan will “pay a corresponding price” on an extent to which the agreement could threaten China’s security. Furthermore, the state-run Global Times newspaper argued that the agreement “accelerates the confrontational atmosphere in the Asia-Pacific region” and was erected against China. However, Morrison insists that the RAA is “a key plank of Australia’s and Japan’s response to an increasingly challenging security environment in our region amid more uncertain strategic circumstances.” 

It is key to remind both parties to the agreement that they share fundamental values in democracy and rule of law. This provides a reliable pattern of cooperation to realize a free and open Indo-Pacific. In contrast, the leaders’ joint positions raised “serious concerns” about the militarization in the South China Sea and expressed a “strong opposition to any coercive or unilateral attempts to change the status quo and thereby increase tensions in the region.” In this way, China should invest further on multilateral mechanisms as well as maintaining regional stability and safeguard its territorial security. 

This diplomatic context comes amidst fresh calls issued by Australian ministers for dialogue with their Chinese counterparts to advance with the perspective to exit any simmering diplomatic dispute, which resulted in China to undertake a series of trade actions against Australian export sectors throughout the course of the year.

China’s fears in this context may stand invalid to the extent that Australia – a commonwealth country and important partner of the U.S., sharing the same ideology as western countries would not constitute a security threat. Instead, two days prior to the RAA agreement, it is key to note that fifteen Asia-Pacific nations sealed one of the biggest trade deals in history seeking to reduce barriers. An economic and trade cooperation could bring a step closer to reducing confrontation, and increase economic integration in the region. Suga and Morrison underlined their goodwill, “Trade should never be used as a tool to apply political pressure,” since such actions could undermine trust and prosperity. Indeed, sharing close values with Japan, Australia seeks to deepen the countries’ strategic and security relationship.