Foreign Minister Penny Wong went to Beijing to meet with her Chinese counterpart Wang Yi to mark the 50th anniversary of Gough Whitlam’s visit to Beijing.

That the Albanese government chose that particular week to mark the anniversary, and in such spectacular fashion, highlights the Albanese government’s propensity to politicise an area of government policy which should be bipartisan.

By virtually ignoring the Chinese Embassy’s function in Canberra celebrating the 50th anniversary of Chinese-Australian diplomatic relations, held over two weeks prior, and choosing rather to celebrate (admittedly in a much more impressive location) both the anniversary and Gough Whitlam’s historic trip to Beijing, brings kudos not only to the longevity of Australia’s diplomatic relations with China, but also Labor’s former Prime Minister.

However, under the Albanese Labor government, Australia is becoming increasingly enmeshed in the tangle of acronyms that tie us closer and closer to American policy in the Pacific.

This is not to say America, Australia, and Japan are wrong to be concerned about China’s increasing belligerence in Southeast Asia… When the Prime Minister of Finland recently visited, it was not difficult to see similarities between Finland’s position on the map and ours. We both worry about a large, relatively close, aggressor. Unlike Finland, we do not share a 1,300-kilometre land border with our large aggressor, but we are dangerously positioned and a very long way from our natural allies.

New Zealand may be nice and close, but fond of them as we are, it’s hard to see a lot of help coming from that direction. Perhaps New Zealand could play the role of the French resistance to our United Kingdom, but only if the Chinese choose to come that way…

New Zealand has worked hard to ‘stay on the fence’ in Pacific matters, whilst Australia is increasingly putting all its eggs into one basket. The US Coordinator for Indo-Pacific Affairs in the National Security Council, Kurt Campbell, made a worrying observation: ‘We have them (us) locked in now for the next 40 years.’

There are many ways that a US-China war could begin, but the two most obvious scenarios are those which will resemble the events that leading up to either the first or second world wars. No doubt there will be many turnings, many efforts, and many mistakes contributing to conflict, but most of those turnings, efforts, and mistakes will come from either China or America.

If the final straw it is to be China’s mistake, possibly an invasion of Taiwan, then the events leading up to a US-China war will resemble the second world war. If it is a mistake made by America, with the regime likely falling into the Thucydides Trap, then events will resemble the opening of the first world war.

In much the same way America, Nato, and Europe were right to respond to the Russian Federation’s invasion of Ukraine, we will be right to respond if China invades Taiwan – but if the critical error is American in origin, Australia will find itself in following its ally into an avoidable war. We can do little to influence American foreign policy, but we could do more to nuance our own.

Take for example Elly Lawson’s attendance at the Chinese embassy’s function celebrating the 50th anniversary of Chinese-Australian diplomatic relations.

Perhaps some background is necessary.

There was a similar celebration marking the 50th anniversary of Chinese-New Zealand diplomatic relations held at the Chinese embassy in Wellington. At this celebration, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China was proud to note the attendance of New Zealand Foreign Minister Hon Nanaia Mahuta, Deputy Speaker of Parliament Hon Greg O’Connor, Deputy Chair of Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee of Parliament Hon Gerry Brownlee, and nearly 300 other guests including government officials and other ‘prominent figures’.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China did not specifically note Elly Lawson’s attendance at the Australian function in Canberra, although it is likely they did note exactly where the Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong and Defence Minister Richard Marles were when their function was held.

Rather than attend the Chinese embassy’s function, Foreign Minister Penny Wong and Defence Minister Richard Marles were in Washington DC for the annual diplomatic and defence talks. In Washington, the key topic was (oddly) not a celebration of 50 years of diplomatic relations with China, given President Nixon’s visit 50 years ago which America too could have celebrated, rather, the key topic was Australia’s acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines. There was a further deepening of Australia’s entanglement with American forces when the US Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin pledged the US ‘will not allow’ a capability gap to appear between Australia’s Collins class sub retirement, planned for the end of 2030s, and the deployment of its first nuclear-powered attack submarines. Reassuring in one way, worrying in another.

Even after this took place, there was still a chance either the Foreign Minister or the Defence Minister might make it to Canberra for the Chinese Embassy’s function, but neither did. Instead, both went to Tokyo where they furthered the likelihood of Japan joining Aukus.

If we are increasingly aligning ourselves with America, what happens if American policy takes a turn towards isolationism? We know from history, and most recently after four years of the Trump Presidency, there is no guarantee of consistency when it comes to US foreign policy. Perhaps it would have been better for us if our government could have come up with a slightly more illustrious guest list to attend the celebration of 50 years of diplomatic relations at the Chinese Embassy rather than leaving it up to the acting deputy secretary for the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Elly Lawson, to represent the Australian government…