One of my greatest regrets is that I was living in Thailand (doing my PhD research) during Alexender Downer’s eight-month tenure as leader of the Liberal Party in Australia. Downer’s opposition leadership was a comical, bumbling, liberal stuff-up. And I missed it! My mother’s regular ration packs of Sydney Morning Herald front pages kept me in touch with events back home, but it wasn’t the same as bathing in the accident-prone leadership glow of the “idiot son of the Adelaide aristocracy” (to use Paul Keating’s classic phrase).
Downer, of course, went quietly. He handed the leadership over to John Howard and was rewarded by an 11-year stint as Foreign Minister. Now, finding himself once again on the opposition benches, Downer has decided that parliamentary representation is not for him. There is talk of a peace-making post with the UN.
But what was his impact in southeast Asia? What was his legacy in the region? To mark this mini-milestone in Australia’s political history let’s get some reflections from New Mandala readers on Lord Downer’s contribution to diplomacy and comedy in southeast Asia. Eye-witness accounts of Downer-diplomacy in action would be particularly appreciated.
7 responses so far ↓
1 Chris Fry // Jul 5, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Here we go again, the absurd provinciality of the Australian left.Have you really no more interesting subject matter than to call on readers to shit on Downer?Alexander Downer was in fact a perfectly competent Foreign Minister and well liked in South East Asia.Believe it or not his good manners (upper class credentials if you like) went down rather well with the Thais, Malaysians and Indonesians.What would you prefer - a beer swilling Ocker?Paul Keating’s schoolboy comment is hardly a “classic phrase” and simply betrays his own chippiness and boorishness, albeit with a fine intellect.I suspect Keating in his heart of hearts would dearly have loved to be a patrician, Caliban raging at his image in the mirror if you like.Incidentally a well educated English friend told me that to an Englishman Downer comes across as just another Australian and certainly not as upper class.Bottom line: - grow up.
2 Totila // Jul 5, 2008 at 10:10 pm
Nothing really interesting, but I was at a press conference he gave in the courtyard of the Hotel Turismo in Dili in August 1999 just before the elections there. If I remember, the “pro-integrasi” Indo press asked some odd questions, and the wire services some more interesting ones but Downer’s answers were nothing special, somewhat formulaic and not really revealing, at least not publicly. He, or his factotum (I forget), then announced there would be a separate meeting with drinks in an upstairs room but that non-Australians were excluded from that.
3 Grasshopper // Jul 6, 2008 at 12:49 am
Pale tourist Downer holidaying after the Tsunami:
ALEXANDER DOWNER: My impression is that the force of the waves was much greater than people imagine, and that clearly explains the large number of casualties - that it just crashed through, even breaking down concrete sea walls. It’s amazing how much strength the waves had.
Some more Downer pontification from June 2005??:
Our engagement with Asia today is plainly stronger than it ever was, although the dismal brigade, of course, refuse to recognise that fact.
For example, a former diplomat, Alison Broinowski, maintains that we are a culturally cringing, subservient ally of an imperious United States, which makes all of us targets wherever we are.
She also claims that our regional relationships have diminished in the Howard era.
‘Pulling off two presidential visits in a week has enabled Howard to claim another triumph. The truth however is that a gap yawns between the assuring self-image Australians are being offered and the way we are perceived in the region.’
Her evidence is thin, mostly derived from Australia-bashing journalists in English language Asian newspapers, and otherwise anecdotal.
Like many critics she fails to see, or perhaps cannot bear to recognise, the far-reaching and effective counter-terrorism cooperation between Australia and our regional partners which has served to prevent terror attacks and disrupt terror networks and has also underlined our shared security interests.
Or they choose to ignore that in the last year we have concluded two genuinely liberalising Free Trade Agreements with Singapore and Thailand, and have begun a joint study on a third with China.
On the cultural level, there are also more Asian students in Australia today than ever before.
The fact is, if they but cared to look, what they would see today are dynamic relationships between Australia and the other countries of the region.
Indeed if the sneerers looked hard enough they would see that we are not the only ones that do not define our interests exclusively in regional terms.
Therefore, the Downer Diplomacy success stories:
1) Combating terrorism regionally.
2) More Asian students.
3) FTAs with Singapore and Thailand
4) That if we look hard enough, we can see our relationship prospering.
Taking his 4th point seriously, wouldn’t those other 3 points have occurred if Downer was not there? Such dynamic leadership!
5) Australia does not define it’s success on regional terms. We have other terms that are not defined or public so we can always be successful.
6) We are not little Australia.
I apologize to everyone that I did not prevent my electorate from voting for him. However, I did steal and deface his election posters and I feel slightly better about that… although my actions probably prompted a lot of older people to vote for him who otherwise would not have had their common sense not been overruled by fear of youths.
4 Andrew Walker // Jul 6, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Thanks Chris Fry, I need to grow up! I will write out 200 times “I must not be childish when writing about Liberals from Adelaide, including Christopher Pyne.”
5 Stephen // Jul 7, 2008 at 12:58 pm
While not an Australian citizen, I was a resident there during Howard’s final term and got the opportunity to hear Michael Wesley from Griffith University present his (at the time) latest book The Howard Paradox: Australian Diplomacy in Asia 1996-2006 in which he argued that despite all expectations Australian Foreign Policy under Howard/Downer was not as disastrous as most had expected. He cited some items along the lines of Grasshoper’s points #s 1-3. He also noted that many Asians whose perspectives he surveyed still thought that the White Australia policy was still standing but that that this didn’t seem to actually cause any ripple to Australian foreign policy. It did seem at the time that he was using a narrow frame of Liberal Party values to assess the Howard/Downer foreign policy achievements. However, it may simply be that whether or not Downer did achieve anything depends on whether one shares Downer’s (Liberal Party) values and foreign policy aims.
6 Grasshopper // Jul 11, 2008 at 10:58 pm
From the SMH, not the mainland South East Asia massif, but southeast Asia nonetheless.
As he announced his retirement from Parliament yesterday, Downer said his greatest accomplishment was to bring freedom to the people of East Timor. And it was a signal achievement for Australia to act as midwife at the birth of an independent East Timor.
But the problem with this claim is that the big decision on East Timor was John Howard’s, not Alexander Downer’s. Indeed, all the really major foreign policy choices of the Howard years were Howard’s. This crimps Downer’s claim of ownership of Timorese independence, but it also helps exonerate him from blame for some of the worst decisions of the last government.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/peter-hartcher/vale-alexander-the-notsogreat/2008/07/03/1214950947565.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap2
7 Nicholas Farrelly // Jul 15, 2008 at 10:39 pm
Readers looking for another assessment of Downer’s years as Foreign Minister will find this fascinating piece, from the Lowy Institute’s Interpreter, merits a quick click.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Leave a Comment
Please note: New Mandala encourages vigorous debate but we reserve the right to reject or edit comments that contain material that is offensive, irrelevant, overly repetitious or involves personal attack rather than a discussion of the issues. And please avoid long quotes from other online sources - just provide the link!