Australia faces credibility crisis over stance on US
Australia's support for the United States' military strikes against Iran has fueled skepticism both at home and abroad about its commitment to the rules-based international order it has long advocated. It also raises questions about whether Australia can still credibly claim the role of a neutral and responsible middle power, experts said.
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said on Tuesday that Australia will deploy a long-range reconnaissance aircraft and provide air-to-air missiles to help countries in the Gulf region defend against potential Iranian attacks.
He said the Royal Australian Air Force will send an E-7A Wedgetail surveillance aircraft and supporting personnel for the next four weeks to "protect and secure airspace above the Gulf" and support the region's "collective self-defense", he said in a news conference.
Australia will also send advanced medium-range air-to-air missiles to the United Arab Emirates, he said, following a phone call with UAE President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan.
At the outbreak of the US-Iran conflict on Feb 28, Australia was among the first countries to express support for the US military action against Iran.
According to a statement on the website of Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong, Australia supports "the United States acting to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to prevent Iran continuing to threaten international peace and security".
The statement sparked concern among some Australian government officials, who privately questioned why the government was quick to endorse strikes that may have violated international law, said a report from The Guardian.
The report also noted that revelations of the angst among the Labor Party members of the parliament come as the party's grassroots antiwar group, Labor Against War, plans to circulate a motion to some branches, condemning the US and Israel's attacks on Iran as an "illegal act of aggression against a sovereign nation".
Clare Armstrong, chief digital political correspondent at the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, said in a report that Australia plays an uncomfortable and important role as a middle power. When opinions differ, Australia "has been reluctant to draw the ire of" the US or to risk conflict with it, she said.
Chen Hong, director of the East China Normal University's Australian Studies Center, said that Australia's stance on the US-Iran conflict illustrates the structural contradictions embedded in its middle-power strategy. He highlighted the tensions between alliance commitments and its advocacy of a rules-based international order.
Australia's political elite has consistently stressed the country's identity and responsibilities as a "middle power", aiming to project an independent and rational international image while defending global order and norms. In practice, however, it has frequently remained silent or sided with the US on key issues, he told China Daily.
"This gap between rhetoric and action has left Australia's diplomatic posture increasingly contradictory and uncomfortable," Chen said.
For decades, Australia has operated under a characteristic strategic structure: security reliance on the US alongside economic dependence on Asian markets. During the Cold War, this arrangement maintained a certain degree of equilibrium. Yet as the US has increasingly embraced bloc confrontation, this inherent contradiction has continued to intensify, he said.
Excessive reliance warned
From AUKUS and intelligence-sharing frameworks to military base arrangements and regional security narratives, Australia has become deeply integrated into the US strategic system across nearly all critical security domains, Chen said.
Some Australian scholars and former political figures warn that excessive reliance on the US may entangle Australia in geopolitical conflicts that do not serve its interests, while weakening its credibility and reputation in regional affairs, he said.
The Lowy Institute, a Sydney-based think tank, has recently issued a report, saying that Australia's Iran reflex tests its credibility among its Southeast Asian neighbors.
"If Australian leaders want to sustain trust in Southeast Asia, the country's anchor cannot be the shifting temperament in Washington. It must instead be the habits Australia claims as its own — discipline in favoring rules, careful framing, and a visible preference for de-escalation and process," the report said.
Daryl Guppy, an international financial technical analyst and a former national board member of the Australia China Business Council, said that Canberra's policy space as a "middle power" has been steadily eroded, ultimately leaving only a symbolic diplomatic label.
"Australia appears willfully blind to the gap between its belief that it occupies the moral high ground in defending the global rules-based order and the reality of its policy practice. Its silence on what many view as breaches of that order by Israel and the US has not gone unnoticed in the region, particularly by countries such as Malaysia and Indonesia, where public opinion is strongly shaped by significant Muslim populations," he said.
While Australia presents itself as an active and responsible middle power, its support for US strategic objectives sits uneasily with its professed commitment to a consistent application of the global rules-based order, Guppy added.
To overcome its current constraints and assume a more independent and constructive role as a "middle power", Australia should maintain moral integrity and better balance economic cooperation with security priorities, he said.
liujianqiao@chinadaily.com.cn




























