Normal text size Larger text size Very large text size It was a sunny day in a Melbourne summer, perfect for lunch outdoors. John Garnaut and his wife, Tara Wilkinson, were in the city, without their kids for a bit, and spontaneously decided to eat at one of the restaurants in the city’s famous Federation Square. The former Beijing correspondent for The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald had gone to work for Malcolm Turnbull to write a classified report on the Chinese government’s covert interference in Australia. He had left government service with the satisfaction of having seen the parliament act on it, passing two new laws against covert foreign intrusion, and now worked as a consultant. But when they sat down at a table at the Chocolate Buddha, the couple found they couldn’t enjoy their lunch. Four people approached, separately, and hovered nearby, uncomfortably close. Men and women. They were conspicuous; it was not a very busy time at the Chocolate Buddha. They said nothing, but would stare at John and Tara until the couple turned to look at them, and then quickly look away. One even sat at the same table, but without ordering, until the waiter asked him to move. He then sat at the nearest corner of the next table. It was unnerving; a deliberate act of intimidation. John Garnaut. Credit:Alex Ellinghausen “How are you?” John asked one woman in Mandarin. She said nothing and abruptly left. But, oddly, she returned 10 minutes later wearing a different-coloured shirt. The group persisted even after John and Tara got up to leave, until Tara started to film them with her phone camera. One man was walking directly towards her until she produced the phone, at which point he immediately started walking sideways, crab-style, to avoid having his face recorded. It wasn’t the only act of harassment against Garnaut and his family, but it was a notably overt one. The message was plain: you have displeased the Chinese government and we are going to punish you. We can always find you, we know where you live, we can act with impunity in the middle of Australia’s biggest cities. We don’t care that you worked for a prime minister. We are not afraid of Australia’s authorities. It was January 24, 2019. The foreign influence laws had taken effect six weeks earlier. Their conduct didn’t mark them as professionals. But whoever tipped them off to Garnaut’s whereabouts probably was. Federal agencies were vexed about how to respond. John and Tara took their problem to Victoria Police. The couple sat down with three plainclothes investigators from the Organised Crime Unit at a cafe in Little Bourke Street in August. As Tara recounted some of her experiences, one of the police officers leaned forward and interrupted: “Do you realise the people behind you are filming us?” The stalkers had helpfully provided first-hand evidence to the police. An investigation into potential criminal stalking was under way at the time of writing.


The never-ending pursuit of power, the relentlessly expanding influence and paranoid nature of the Chinese Communist Party means that it will continue to press outwards unless and until it meets resistance. At home and abroad, it imposes one control after another until it is satisfied that it has total control. It is an ideology of authoritarianism animated by a psychology of totalitarianism. Espionage and foreign interference is insidious. Its effects might not present for decades and by that time, it’s too late. Duncan Lewis, former ASIO head The passage of Australia’s foreign interference laws did make something of a difference. But is it enough to protect our democracy? Perhaps the starting point is to ask what we’re protecting against. What does the Chinese Communist Party want from Australia? Duncan Lewis, who was not only the previous head of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) but also commander of Australia’s Special Forces, secretary of the Defence Department and Australia’s inaugural national security adviser, is especially well qualified to answer. “They are trying to place themselves in a position of advantage,” he told me in an interview shortly after retiring in September. Loading “Espionage and foreign interference is insidious. Its effects might not present for decades and by that time, it’s too late. You wake up one day and find decisions made in our country that are not in the interests of our country. Not only in politics but also in the community or in business. It takes over, basically, pulling the strings from offshore.” Note that, although Lewis was a longtime soldier, traditional military invasion does not feature in his answer. This is the modern way of intelligent statecraft, conquest and control without war. Another expert comes to the same conclusion from a very different lifetime of experience. Anson Chan, the former chief secretary of Hong Kong, occupied a position of trust unique in history. She was the last head of the Hong Kong civil service under the British and the first under the Chinese. She served four years under each, evidence that both powers trusted her impartiality and professionalism. The career civil servant is now 79.


“I don’t think Australians understand the sort of country they’re dealing with. Look at the way they are infiltrating, even in Australia,” she said during a visit to Melbourne in 2016. “Australia is a very open society, so it wouldn’t occur to most people the designs of the one-party state. And it wouldn’t have occurred to the people of Hong Kong until we experienced it first-hand. No one should be under any illusions about the objective of the Communist Party leadership: it’s long-term, systematic infiltration of social organisations, media and government. By the time China’s infiltration of Australia is readily apparent, it will be too late.” Chan stepped out of retirement to support the campaign to keep Hong Kong’s autonomy, as promised by Beijing under the Basic Law, which serves as Hong Kong’s de facto constitution. As a result, once trusted by Beijing to administer Hong Kong, she is now denounced in Party media as “an important pawn for anti-China forces in the West to meddle in Hong Kong affairs”. Loading Replay Replay video Play video Play video Paradoxically, perhaps, while China’s conduct outwardly seems offensive, from within it is designed to be defensive. “The Chinese Communist Party’s priority is to pre-empt all perceived threats to state security,” says Samantha Hoffman of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, an expert on China’s use of technology for social control, “which means the Party must not only protect its existing power, but also continuously expand its power outward in what feels like an attack to China’s targets”. The prominent New Zealand sinologist Anne-Marie Brady explains why this came about. From the very beginning of the People’s Republic in 1949, “influenced by China’s recent history and guided by Marxist-Leninism, the Chinese Communist Party stressed the importance of resolving the foreign presence in China, eradicating the harmful, taking what was useful and bringing it under Chinese control”. The system for doing this, its waishi system for managing the foreign world, “is a defensive tactic to control the threat of the impact of foreign society on the government’s political power”, says Brady. The system is “part of a cultural crisis, a conflicting inferiority/superiority crisis that Chinese society has faced since its earliest contacts with the technologically superior Western world in the 19th century”. To the outsider, it appears that today’s China is so mighty that it must have outgrown such timorousness. Yet the psychology and the policies of an impoverished and uncertain new republic of 70 years ago remain operative today. Controversial businessman Huang Xiangmo has been accused by ASIO of being a covert agent of Chinese government influence - and had his Australian permanent residency cancelled. Credit:Ryan Stuart The good news here is that the party’s intrusions are not intended to be malicious, but that’s little consolation because its intrusions are aggressive nonetheless. Further, it means its quest for perfect protection is both paranoid and never-ending. You cannot reassure a paranoid person that he or she is secure; nor can you reassure a paranoid political party-state that it is safe. Its systems and policies are structured to expand endlessly. Under this mindset, the greater China’s reach, the greater its ability to protect itself. So it must not stop reaching.


China’s President, Xi Jinping, has told his party that it must brace for a long ideological struggle. Early in his tenure he gave an internal party speech, not released until six years later, in which he said that “the eventual demise of capitalism and the ultimate victory of socialism must be a long historical process”. Regardless of how China seems to us – and it’s hard to think of today’s China as communist or even socialist in its economic principles – this is how it sees itself. Xi portrayed China as the challenger striving to defeat a stronger, more established West: “We must profoundly understand the self-regulating ability of capitalist society, fully appraise the objective reality of the long-term advantage of Western developed countries in the economic, scientific and military spheres and conscientiously prepare for all aspects of long-term co-operation and struggle between the two social systems.” He warned his party that it would not be “a walk in the park”. It was likely to continue long beyond the lifetime of anyone alive today. He quoted the former paramount leader Deng Xiaoping’s 1992 insistence that “consolidating and developing China’s socialism will take dozens of generations”. Loading Replay Replay video Play video Play video So how have the new foreign interference laws helped brace Australia for this mighty struggle? Apart from incurring Beijing’s displeasure and earning Australia a place in the Chinese government “freezer”, with a ban on high-level visits and a go-slow on Australian coal purchases, that is. The laws did tamp down some of the activity by the groups organised in Australia to do the work of the United Front Work Department, the Chinese government agency tasked with organising Chinese populations overseas covertly to serve its strategic interests. Some of the United Front community and cultural associations have become more circumspect about their connections to the Chinese government, removing references from their websites. They have become more cautious in the bellicosity of their statements of support for Chinese government policies. One of the larger United Front affiliates, the Australian Council for the Promotion of Peaceful Reunification of China, has become less active, as it’s seized by an internal split over just how overtly pro-Beijing it should be. And the laws have sobered some non-Chinese Australians. Labor’s former foreign affairs minister Bob Carr has left the Australia-China Relations Institute, which was set up at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS) in 2014 with a $1.8 million gift from billionaire Chinese businessman Huang Xiangmo, a man ASIO accused of being a covert agent of Chinese government influence. Huang personally recruited Carr for the post. Carr said the institute presented “a positive and optimistic” view of Australia’s relationship with China. Carr remains at UTS, now as an authority on climate change. Australia’s Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme requires that anyone doing the work of a foreign state must put their name on a public register. Huang was the benefactor to Sam Dastyari before the former Labor senator’s fall from grace over their relationship.


The public scrutiny of the purported affiliations of the new Liberal MP, Gladys Liu, who was elected at the May federal poll, also shows a new level of intensity. The media and the Labor opposition demanded to know about the various Chinese community associations listing her as a patron or member. She disavowed them, saying she wasn’t aware that they’d claimed her support. As uncomfortable as this was for Liu, it was an illustration of the heightened vigilance about potential covert foreign interference in Australian politics. Liu’s extraordinary success as a fundraiser – more than $1 million by her own account, before she’d even been elected to parliament – remains to be probed. Prime Minister Scott Morrison, in a desperate effort to protect his new MP, accused the opposition of racism. This is a favoured tactic of Beijing. Any scrutiny of Chinese activity is “racist”. Morrison should have resisted the urge to do Beijing’s work for it. Australia’s former race discrimination commissioner, Tim Soutphommasane, didn’t think it was racist to scrutinise Gladys Liu. “Questioning by Labor and the crossbench members of Parliament on this is legitimate and reasonable,” he said. Loading At the same time, the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) inquired into NSW Labor MP Ernest Wong, discovering uncomfortable allegations that he broke the law to conceal illegal donations from Huang Xiangmo. Morrison did not accuse the ICAC of racism in pursuing a Labor MP. The PM was wrong to put the exigency of a partisan urge to protect his MP ahead of the higher need to protect his country. “With these new laws, a democratic pushback has started,” says Feng Chongyi, an associate professor of China Studies at UTS. “It starts to change the incentive structure in Australian society, and in particular in the Chinese community in Australia.” How so? “Before, Communist patriots were taking benefit from both sides,” Feng explains. “They engaged with the United Front to carry out political tasks, and they not only reaped benefit from the Chinese government from doing that, they could also continue reaping benefit from Australian society and Australian government. “Simply because they are backed by Chinese authorities, and by extension the Chinese community, they develop great capacity for fundraising and can raise tens of thousands of dollars at lunches and dinners,” Feng says. “Their enhanced ability to raise funds then makes them valued by Australian

political parties. They command a lot of followers. They then enjoy high profiles and they enjoy the privilege of meeting leaders in Australian politics, on both sides.

Advertisement