Ironic and Rhetoric Policy In SEA and Asia †MyAssignmenthelp.com

Question: Discuss about the Ironic and Rhetoric Policy In SEA and Asia. Answer: Authors Thesis The author, based on historical studies and evidence, posits that Australia is geographically, and increasingly very much a part of Asia and South East Asia, but still remains culturally isolated and different from the region. Australia is practically integrated with Asia and South East Asia but remains culturally disintegrated and separate from the region. Points to Support the Authors Thesis That Australia feels and actually is, culturally isolated from Asia and South East Asia (SEA) can be traced to the very founding of the modern day Australia in 1770. Australians (the majority white population) are descendants of England, are are essentially Anglo-Celtics, and saw themselves as an outpost of the British Empire, from where they derived their identity and sense of belonging. However, they were faced with the challenge of being geographically isolated from Britain and the West, despite being culturally close to the West. The early Australians saw themselves as being in a region they did not identify with, and saw the surrounding Asians as being a threat to them, sentiments buttressed by a belief that the empty Tropical North Australia that was close to Asia would be invaded as it was sparsely populated by the white Australian majority. The Asians were viewed as potential invaders and a security threat to the culture and identity of Australia. And so policies were put in place to preserve a homogeneous white Australia and do everything to stop the adulteration of this homogeneity through restricted immigration of Asians. This was also driven by the belief that White Australia were racially and culturally superior to the Asians and so there was no need for cultural integration. The anxiety and fear of Asia was exemplified by the Japanese routing of Britain from its colonies in SEA and causing a fervor for independence by former smaller colonies,; this added another threat, the spread of Communism that Australia got involved in fighting (sending troops to Vietnam). Australias beliefs and efforts to maintain an identity with the West was shattered with the realities of trade and proximity; realizing that its economic growth and prosperity depended greatly on Asia and SEA (Walker Sobocinska, 2012); for instance, with Japan becoming its largest trading partner in 1967 (Kaur, 2014). The rapid growth of Asian and SEA economies made Australias own economic prosperity be dependent on Asia, and so the country as largely adopted a pragmatic approach to Asia, being an integral part of Asia through trade and bi lateral trade agreements, but remaining culturally isolated from the region and instead identifying with the West. My Thoughts Australia continues its ironic and rhetoric policy of full and integrated engagement with SEA and Asia, when in actual sense, she is only disguising her belief of not being a cultural part of the region; Australia is being diplomatic about what is brutally clear that she does not consider herself a part of the SEA and Asian region. In essence, Australia sees SEA and Asia as an important economic bloc, specifically a huge market for her products that is integral to her own economic prosperity. However, it is still culturally different from the region, and still considers herself as being Western, with her security and cultural identity proceeding from the West. While some events such as the Japanese invasion of SEA, the threat of Communism, and events in Indonesia have reason to make Australia apprehensive and anxious of the security threat of Asia, it behooves Australia to recognize that the world has changed and the continued perception of Asians as aliens with whom they cannot cul turally integrate, and are therefore only useful to her as a market (Korporaal, 2017)is retrogressive and only reinforces the racist underpinnings of Australias pragmatic foreign policy towards Asian and SEA and its peoples. I therefore agree with the author that Australia is in Asia but just for economic reasons while Asia is not in Australia References Kaur, I. (2014). The Oxford handbook of the economics of the Pacific Rim. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Korporaal, G. (2017, January 28). Relationships, Chinese students key to success in Asia. Retrieved September 7, 2017, from https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/financial- services/relationships-chinese-students-key-to-success-in-asia/news- story/1bfc82a0e63dfbcb323b03e0ed836ec0Walker, D., Sobocinska, A. (2012). Australia's Asia: From yellow peril to Asian century. Crawley, W.A: UWA Publishing.