In 'safe' hands

Just a couple of days after being sworn in as Australia's 31st Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese is there in Tokyo to attend the Quad summit. His articulations will be watched closely as the world is eager to get a glimpse of the new Labour government's outlook towards China with reference to the Western world — particularly the United States. Geopolitics apart, it will also be interesting to see whether Australia manages to take up the leadership role in tackling climate change globally and domestically — one of the core factors that led to the ouster of Scott Morrison. The Labour government has come to power after toppling the right-wing Liberal-National coalition led by former PM Scott Morrison, but it has received merely 31.2 per cent of the first preference votes — less than what it received in its losing bid in the 2019 elections. Notably, Australia has a preferential voting system. Albanese's successful bid this time around can partly be attributed to the large number of second or third preference votes he may have received. The prominent choices before Australian voters were — Liberal-Nationals led by Scott Morrison, the Labour party, Greens and the Teal Independents. Scott Morrison had come under heavy public criticism due to his laid-back approach to tackling climate change and ambiguous response to high-profile sexual misconduct allegations against his parliamentary colleagues. Morrison's losing grip was impressively grabbed by Teal Independents — a group comprising mainly women — clad in blue-green (teal). Their election campaign was financially supported by Climate 200 which backed candidates with a scientific vision for handling the climate crisis and gender imparity. Teal independents stunningly dislodged Liberal-Nationals from their home turfs — winning at least 10 seats. Teals were the major gainers of Scott Morrison's unpopularity but others too were contesting to acquire their share of votes in the new vacuum, including the Greens and Labour party. So, while the Teals lent a strong momentum for political change, sharing of first preference votes among the three progressive parties led to the right equation in favour of the Labour party as Coalition (Liberal-National) was kept at bay. This helps us understand the psyche of Australian voters and allows us to analyze where Anthony Albanese and his party stand in terms of delivering upon voters' aspirations. Crumbling under the plight of a steep economic downturn, high food inflation, low wage rates, and increasing instances of climatic disasters (including forest fires), the Australians appear to have voted for a transformative change. This lies in sharp contrast to Albanese's idea of "safe change" — which, in a way, denounces radical transformation. Like in the case of the United States where cautious Biden took over flamboyant Trump, it remains to be seen whether calculative Albanese will stand up to the expectations of the people at large? Now coming to the question of Australia's role in South Asia and the Indo-Pacific, the new dispensation's approach towards India and China will be critically important and decisive. Indo-Australian relations have marked a significant improvement over the past decade, particularly under the leadership of Scott Morrison. Will the change of guard in Australia have a negative impact on Indo-US relations? It is very less likely. Reasons are twofold — first, the relations between the two countries have been built purely on merit following a somewhat disjoint past; and second, the leader at the helm may have changed but those responsible for chalking out plans — the strong national security team — remain by and large the same. A particular reference to Foreign Minister Penny Wong can be made here. Widely acknowledged and regarded for his deftness, finesse and foreign policy credentials, Wong had been very instrumental in forging Indo-Australian ties. In the context of China as well, Anthony Albanese has very little scope for experimentation. Being a central part of the Quad grouping and further caught up in the AUKUS framework, there appears to be little left for the Australian government if it even wishes to deviate from the US' handholding and balance ties with China. Australia, however, has the option to parallelly engage with South Asian forces for addressing Chinese dominance. But, for the time being, AUKUS and Quad — with domineering influence from the US — have come to a point from which return will not be easy. The ambit of Albanese 'safe' change is highly limited.