First of all, I fully understand what an olive branch is, and what it is meant to do... however, in order for any overture to be remotely considered an olive branch requires that the party initiating the overture to accept and adopt a position in which they show that they understand and are willing to consider the position of the other side. I don’t expect the PM to apologise publicly since they must save face, but that also doesn’t mean that they can maintain all of their initial positions that cause all the issues in their supposed olive branch official statement, that is not an olive branch but a fake statement designed to appear as if they are being objective and is the victim of unreasonable actions.
If China took this ‘olive branch’ as it were... then it is an admission in the public sphere that China was wrong and there was nothing wrong with Australia’s stance and actions, since nothing has changed. This also shows that there is no will in the Australian government to address any of the grievances. In this case it would instead diminish China negotiating position as, if they don’t accept whatever Australia proposes, then China will be seen as unreasonable by default. By not engaging Australia it shows that China still considers Australia’s stance and actions as unreasonable and will not compromise with Australia until such time that Australia recognises and accepts China’s issue with the Australian stance and actions.
It is not running foreign relations by fear when you are choosing not to engage with the other party whom by verbal and physical conduct is acting and maintaining a hostile and aggressive manner. The recent news of a possible deal with the Philippines is a prefect counterpoint to your statement. By adopting a position that shows they are willing to discuss the issue the Philippines have demonstrated that they are not acting in a hostile and aggressive manner therefore grievances on both sides can be discussed and a compromise can be reached.
Last edited:
