The Turnbull consultants have made the best wording to describe Australia's answer to Nauru's key value in Australia, namely media freedoms. Then there is the question: why the extremely sensitive attitude to Nauru's provoking move to stop a member of local radio from reporting on a supranational incident that attracts members from 18 islands in the Caribbean?
To put it simply, Australia is committed to one of the smallest and poorest islands in the planet, whose economies would break down without Australia's subsidies. Australia's angry asylum-seeker policies - not to speak of the fate of the government itself - are the hostages of an asylum-seeker prison on Nauru.
Nauru's assistance of AU$25.9 million in 2018-19 is equivalent to one third of GDP. That is the nasty detail that prevents an Aussie administration from summoning a beggar state representative on an item that should not even be the object of discussion. Aside from Canberra's reluctance as a Pacific metropolis force to stand its ground among its islander, its reaction to Nauru provocation is feeble.
The work of more or less supportive of the government's overall refugees policies in its present state would not be much different, although Foreign Minister Penny Wong expressed "disappointment" rather than "regret" in Nauru's ruling. Backstage stalking - or in the nearby water - is another problem that hinders Australia's reaction to the Nauru attack.
That is the increased apprehension about China's rapid trip to the Far East. The Canberra is pressing against Beijing's efforts to make itself popular with the islands of the Pacifier. It has become a great worry of Australiaʼ external policies, and one that leads to spending tens of billions of dollars to prevent Chinaʼs growing clout.
One example of this is the provision of AU$ 136 million for an underwater power line between the Solomon Islands, Papua New Guinea and Australia. Another issue in all this: Why did Naurua's leaders make such an exemption from the ABC? It is relatively simple and has much less to do with the criticisms of the station's reporting on asylum-seeker affairs than with the supposed Nauruan corrupt practices.
Supported by leaking e-mails, ABC in 2015 provided extensive reports of alleged illegal settlements by an Aussie firm engaged in phosphates trading with celebrities from the Nauruan people. Naurua's business and civil servants, among them President Baron Waqa, have both rejected the reproach. Nauru's stubborn reluctance to issue a $8,000 non-refundable entry permit to a journalist is another example of the burden of reporting on the state.
Nauru said so in a declaration published on-line that explains why ABC was jammed by the Pacific Islands Forum: We should point out that no Australian Broadcasting Corporation agent will receive a Nauru entry permit because this organization appears to interfere in Nauru's internal affairs before the 2016 elections, harasses and disrespects our Australian President, makes erroneous and defaming assertions against members of our administration and continues to report biasedly and falsely on our state.
The ABC then exercised its right to "independent coverage of our region". The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade described the Isle of Nauru in its "country letter" as "one of the smallest sovereign states in the world". The Nauruan authorities have wasted this right of birth through bribery and mismanagement. Nauru would perish without the support of the GOA if there were no help from other resources, in other words, including Beijing.
Urging this time period on his consequence to Naurus' nonallowance to allow the ABC to bedclothes the Pacific Islands Forum, Turnbull same this: