Albanese Navigates ‘Derangement Syndrome’ as Landmark PNG Defense Pact Takes Shape
Australia’s foreign policy landscape is increasingly defined not just by strategic shifts, but by the reactions – and misreactions – to them. As a former foreign correspondent, observing events unfold during the frist Trump administration, it became clear that perceptions frequently enough diverge sharply from reality, and that intense political animosity can cloud judgment. This dynamic is now playing out in Australia, with the recent saga surrounding the security treaty with Papua New Guinea – dubbed the “pukpuk” treaty, being pidgin for crocodile. Initial reports of a stalled deal sparked a wave of criticism,with some observers labeling the situation an “embarrassment” and speculating about Chinese interference or government incompetence.
“Anthony Albanese failed his own test: he has failed to plan for the risks in our region,” declared opposition defence spokesperson Angus Taylor and shadow foreign affairs colleague Michaelia Cash in a joint statement on October 6th. Former coalition foreign minister Alexander Downer echoed these concerns, suggesting Albanese ministers needed to prioritize “personal diplomacy” with Pacific leaders. One newspaper commentator went further, branding the setback a “complete humiliation” and part of a pattern of missteps during the prime minister’s recent trip to the US and UK.
However, these assessments proved premature. The PNG deal has now been secured, with James Marape, Papua New Guinea’s Prime Minister, scheduled to travel to Australia early next week for a formal signing ceremony.The delay wasn’t due to Australian failings, but rather to logistical challenges within the PNG cabinet, as some members were celebrating the country’s 50th year of independence outside of Port Moresby.
Far from a setback,the “pukpuk” treaty represents a potential watershed moment for Australia’s regional security strategy. Approved by the PNG cabinet on Friday, it marks Australia’s first significant alliance in over 70 years, joining existing partnerships with New Zealand and the United States. Strategically, the agreement is crucial for preventing China from gaining a foothold in PNG’s internal security apparatus, bolstering Australia’s influence and perhaps paving the way for similar agreements with other Pacific nations.
The treaty envisions a considerably increased level of military cooperation, with up to 10,000 Papua New Guineans potentially serving in the Australian Defence Force under “dual arrangements.” While challenges remain in fully integrating the two forces, the agreement aligns with Australia’s 2023 Strategic defence Review, which prioritizes a “strategy of denial” against potential adversaries in the region.
This episode highlights a broader trend: Albanese’s consistent, if understated, approach to foreign policy. As the prime minister prepares to meet with Donald Trump in the White House on October 20th, the “pukpuk” treaty will serve as a exhibition of Australia’s proactive engagement in the region, independent of US leadership – a dynamic that aligns with Trump’s own preferences.
The situation also mirrors a pattern observed with previous Australian leaders.Just as “Obama Derangement Syndrome” and “Trump Derangement Syndrome” became shorthand for intense, frequently enough irrational, opposition, a similar phenomenon – “Albanese Derangement Syndrome” – appears to be taking root. As Fareed Zakaria noted in 2018, such “derangement” impairs judgment, leading critics to automatically reject policies simply as they originate from a disliked leader. This tendency, as seen with past leaders like Scott Morrison and John Howard, risks obscuring genuine progress and strategic gains.
Albanese’s foreign policy isn’t without its complexities. Critics point to the need to balance relationships with both China and the United States, and the challenges of securing favorable trade terms with the US while maintaining adequate defence spending. Trump remains an unpredictable factor, capable of disrupting even the most carefully laid plans. Though, both leaders are likely to remain in power until 2028, creating a shared interest in finding common ground.
As Zakaria wisely observed, a policy pursued by a disliked leader shouldn’t automatically be deemed wrong or dangerous. This advice is particularly relevant for those scrutinizing the Albanese government’s approach to foreign policy. The “pukpuk” treaty, and the broader strategic vision it represents, may well prove to be a defining achievement of the Albanese era.
