What is the New Pact?
- Name: The “Pukpuk Treaty” (named after the PNG Pidgin word for “crocodile”) is a mutual defence treaty between Australia and Papua New Guinea (PNG).
- Core Commitments: If either country is subject to an armed attack, the other must consider assisting (“act together to meet the common danger”).
- Additional Provisions:
- Up to 10,000 Papua New Guineans to be allowed to serve in the Australian Defence Force under dual arrangements.
- Modernising PNG’s defence capability and closer cooperation on security, maritime, air, and land domains.
- The treaty includes clauses that neither country will engage in activities with third parties that “compromise the purposes of this treaty.” Observers see this as aimed at constraining external influence—implicitly, Chinese influence.
- Ratification Needed: The treaty has been signed but is pending approval by the parliaments of both Australia and Papua New Guinea.
- PNG’s Position: PNG’s Prime Minister James Marape has stressed sovereignty and indicated that while the treaty creates obligations, PNG may still choose not to participate in a conflict involving China. The decision rests with defence and constitutional processes.
Why the Pact Now?
- Chinese Influence in the Pacific: Australia and its allies are concerned by growing Chinese diplomatic, military, and security involvement in Pacific nations. The treaty is widely seen as part of Australia’s strategy to counterbalance that.
- Previous Chinese Pacts: For example, China signed a controversial security pact with the Solomon Islands in 2022, which raised fears among Australia and other Pacific nations about a possible military base and increased Chinese presence in that region.
China’s Reaction and Concerns
- Official Response: China has expressed concern that such treaties (“Pukpuk” or similar agreements) may be exclusive in nature or restrict relationships with third parties. Beijing has urged PNG to safeguard its sovereignty and avoid “targeting any third party or undermining its legitimate rights and interests.”
- Implications per China’s View: China seems wary about being isolated or seeing formal alliances in the region that could limit its security or diplomatic options. The Chinese embassy in PNG has made public statements to that effect.
Broader Context: Where CCP Influence Has Raised Global Concerns
To understand why many see the Pukpuk Treaty as part of a larger pattern, here are other recent examples of Chinese influence or actions that have generated concern internationally:
- Solomon Islands Security Pact
- China signed a security cooperation agreement with the Solomon Islands in 2022 involving law enforcement, security training, and other measures. Observers raised alarms that this could allow Chinese warships to dock, or give China a naval “foothold” in the Pacific.
- Concerns have also focused on secrecy in negotiations, and potential implications for regional stability.
- Surveillance and Internal Security Exports
- In the Solomon Islands, China has piloted its “Fengqiao” village surveillance model (fingerprinting, palm prints, community mapping) in partnership with local police. Critics see this as extending domestic-style surveillance into foreign jurisdictions.
- There are frequent concerns about transnational repression—targeting of dissidents, students, or critics abroad. A report from Freedom House found China leads globally in such incidents.
- Use of “Soft Power” and Aid Diplomacy
- China has used loans, infrastructure deals, diplomatic recognition switches (e.g. Taiwan), and development assistance to build influence. Some such agreements have been criticized for lack of transparency or for having security implications in addition to economic ones.
- Technological, Cyber, and Disinformation Concerns
- There are ongoing allegations (from intelligence agencies, think tanks, news reporting) of CCP-linked hacking, cyber espionage, disinformation campaigns targeting overseas audiences. For example, Australia’s spy agencies have warned of Chinese cyber operations. (While not all details are public.)
Risks, Trade-offs, and Critiques
- Sovereignty and Neutrality: PNG has made clear that it wants to preserve its sovereignty; entering alliances can put smaller states in difficult positions if great power tensions (e.g. China-US) escalate.
- Domestic Capacity vs. External Threats: PNG has many internal security challenges (tribal conflict, law enforcement, border control, maritime surveillance) which require resources. Critics argue that focusing too much on external defence threats may divert from those pressing domestic priorities.
- Risk of Escalation: Formal defence treaties can be seen by other states as provocative. There is risk that China or others may respond by increasing their own military, diplomatic, or economic presence. This can lead to tension rather than stability.
- Transparency and Accountability: One of the criticisms of many CCP-linked agreements has been lack of clear, open texts, limited public discussion, or hidden clauses. The Pukpuk Treaty is being scrutinized for how it addresses potential exclusivity or restrictions.
Implications Moving Forward
- Regional Security Architecture Strengthened: For Australia, this treaty formalises a defence commitment in its “near neighbourhood.” It sends a message to other Pacific Island nations about Australia’s role and willingness to commit strategic capital.
- Potential Deterrent: The treaty may deter aggressive moves, maritime encroachments, or pressure tactics by external powers, by making clear that PNG is not entirely isolated.
- Competition Intensifies: Expect China to respond with its own diplomatic, security, or infrastructure initiatives in the Pacific to maintain influence. We may see more training programs, loans, policing agreements, or visibility of Chinese assets.
- Domestic Debate in PNG: As ratification proceeds, there may be more public discussion and debate in PNG about what obligations the treaty entails, how much risk they assume, and whether the benefits outweigh risks.
- Influence on Other Pacific Nations: PNG’s move may encourage or pressure other Pacific nations to choose sides, or at least form clearer alignments. Some will seek similar treaties; others may double down on non-alignment or diversification of partners.
Conclusion
The Pukpuk Treaty between Australia and Papua New Guinea is a historic defence pact, marking a formal alliance in a region where much of the strategic contest is currently unspoken. While the treaty does not explicitly name China as an adversary, the timing, content (especially clauses about third parties), and broader geopolitical trends suggest it is part of a broader balancing act in response to growing Chinese influence in the Pacific.
The role of the CCP globally—in projecting influence, exporting surveillance models, intervening (directly or indirectly) in other countries’ internal affairs, and making strategic security treaties—adds pressure on regional powers to respond. Countries like Australia are recalibrating their approach to ensure they are not circumvented or outflanked.
