Competition among countries to develop, deploy and govern the next generations of technologies is intensifying. The countries that prevail will secure economic, social, environmental, and military advantages for decades to come.
However, too many western countries continue to operate as if the superiority of our brand — our technologies and our governance models that prioritise democracy, human rights, and freedom — is self-evident. This is no longer the case; our brand needs a refresh.
Framing this as a contest between autocratic and democratic brands is easy, but lazy. It also passes the buck.
Our brand refresh is necessitated by our own deficiencies, and not just by China’s strengths.
China offers innovative technologies at a low cost, along with extras like training and tech support. In comparison, tech from Australia, the US and our like-minded countries are more expensive; extras are available but at a price.
The Chinese Communist Party actively harnesses technologies and regulation; both reinforce autocracy and legitimise surveillance. The party, state and economic development are the primary drivers. Control is prioritised.
In contrast, until recently, Australian and like-minded governments have been hands-off, letting the market lead. Technology, especially social media, has been used to erode democracy and polarise society. The subsequent ‘tech lash’ has government, regulators, tech companies, civil society and even allies at loggerheads. A perception of chaos increasingly reigns.
Cheap versus expensive. Economic development versus profit. Control versus chaos. Which would you choose and, more importantly, why does it matter?
When countries choose technology, they embed into their own societies the values and governance preferences of the company and country supplying it.
And, just like when an individual chooses Apple or Android, once a country aligns with one geostrategic technology brand, it can change, but it would be complicated and costly.
We urgently need to rebrand technology and democracy — to ensure our ‘brand’ continues to be the brand to which other countries aspire.
If countries migrate away from our brand — our technologies, and our governance model that prioritises democracy, human rights, and freedom — then our own geopolitical power and influence are further eroded.
Australian and like-minded leaders are beginning to recognise what is at stake.
Cooperation with technology and the laws, norms and standards that govern them has been prioritised in AUKUS, QUAD, the EU-US TTC, CHOGM, G7, and the OECD to just to name a few international forums.
It is an alphabet soup of good intentions.
Duplication and gaps both proliferate.
Momentum is building for a new like-minded initiative dedicated to technology and democracy to galvanise coordinated action (not just speeches).
Australia and the Albanese government are uniquely positioned to lead such an initiative.
Australia is slated to host the next QUAD leaders meeting in early 2023. With Biden already in town, Albanese has significant convening power.
Albanese should seize the opportunity to host a joint meeting of AUKUS, QUAD, and EU-US tech initiatives. France, Germany, Singapore, Korea, Finland, and Israel should also be invited, ensuring all major like-minded economies and tech innovators are at the table.
Such an initiative strongly aligns with the Albanese government’s foreign policy priorities — strengthen the US alliance; increase Australia’s power and influence in the Indo-Pacific, while bolstering multilateral engagement — and its domestic agenda — to build a better future, including through innovation, science, and skills.
Foreign minister Wong and industry minister Husic have the expertise and energy to command respect on these issues internationally.
No other country has an asset like assistant minister Watts, installed in the foreign affairs portfolio and with a deep understanding of the tech industry.
Likewise, no country can claim a cyber ambassador as well-respected and globally connected as Australia’s ambassador Feakin.
Senators Paterson and Shoebridge are actively engaged with these issues, opening the door for important bipartisan and crossbench support, another international rarity.
I’ve spent years negotiating breakthroughs in international cyber agreements, cutting my teeth at the ASEAN Regional Forum, then the United Nations. When Australia engages, we produce results.
Geopolitically, Australia carries less baggage than the US; comparatively, our democracy is in better shape and our tech industry more respected. We currently have more capacity than the EU, with its diplomatic efforts rightly focused on ending the war in Ukraine.
Inaction risks our brand becoming obsolete.
No other country has the platform, the reputation, and experts in position ready to galvanise action to refresh technology and democracy’s brand.
The prime minister should seize the initiative and act now.
:
Morrison’s secret ministerial powers saga plagued with ethical potholes
Any feedback or news tips? Here’s where to contact the relevant team.