Freddie: Hello and welcome! You’re watching Lockdown TV from Unheard. Throughout this pandemic we have been bringing you interesting and influential thinkers to help us understand what’s really going on in this world. Today we have a very special guest. Joining us from Australia is Malcolm Turnbull. And hello Malcolm! Can you hear me?

Malcolm Turnbull: Hello Freddie! I certainly can. I can hear you and see you.

Freddie: Very good! So Malcolm Turnbull was two times leader of the Australian Liberal Party, Prime Minister of Australia between 2015 and 2018. And his book “A Bigger Picture” is out. Now so lots we’d like to talk to you about. But let me start with something a little bit closer to our home. Yesterday we had the fourth consecutive day of protests. And in this case the University of Oxford was the center. And students there were demanding that a statue of Cecil Rhodes in one of the colleges must be taken down, and chanting:

“Rhodes must fall!”

So, you went to Oxford. You were actually a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford. Must Rhodes fall?

Malcolm Turnbull: Well I’m not a fan of tearing down statues. I can see that there are situations where you could reasonably relocate a statue. And, you know, replace it with one, a monument that is more relevant, or contemporary. But I think that everyone’s history has got plenty of heroes who, heroes and villains, and people who had both heroic and villainous aspects to their lives and work, but who were nonetheless very important figures. So, you know, statues and monuments are a form of propaganda. They’re a form of political speech at the time. But, you know, you can’t erase, you can tear down a statue, but you can’t tear down the history.

Freddie: What do you make of the “Black Lives Matter” movement more generally? It’s hit Australia as well.

Malcolm Turnbull: Yeah.

Freddie: There’s been wide-spread protests in Australia. And will you be “taking the knee”?

Malcolm Turnbull: Well I haven’t had the opportunity to “take the knee”. But I certainly support, you know, action being taken to eliminate discrimination on the basis of race. All my life I’ve stood up for and, you know, equality and mutual respect, equality before the law, a mutual respect for people of different races, religions, you know, ethnic backgrounds, and so forth.

I mean, Australia, far from perfect, nonetheless is in my view the most successful multicultural society in the world. And while there are plenty of people in politics and in the media who want to divide the country and turn one part of the country against another, I’ve always stood for mutual respect and the inclusiveness that is absolutely critical to maintain a successful multicultural society.

Freddie: Let me ask you about China, if I may. You are thought of as a kind of moderate liberal. Just so people who are viewing understand the Liberal Party in Australia is roughly equivalent to the Conservative Party in the UK. Now you are sort of in the moderate wing of that. But one issue that your thought of as kind of hawkish over, is China. And what is it that you’re most worried about? What’s the worst case scenario that we need to avoid?

Malcolm Turnbull: I don’t know where “hawkish” is the right term. I would say I’m very clear-eyed and pragmatic in terms of dealings with China. I’ve had a lot to do with China over the years, from doing mining deals. I set up the first Sino-Western mining project in China in the mid 90s. So I’ve had a lot to do in both business and in government, politics in China. You know, our son is married to a Chinese woman, so two of our four grandchildren called me “Yer Yer”. So, you know, and two of our four grandchildren are among the nearly one and a quarter million Australians of Chinese heritage. So China is, and Chinese people are family for Australia! And in the case of my family in a very literal sense!

[04:37]

But, the reality is that China, the government of China has changed it’s approach in recent years. It’s been very forceful in asserting it’s claimed rights in the South China Sea. It increasingly resorts to very bellicose rhetoric! We’ve seen examples of that recently, some very bullying rhetoric. And from our point of view, our simple proposition is we respect China and it’s sovereignty. And we expect China to respect ours. So we don’t want to see any country, including China, it doesn’t matter how big, or small they are frankly, interfering in our affairs. And as far as 5G is concerned, because we were the first government in the West to be very plain that we would not have what we called “high risk” vendors in our 5G system. Which in practical purposes meant Huawei and ZTE. The proposition is simply this. We’re not saying that Huawei is doing, is spying for China! We’re not making that assertion. At all!

However, the reality is that Huawei and ZTE, if they are required to, will have to support and basically do, whatever the Chinese intelligence services ask them to do. That is a given! I mean, anyone that denies that is honestly in la-la land! So that’s the reality.

So the question is, do you want to have such a key part of your technological landscape, one of the, probably the most important enabling technology in this whole internet of things, your 5G system. Do you want to have that in a situation where it could potentially be vulnerable and could be interfered with, or it could be interrupted, or disrupted in some way by a vendor who you know will be required to do the bidding of a foreign government? Which foreign government is increasingly, frequently, resorting to threats and bullying!

I mean, we’ve had now in two instances, in two years. The Chinese ambassador in Australia openly saying that he objects to things that Australian government is doing and that there will be adverse trade consequences! And then they say:

“How unreasonable of you to think that we would ever do something as mean as meddle with your telecom system!”

You’ve got to say:

“Well hang on, you’re using the language, you’re using bullying language!”

And you got to remember, Freddie, that a threat is the combination of “capability and intent”. Capability can take decades to put in place, or may never be able to be put in place. But intent can change and a heartbeat! So if you’ve got, you know, you’ve got to think very carefully about what capabilities you want to put into the hands of other parties. Particularly other nation states, which may not always be benignly disposed towards you.

Freddie: So we’ve had this in the UK as, you know. A big decision as to whether to allow Huawei into our 5G network. I know that you spoke to Teresa May, spoke to Sajid Javid. And you lobbied them quite hard to say no to Huawei. And then they went ahead anyway! Were you disappointed by that?

Malcolm Turnbull: Well I was surprised, frankly. Because all of the “Five Eyes” have got access to the same technical advice. But I think that was a trade off. I assume a political trade off. Assuming that they wanted to accept a certain amount of risk, rather than offending a potentially important economic partner. I think, if I may. Say so, I think we handled it the right way. Look, ultimately the British government’s got to make it’s own decisions, and it’s perfectly capable of doing. So but I think most people in the “Five Eyes”, Signals Intelligence world, would say that Australia has taken a more prudent approach.

Freddie: Although it looks like they’re coming around to your way of thinking. Since the coronavirus the pressure on the Prime Minister to reconsider the Huawei involvement has increased. And it looks like he is moving on it. And he’s even talking about this alliance of Western nations to develop our own 5G capability. Which I think is an idea you pitched?

Malcolm Turnbull: Yeah. Well, I mean, you’re right, Freddie. I mean, this is a argument I’ve been making for some time. I first made it in Washington, and in London in 2017, you know, that it is passing strange, you would say, that if you are a telco and you want to acquire 5G capabilities, you’ve currently got four vendors. Two of them are Chinese, Chinese companies, and therefore subject to direction, under Chinese law, from Chinese intelligence agencies. And the other two are Scandinavian, Nokia and Ericsson. Samsung is trying to develop those capabilities from South Korea.

But what is extraordinary is there wasn’t a British company, an American company, a Canadian company, an Australian company, and so forth. Or, you know, French, Japanese. So it’s the leadership on wireless has been lost by the Five Eyes nations, in an “absence of mind”, much as the British Empire was supposedly acquired.

Freddie: Do you think there’s any danger, or is it a likelihood, … People talk about us being in a new Cold War situation.

Malcolm Turnbull: Hmm.

Freddie: And with kind of America and China being these two big poles. Do you think there’s any chance of this “Cold War” heating up?

Malcolm Turnbull: . I don’t think any need for this confrontation to become any more intense. President Trump is dialing it up at the moment for electoral reasons, obviously. And to distract from his own failures with respect to the coronavirus. I mean, you can’t get around it, that the American experience is probably, is still the worst, is now the worst in the developed world. The UK being, I would think, a runner-up in that regard. And while there may well have been, you know, bureaucratic, administrative denial, even cover-ups in China, at the outset, the fact is that there are other countries which became aware of the virus at the same time as the United States did, that handled it much better! That’s a reality, right? That’s a political reality! It’s not a partisan comment at all!

So Trump got a vested interest in trying to point as much blame in China’s direction. He does take a very rather risible approach to China. He feels they’ve been cheating on trade, and espionage, and so forth. And while his arguments are often coated in a lot of rhetoric and exaggeration, they’re some strong points there. I mean, ideally the trade playing field between China and the United States should be level. You should have fair trade, as well as free trade. And that’s been one of the things the Americans have grappled with. But there’s certainly no justification for getting into hostilities!

And I frankly think the Chinese response, at the moment their so-called “wolf-warrior” diplomacy is completely counterproductive! I mean, while Trump is being erratic, and bellicose, and unsettling friends and foe alike, rather than China emulating that, they’d be better off being quite the reverse, wouldn’t they? You know, being consistent, and measured, and patient, and not overreacting, but under-reacting. I mean, the overreaction to the Australian Government’s call for there to be an independent inquiry into the virus and it’s origins and responses to it, is really that, … It was ludicrous!

Freddie: Hmm.

Malcolm Turnbull: I mean, that was one, someone in Beijing should have said:

“Look, maybe these guys are going along with Trump but, you know what? We’ll just let that one go through to the keeper — to use a cricketing metaphor — and we’ll just say; ‘Yep, we look forward to there being a full and open review by the World Health Organization.”

And not rise to the bait.

Freddie: Isn’t the reason we’re in this situation, with these heightened tensions, precisely, because politicians, such as yourself, felt that the world should operate on kind of pragmatic business principles. And there were sort of liberal conservatives around the world feeling the same. And that we should bring China into the world trading system, we should have open borders, and we should focus on international trade. And China would liberalize. All of that. And it’s sort of proven not to be the case. Isn’t there a naivety in thinking that the world can ever be so pragmatic?

Malcolm Turnbull: China’s growth has been a plus for everybody. There’s always tensions from the rising power, you know, this is the so-called “Thucydides Trap” that Graham Allison* popularized. But, as long as people keep their heads, and are respectful, and play by the rules, then you can avoid falling into that trap.

[* Allison, Graham, 2017, “Destined For War: Can America and China escape Thucydides’s Trap”]

[15:01]

The point that Thucydides makes in the first chapter of his history where he goes through all of the reasons the war started between Athens and Sparta. And the Corinthians are doing this, and the people in Kirker [sp] were doing that, and the people in Epidamnus were doing that. But then he says:

“Look, the real reason was that the Spartans were anxious about the rising power of Athens. And that’s what triggered the war.”

But the more pertinent book, is book five, where the Athenian ambassadors go to the little island of Melos, you know, the independent island of Melos, which says:

“We just want to stay neutral.”

And they have this great debate led by [word unclear] head of the Athenian ambassadors. And the Athenians finally lose their patience with the Melians, and they say:

“Look you can rattle on about justice as much as you like. But, you know, as well as we do, that in the real world justice is found only between equals in power. As for the rest, the strong do as they will and the weak suffer as they must!”

And that’s what we reject! So we reject that in Australia. And we reject it in the region, because we say:

“Might is not right!”

We demand that our sovereignty is respected, just as we respect others. And that’s ultimately what is that stake here. We have to ensure that the rule of law, the international rule of law, is maintained, and the strong are not able to do as they will.

Freddie: So you’ve been at the sort of hot center of some internecine struggles within the Right of Australian politics. Do you think there are lessons to be learned from that for conservatives in the UK and in the US? I mean, let me start with the UK.

Malcolm Turnbull: Yeah.

Freddie: There was one particular feature of your long-standing struggle with Tony Abbott — this was something you write about in your book — where he was overly dependent, so you thought, on a particular aide, the lady Peta Credlin, and lots of his colleagues wanted him to get rid of her, but he kept on to her. And that was actually part of his downfall. Clearly we have something a little bit similar going on with Boris Johnson and Dom Cummings. Do you read a parallel there? And are there warnings for Boris Johnson?

Malcolm Turnbull: Well, I mean, Abbott was, as I say, in the book, I’ve never known a person in a leadership role more dependent on another, as Abbot was with Credlin. I mean, he felt she had created him effectively as Prime Minister. And she certainly felt, believed, she had too. And it was a very odd relationship. Certainly the relationship between Boris, whom I do know, and Dominic Cummings, who I don’t, appears to be very close, … The episode with the drive to Castle Barnard, or Barnard Castle. And going for a drive to check your eyesight! I mean, that seems a pretty wild, [chuckling] I mean, that seems like a pretty wild thing to do! So it was a, … Yeah, well I mean, clearly, …

Freddie: What’s the warning? Do you think it’s a danger for any politician to be overly reliant on staffers?

Malcolm Turnbull: We all rely, in politics, everyone relies on their staff, on their advisors. You can’t, you know, the Prime Minister can’t just sort of get up in the morning and then single-handedly run the nation. So there’s, you know, it’s a team effort. But it is very important that the Prime Minister is not seen as being in effect under the dominion of another. Because then people say:

“Well hang on! We voted for him, not for the advisor!”

So I don’t know whether that’s how people are seeing Boris Johnson. But they certainly, [that’s] how they saw Abbott. They, people absolutely saw Credlin’s running the country! And that definitely undermined Abbott. So, I had very good advisors for over many years. Some of whom were with me for pretty much all the time I was in politics. But there was never any doubt as to who was making the final decisions. That, of course, was me.

Freddie: So the kind of currents in British politics, and Australian politics, are quite parallel, I think. You know, you have this kind of Liberal, Tory, kind of agenda which is very much sort of global, it’s business focused, it’s pragmatic.

Malcolm Turnbull: Hmm.

Freddie: Critics would call it “neoliberal”. And then there are these more nativist, more nationalist kind of elements. Which one is dominant, do you feel? And which one do you think Boris Johnson really belongs to, in his heart?

[20:00]

Malcolm Turnbull: Well, you know, the secrets of Boris Johnson’s heart are known, well I don’t know how many people they’re known to, but they’re certainly not known to me! But I would say he’s one of the less enigmatic political leaders, I would think would be fair to say.

Look! I mean, the reality is that, as I always say here, most people who claim in politics to be conservatives nowadays, wouldn’t know the difference between Edmund Burke* and Tony Burke! Tony Burke being a well-known Labour politician here. And a lot of people who are called “conservatives” are the absolute antithesis of conservative!

[* Edmund Burke was an Anglo-Irish statesman and philosopher. Born in Dublin, Burke served as a member of parliament between 1766 and 1794 in the House of Commons of Great Britain with the Whig Party after moving to London in 1750. Source: Wikipedia]

There is a lot of right-wing, nativist, populism, flying around! Which is radical in the sense that it does not respect established institutions, and certainly has no interest in the continuity of them. Now, you know, Trump is clearly not a conservative! Whatever he is, he’s not a conservative! That’s ludicrous to describe him as such! Boris, you’d be better able to draw a bead on him, than me. You know, the one thing you’ve got a hand to him, is that he is very thoughtful and well-read! He probably, you know, he probably flashes his classical studies, to a great effect. But I think he has a keen interest in British political philosophy. And, of course, within that conservative tradition in Britain, you’ve got a lot of scope!

If you look at the way, say Quintin Hogg described conservatism, in that great little book he wrote just after the Second World War, “The Case for Conservatism”, he talks about the practical patriotic aspects of British conservatism. Which, I think, Boris could quite legitimately place Brexit, and all that goes with it, within that tradition.

But ultimately what is most dangerous is when people who purport to be conservative start undermining and attacking the rule of law! You see it happening all the time in the United States! I mean, the attacks on the judiciary! And the sense that the arguments that the President is essentially unaccountable, all of these cases are going on in the courts. It’s quite a different environment. Of course, it’s important to remember just from a historical point of view, that the United States presidency was modeled on a British monarch, not on a British Prime Minister! In the days when the monarch actually, you know, had real executive power. So it’s a very different system.

I think in Australia, in the UK, we look at the US and we don’t fully appreciate how very different a political system it is. But. It’s one of the oldest democracies in the world, and that says a lot for it’s durability. But it’s really being put under stress at the moment, because of attacks on established institutions, putting established institutions under stress, and, of course, this point about division. This is the thing that Jim Mattis said about Donald Trump is absolutely fair comment! That he said in his lifetime he’s never known a President that has failed to seek to unite the country! But instead, for political reasons, is pursuing the politics of divide and conquer. That maybe successful electorally, but gee, you pay a very high price!

Freddie: You brought us to “The Donald”. So I’m afraid I have to ask you about that. You had a good relationship with him, apparently when you were Prime Minister. It was a pragmatic relationship. You described how you got on well. But then you call him a bully in your book. And from what you’re saying now, it sounds like you are not very positive about him.

Malcolm Turnbull: Well, I mean, Trump is a bully! Look Freddie, saying that Trump is a bully is like saying the Pope’s a Catholic! I mean, that isn’t a criticism, it’s an observation. I mean, he’s got a big, his modus operandi is that of a big, bullying, hard driving, tycoon! That’s how he’s operated. And he continues to do that in our office. You know, with supreme self-confidence, and it’s a type. And I’ve dealt with people like that before. Whether it’s Packer or, Jimmy Goldsmith, or Bob Maxwell. All of these characters, or many of them are in my book. And so yeah. I don’t think saying Donald Trump is bullying, is again, I think that is a penetrating glimpse of the obvious! And one that he would probably agree to, I think.

Freddie: Has your opinion of him changed? From those years to now?

Malcolm Turnbull: No, not at all. Look, I didn’t know Trump, I knew of him, and I knew plenty of people, we had plenty of friends in common, if you like. But I didn’t know him. I mean, like most people I thought that he would be changed by the office. That he would become institutionalized! The system would make him a more conventional President.

But, in fact, that expectation which I would say was almost universally held, certainly in the international community, was completely confounded. So, you know, he is the most idiosyncratic President in my lifetime! There’s really only one decision-maker in the White House, it’s him! The system has not reformed him, tamed him. He is the same guy that went in, I guess. Just a little older and he’s as determined as ever to do it in his own way. I’d say so, having said that in my dealings with him, I found him, in my dealings, to be practical, pragmatic, to listen, and to be thoughtful, right? And he was very businesslike in virtually all the dealings I had with him. And that’s a good thing.

But, do I agree with his policies? No! I mean, I think his policies on trade have been quite counterproductive, internationally. I think pulling America out of the Climate Treaty, the Paris Climate Treaty is a terrible mistake! Defunding the World Health Organization, even worse! I mean, part of the problem is, people will say, or they’ll think they’re criticizing Trump, by saying America has less influence in the world today, because of Donald Trump. That’s a fact! It does have less influence. But in large part it’s, because he wants to have less influence! You got to remember, Trump’s gigantic personality, it tends to overshadow everything! And including the fact that a lot of the views and positions that he represents, or speaks for, are ones that have been part of the American political landscape for a very long time.

I mean, he is very much in that isolationist, don’t tread on me, stay out of foreign entanglements tradition of American policy! He has essentially a dystopian view of the world. Whereas the (((neo-cons))) thought that they could make, you know, turn the Middle East into a democratic region, Trump looks at the Middle East and says:

“These guys have been trying to kill each other for hundreds, if not thousands of years! Nothing’s going to stop that! We’ve got a couple of vital interests we’re going to protect. One of which is the security of Israel. But beyond that, nation-building is naive!”

Right? Now, is that an entirely unreasonable point of view?

Freddie: So bearing in mind all of that, looking ahead to November, you see a reelection of Donald Trump in America?

Malcolm Turnbull: Well I think he easily could win, yeah. You know, he’s behind, and I can well understand why he’s behind. But whether Biden is going to be able to motivate enough people to get out and vote is the question. I mean, Trump has a very devoted base! And you see, this is the point, he has energized and mobilized a base, which is less than it used to be. And it was Trump who said, you know, that:

“He could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and still get reelected!”

The fundamental argument I think the Democrats will be making is that they will say:

“This is a referendum on Trump. You’ve got to get rid of him, this is the only way we can get rid of Trump.”

And they’ll say:

“Joe Biden is a safe pair of hands!”

And Trump will say, as he does:

“You need a tough guy to lead this country, in a tough world! We’ve got so many enemies! We’ve got internal dissent. We’ve got China. We’ve got the Europeans trying to rip us off! Everyone’s trying to rip us off! You need me, the strong man to defend you!”

Freddie: We’re nearly out of time!

Malcolm Turnbull: Okay.

Freddie: So let me leave you with a final question which is really, to sort of zoom out, and you’ve now left politics, you have no constituency anymore to worry about. Are you frightened about the future of the world? Do you see America weakened, China rising, there’s no firm international order? Do you worry for your children and grandchildren, what kind of future they’re growing into? How do you feel “big picture” about this?

Malcolm Turnbull: Well I don’t. I mean, I worry. But I’m not curled up in the corner, fretting about it. I mean, I think that the important, that there are important principles that if we stick with, we’ll be in good shape. We’ve got to respect the rule of law, both domestically and internationally. We’ve got to be absolutely, you know, we’ve got to reject racism and discrimination on the grounds of religion and other things. And speak out strongly against those who do try to create division.

And we have to reject the proposition that “might is right”. We have to do that domestically within our own societies, but also internationally. I think we’re in a position to do that. I think for middle powers, like Australia, and I mean, the UK is obviously a bigger country and a bigger power than Australia. But I guess we’re all middle powers, if we’re not super powers. What we’ve got to do is make sure that we work together! You’ve got to make sure that we have a common cause. And even though Britain stepping out of the EU, I think Britain should, I hope, will still be able to work very closely with the European Union on these big geopolitical issues, and continue to be a voice for the rule of law and for resisting bullies, wherever they may come from! From whatever direction they come from.

Freddie: Malcolm Turnbull! Thank you so much for your time! Some fascinating thoughts there. Thank you.

Malcolm Turnbull: Thanks freddie. Good to talk to you, and to see you.

Freddie: You’ve been watching Lockdown TV. That was Malcolm Turnbull, former Prime Minister of Australia, sharing his views on everything from Donald Trump to the rise of China. I hope you enjoyed it. We’ll be back tomorrow!

[33:19]

END

See Also

J-IDEA – Professor Neil Ferguson on the current 2019-nCoV coronavirus outbreak – Feb 6, 2020 — Transcript

UnHerd – Malcolm Turnbull – Don’t Count Trump Out – Jun 12, 2020 — Transcript

UnHerd – Why Lockdowns are the Wrong Policy – Swedish Expert Prof Johan Giesecke – Apr 17, 2020 — Transcript

UnHerd – Scott Atlas – I’m Disgusted and Dismayed – Oct 20, 2020 — Transcript

Ivor Cummins – Amazing Debate on Lockdown Ideology Versus Scientific Approach – Unmissable! – Oct 23, 2020 — Transcript

UnHerd – Prof Tim Spector – Hopes of a Vaccine Will Lead to More Lockdowns – Nov 11, 2020 — Transcript

============================================