"G'day, we're closed": Australia's offensive strategy towards COVID-19

Source: www.kells.com.au

In this week’s blog post, on the series on theories and concepts in International Relations, ‘Offensive Realism’ will be incorporated into my discussion. This topic I believe is very relevant within the current global setting due to COVID- 19, particularly with the closure of borders. I am going to take Australia as an example to show how ‘survival is the main goal’ for their nation. Offensive realism is the idea that states believe it makes good strategy for states to seek power to survive (Valeriano, 2009)– this power I believe Australia is implementing by its extreme border closure measures.

Since March, Australia has been closed to the rest of the world, with few being able to secure sufficient circumstances which allows them to enter, yet upon entry people have to pay extremely high rates for hotel quarantine – where they have been reports of poor treatment. Now why has Australia maintained this border closure? Yes, it is an island state and has to protect itself! Yet I believe it is an act of the government, aimed to obtain as much power as possible over its citizens. Preventing a person from leaving their own country surely breaches many rights! Through the use of offensive realism, 'States always seek power so that they may ensure their state’s security under conditions of anarchy in the international system', such power has been enforced through tight border security, Australia has ensured state security from 'conditions of anarchy', anarchy being the Coronavirus (Valeriano, 2009). Furthermore within offensive realism, states wish to alter the distribution of power ,the Australian government has been altering its distribution of power by closing state borders and international borders- such a force hasn’t been implemented as strictly in other countries with states, such as the United States, where cases of COVID-19 have been extremely higher than that of Australia. Thus, is it fair that Australia wish to ‘hide away’ from the rest of the world, when the rest of the world is in crisis? When the Foreign Minister was asked about such border closures, offensive realist techniques are mirrored, as minsters predicted and prescribed their motions regarding border closures- prediction and prescribing is a key offensive move in which offensive realists believe a key area- such means that this was always the plan to take place during a pandemic, such can be seen in the video below (Valeriano, 2009).

To me this seems like a deliberate offensive move in which only increases the power of their nation- by keeping the border closed, the Australian government have power over people's freedoms, trade, people stranded around the world and quite frankly the coronavirus itself. This is an ‘act of aggression’ to show the rest of the world that Australia has the power to remove itself from world problems and enforce its hegemony internationally (Synder,2006). Earlier comments by the Australian prime Minister about the UK 'cutting corners' with coronavirus vaccine testing again is in an offensive move, to make others weary about other states. Yes, it is remarkable that despite a pandemic going on Australia remain a nation that is back to pre-coronavirus living, yet such a lifestyle cannot be maintained, eventually this offensive strategy to deter a virus will have to be altered, if Australia wishes to be re united with the world. If survival is the main goal of the offensive strategy, it is clear that within offensive realism, the lives and wellbeing of a nation and its loved ones are neglected, in the pursuit of higher power and control within the world.