What do you think?
Rate this book
Quarterly Essay #101
Blind Spot: Southeast Asia and Australia's Future; Quarterly Essay 101
Australia has forgotten what keeps it safe. So argues Michael Wesley in this sharp and compelling essay about our place in the world.
Southeast Asia is the key to our national security and prosperity. If China dominates the region, as it plans to, Australia will be very vulnerable. So why are we following an American strategy that isolates and alienates us from our neighbours?
Wesley argues that the focus on AUKUS and sticking with Trump is a dangerous distraction. Whereas the United States has little at stake in Southeast Asia, Australia has everything to lose. How did our foreign policy elite become so wedded to the US worldview? What do our Southeast Asian neighbours have to tell us, if only we would listen? *The Crucible* is a gripping essay about strategic folly and the future of our region.
"It should be clear that Australia has made the wrong that relying on the US alliance to address the threat of a Chinese-centred Sphere of Deference on its northern doorstep has left it dangerously exposed and unprepared. If anything, Canberra's adherence to the US strategy has led to an increasing divergence of interests and perceptions between Australia and its neighbours. As a consequence, Australia is arguably at an all-time low in its ability to shape events and attitudes in Southeast Asia."—**Michael Wesley, *The Crucible***
Southeast Asia is the key to our national security and prosperity. If China dominates the region, as it plans to, Australia will be very vulnerable. So why are we following an American strategy that isolates and alienates us from our neighbours?
Wesley argues that the focus on AUKUS and sticking with Trump is a dangerous distraction. Whereas the United States has little at stake in Southeast Asia, Australia has everything to lose. How did our foreign policy elite become so wedded to the US worldview? What do our Southeast Asian neighbours have to tell us, if only we would listen? *The Crucible* is a gripping essay about strategic folly and the future of our region.
"It should be clear that Australia has made the wrong that relying on the US alliance to address the threat of a Chinese-centred Sphere of Deference on its northern doorstep has left it dangerously exposed and unprepared. If anything, Canberra's adherence to the US strategy has led to an increasing divergence of interests and perceptions between Australia and its neighbours. As a consequence, Australia is arguably at an all-time low in its ability to shape events and attitudes in Southeast Asia."—**Michael Wesley, *The Crucible***
126 pages, Paperback
Published March 16, 2026
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
April 21, 2026
This QE is so ‘okay yes … and what?‘. Wesley steps us through 3 rough stages 1. Characterising the actors, 2.
Describing how incredibly fucked Australia is and then 3. Providing solutions. 1-2 were half baked and 3 was pitiful. This is deserving of high 2, low 3.
Describing how incredibly fucked Australia is and then 3. Providing solutions. 1-2 were half baked and 3 was pitiful. This is deserving of high 2, low 3.
March 24, 2026
Ha ha ha - after slagging off 'The Quarterly' I might have to eat some humble pie - sort of... There are still common discursive threads in the essay - China is bad, America is worse, Australia is fucked. I wish that sometimes the essayists would appeal towards the common - all of us - instead of the elite. It is almost as if Wesley is writing for policy makers. Still it was intriguing if not scary. I wonder if China would ever block our pathways to success (literally). Most certainly this essay - confirms that Donald Trump has made life difficult for everyone (oil excluded!).
May 13, 2026
It's fine, but if you've read anything about Australia and its relationship with the Southeast Asia region before, then you're not really going to get much new here.
April 20, 2026
The start of the essay made me think that it was just a list of complaints. Noted heavily on the things that Australia has not completed or achieved in South East Asia. However, I feel as though relationships have been formed and economies work together as best as they can.
Yes, South East Asia is important, however other areas of the world were just as if not more important in the last 20 years. That doesn’t mean that Australia should stop diplomacy in the region, I would argue that they didn’t.
Fair assessment of China’s economical stranglehold on Asia generally.
I found that some of the points arguing for or against china seemed to be from a US perspective and maybe that is because of Australia’s alignment with the US. American actions are requiring Australia policies to shift, but those policies could not have only reacted mostly to those changes rather than being preemptive.
I liked the note about our own self-congratulation of “punching above our weight” because as much as I like the quote and hope Australia does, I don’t necessarily think Australia as a country or sections of the country do, despite saying it often enough.
In one part the author notes that we haven’t stood up to china well enough and in the next sentence notes Australia as plucky and little. So, what would you rather Australia do? Become another America?
4 threats
Cyber - the cyber centre releases some information but not all in order to combat other attacks and to not cause panic. So I would say we don’t need all the information.
Economic - it was argued in previous chapters the influences scale. But now it’s arguing against that scale…?
Military - spelt the base wrong and the military and taking steps to deter attacks and align with others to help the deterrence.
Shaping the south east - For this reason is why countries have created have and other forums to increase ties with other countries.
Michael argues for a whole of nation approach with development and defence together. Is that not the defence strategy and current plan? Saying we need to be more knowledgeable is fine, but that is not a physical thing to change things, it’s a nice to have.
I think our policy makers know the risk with aligning with the US and the effect it has on other countries. I don’t like the alignment either personally, but it is the unfortunate necessary evil.
Solutions:
Understand the scale - less defence, more diplomacy
Rethink the US alliance - say no sometimes
Understand Asia more - okay sure
Think more about likelihood and consequences - we already do this in my opinion
It’s not that I disagree with the solutions, it’s that I agree in parts but would argue we are already doing some of those things and/or implementing the solutions won’t have a major impact.
Like what policies would you suggest changing and how should we deal differently when it comes directly to china? Or keep the same policies and implement the small changes you mentioned?
Self reliance is fine, but not enough.
I think we are already working with our neighbours, but yes, maybe we can do more.
“Ideal outcome is for china to be present but not dominant.” I think that is impossible. You have to acknowledge and work alongside (not help) their dominance.
Overall, an interesting perspective and I agree that we should try and change our ways of viewing china in south east Asia. However, I disagree with some of the comments on the threats and solutions.
Yes, South East Asia is important, however other areas of the world were just as if not more important in the last 20 years. That doesn’t mean that Australia should stop diplomacy in the region, I would argue that they didn’t.
Fair assessment of China’s economical stranglehold on Asia generally.
I found that some of the points arguing for or against china seemed to be from a US perspective and maybe that is because of Australia’s alignment with the US. American actions are requiring Australia policies to shift, but those policies could not have only reacted mostly to those changes rather than being preemptive.
I liked the note about our own self-congratulation of “punching above our weight” because as much as I like the quote and hope Australia does, I don’t necessarily think Australia as a country or sections of the country do, despite saying it often enough.
In one part the author notes that we haven’t stood up to china well enough and in the next sentence notes Australia as plucky and little. So, what would you rather Australia do? Become another America?
4 threats
Cyber - the cyber centre releases some information but not all in order to combat other attacks and to not cause panic. So I would say we don’t need all the information.
Economic - it was argued in previous chapters the influences scale. But now it’s arguing against that scale…?
Military - spelt the base wrong and the military and taking steps to deter attacks and align with others to help the deterrence.
Shaping the south east - For this reason is why countries have created have and other forums to increase ties with other countries.
Michael argues for a whole of nation approach with development and defence together. Is that not the defence strategy and current plan? Saying we need to be more knowledgeable is fine, but that is not a physical thing to change things, it’s a nice to have.
I think our policy makers know the risk with aligning with the US and the effect it has on other countries. I don’t like the alignment either personally, but it is the unfortunate necessary evil.
Solutions:
Understand the scale - less defence, more diplomacy
Rethink the US alliance - say no sometimes
Understand Asia more - okay sure
Think more about likelihood and consequences - we already do this in my opinion
It’s not that I disagree with the solutions, it’s that I agree in parts but would argue we are already doing some of those things and/or implementing the solutions won’t have a major impact.
Like what policies would you suggest changing and how should we deal differently when it comes directly to china? Or keep the same policies and implement the small changes you mentioned?
Self reliance is fine, but not enough.
I think we are already working with our neighbours, but yes, maybe we can do more.
“Ideal outcome is for china to be present but not dominant.” I think that is impossible. You have to acknowledge and work alongside (not help) their dominance.
Overall, an interesting perspective and I agree that we should try and change our ways of viewing china in south east Asia. However, I disagree with some of the comments on the threats and solutions.
April 19, 2026
I gave up my subscription to the Australian Foreign Affairs journal because it was nearly always about China, America and AUKUS, and hardly ever about our Australia's relationships with anybody else. So I was pleased to see this latest issue of Quarterly Essay taking up the slack and focussing on our relationship with our Southeast Asian neighbours.
Some time ago, former Australian Prime Minister, Foreign Policy wonk and Sinophile Kevin Rudd PhD (Oxford) wrote a book called The Avoidable War about the imperative to avoid conflict with China. It was very long and I only read the first chapter before it went back to the library, but (I think) I grasped the thrust of his argument which was that Australian had the option to choose 'strategic trust' because China wasn't interested in conflict. Rudd's most recent book, On Xi Jinping, however, declares that he has changed his mind. Summarising its main arguments at Bitter Winter, Massimo Introvigne writes that Rudd now thinks that
On Xi Jinping is about 600 pages long, so I won't be reading that either. Suffice to say that I'm not entirely convinced that Australia should get involved in protecting Taiwan when the Chinese Taiwanese are themselves colonisers of the indigenous people there, and colonisers of the modern era at that.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/GhNMDV...
Whatever about that, Wesley's essay is a (much shorter) counter to this more recent view of protecting Taiwan militarily.
To read the rest of my review please visit https://anzlitlovers.com/2026/04/19/b...
Some time ago, former Australian Prime Minister, Foreign Policy wonk and Sinophile Kevin Rudd PhD (Oxford) wrote a book called The Avoidable War about the imperative to avoid conflict with China. It was very long and I only read the first chapter before it went back to the library, but (I think) I grasped the thrust of his argument which was that Australian had the option to choose 'strategic trust' because China wasn't interested in conflict. Rudd's most recent book, On Xi Jinping, however, declares that he has changed his mind. Summarising its main arguments at Bitter Winter, Massimo Introvigne writes that Rudd now thinks that
...the only way to protect Taiwan is military, that a 'strategic confusion' making China uncertain about how the West will react to military aggressions may be the best option in the near future, and that Xi Jinping no longer believes (if he ever did) that a major war should be avoided at all costs.
On Xi Jinping is about 600 pages long, so I won't be reading that either. Suffice to say that I'm not entirely convinced that Australia should get involved in protecting Taiwan when the Chinese Taiwanese are themselves colonisers of the indigenous people there, and colonisers of the modern era at that.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/GhNMDV...
Whatever about that, Wesley's essay is a (much shorter) counter to this more recent view of protecting Taiwan militarily.
To read the rest of my review please visit https://anzlitlovers.com/2026/04/19/b...
April 3, 2026
An interesting discussion about where Australia should be focusing it's attention in terms of defence and security, especially given America's decision to move on from being the protector of the wider South East Asia.
Michael Wesley explores the sphere of influence that matters most to Australia, why the US is really only interested in North Asia, and why Australia must get real and be prepared to invest and engage with south east asia to a degree that it hasn't done in the past...whatever happens post Trump.
Michael Wesley explores the sphere of influence that matters most to Australia, why the US is really only interested in North Asia, and why Australia must get real and be prepared to invest and engage with south east asia to a degree that it hasn't done in the past...whatever happens post Trump.
May 13, 2026
I’m sorry Michael Wesley, but you met me at a very Chinese time of my life.
May 13, 2026
An interesting viewpoint on Australia's relationship with our allies. The commentary that we should look more to Asia and be less reliant on the US is pertinent. A worthwhile read.
May 16, 2026
Disappointing. More summary than higher order analysis, this is not to the usual, exceptionally high standard of the QE.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews