Australia's top diplomat in the United States, Kim Beazley, has lashed United States Secretary of State John Kerry for being "preoccupied" with the Middle East and focusing too much on climate change – not geo-strategic issues – in Asia.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
And in an interview with Fairfax Media in Washington, the former Labor Party leader – who had his term as ambassador extended by the Abbott government in June this year – also criticised the Obama administration for failing to adequately explain the need to "pivot" or "rebalance"US strategic and military interests to Asia.
In a speech to the Australian parliament in November 2011, President Barack Obama announced the US "presence and mission in the Asia Pacific a top priority" while a deployment of US Marines to Darwin was also announced.
The Obama administration plans to deploy 60 per cent of its naval assets, up from 50 per cent, to the Pacific by 2020.
Mr Beazley said while Mr Kerry had travelled to Asia and south-east Asia "about the same number of times" as his predecessor Hillary Clinton, his focus had been on Middle Eastern affairs, including Iran and Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations.
"I think Kerry has a profound conviction about the Middle East and a profound conviction both that the US can settle the affairs and must settle the affairs of the Middle East. It's quite noble but it's very preoccupied. In Asia he has another preoccupation. That's climate change," he said.
"So the conversation in Asia tends to have a strong element of climate change incorporated within it, which does interest countries in the region but is not necessarily the focal point of their geo-strategic perspective, which is the conversation they want."
"You're not going to take away the conviction of this administration when it comes to the issue of climate change. This is part of their leitmotif."
But he drew a sharp contrast with Mrs Clinton who had been "in on the foundation" of the Asia rebalance, suggesting she was more engaged with it.
Mr Kerry had a "good knowledge of Asia and really wants to advance the agenda," the Australian ambassador said, but "it's the explanation" of the policy.
Mr Beazley said while the US was undertaking a "slow, steady brick-building of American presence" in the region, "the problem is the American explanation [for the strategic rebalance]. They do not – and this has been a source of constant complaint from me – in various aspects of the administration, they do not draw the essential links between what they are doing in the Middle East and what is happening Asia."
He said there was a direct link between the strategic interests of Asia and the Middle East and "we encourage the US to get it into their rhetoric ... Asia is 70 percent of the Middle East oil market, headed over the next decade to 90 per cent. They have a massive interest in the security of the sea lanes and the stability of the Persian Gulf in particular ... We point that out in discussions here".
The Brookings Institute's Richard Bush, a Washington-based policy expert on US-China relations, told Fairfax Media that while Mr Kerry was intellectually committed to the rebalance and believed in it, "he just hasn't had much time for it".
"He's invested intellectually. He doesn't invest a lot of time although he does show up when it's necessary to show up, but I don't think we've suffered because of that," he said.
"The Department of Defence and the US trade representatives are the ones who are more in the lead, and in a way that's appropriate because there is an important defence component, there is an important trade-and -investment and business component."
Lowy Institute international security director Rory Medcalf said Mr Beazley's assessment was a "message the Americans need to hear".
