This article was originally based on a speech given by former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser at a 2001 conference on the history of Liberal foreign policy at the Menzies Centre in London (Fraser 2005, p. 332). The title of the article and the context that it was given in suggests that it will provide a reflection on how the Liberal party has approached foreign policy. However, this is misleading in two ways. Firstly, it is questionable whether Fraser reflects the foreign policy ideals of the Liberal party. Secondly, the title suggests that the Liberal party was distinct in their foreign policy ideals yet Fraser contradicts this in the article. Although the title is misleading, it does not mean that the article is objective as there is still
…show more content…
In the article, Fraser criticises Australia’s close relationship with America by stating, ‘I had come to have doubts about the reliability of the United States as a long term strategic partner’ (2005, p. 333). However, both former Prime Ministers Menzies and Howard stressed the importance of the American alliance (Frydenberg 2014, p. 22). Menzies did this by establishing the ANZUS treaty and Howard through Australian military support of America in Iraq and Afghanistan (Frydenberg 2014, p. 22). Frydenberg, a Liberal political also highlights the importance of the alliance in the Liberal tradition (2014, p. 23). Therefore, when Fraser criticises this alliance, this limits the reliability of the article in reflecting Liberal foreign policy. To add to this Fraser’s pronouncements on foreign policy have often been criticised generally for not being in line with the Liberal party (2003, p. 33). Therefore, while the title suggests that the article is going to reflect Liberal party tradition on foreign policy, the accuracy of such an account is questionable given that the author may not reflect the views of the Liberal …show more content…
While such bias is not overt, it is achieved through omission of Labor achievements in foreign policy. For example, Fraser states that Liberal Prime Minister Holt ‘virtually ended the White Australia policy’ (2005, p. 335). This statement is problematic because under Holt, there was still discrimination in immigration policies. For example, while any European migrants could come to Australia, the only non-Europeans who could migrate had to be well qualified and of particular value to Australia (Tavan 2005, p. 421). Changes that did eradicate the White Australia policy occurred under Labor Prime Minister Whitlam particularly through the introduction of the Racial Discrimination Act which made it unlawful to discriminate based on race and and passing laws to allow all migrants access to citizenship in three years (Tavan 2005, p. 427). No mention of such Labor achievements were in the article. Therefore, while Fraser’s views in the article were not in line with the Liberal party, the article still shows some bias towards the Liberal party. Therefore, it cannot be relied upon as looking at Australian foreign policy from an objective
In the article, Fraser criticises Australia’s close relationship with America by stating, ‘I had come to have doubts about the reliability of the United States as a long term strategic partner’ (2005, p. 333). However, both former Prime Ministers Menzies and Howard stressed the importance of the American alliance (Frydenberg 2014, p. 22). Menzies did this by establishing the ANZUS treaty and Howard through Australian military support of America in Iraq and Afghanistan (Frydenberg 2014, p. 22). Frydenberg, a Liberal political also highlights the importance of the alliance in the Liberal tradition (2014, p. 23). Therefore, when Fraser criticises this alliance, this limits the reliability of the article in reflecting Liberal foreign policy. To add to this Fraser’s pronouncements on foreign policy have often been criticised generally for not being in line with the Liberal party (2003, p. 33). Therefore, while the title suggests that the article is going to reflect Liberal party tradition on foreign policy, the accuracy of such an account is questionable given that the author may not reflect the views of the Liberal …show more content…
While such bias is not overt, it is achieved through omission of Labor achievements in foreign policy. For example, Fraser states that Liberal Prime Minister Holt ‘virtually ended the White Australia policy’ (2005, p. 335). This statement is problematic because under Holt, there was still discrimination in immigration policies. For example, while any European migrants could come to Australia, the only non-Europeans who could migrate had to be well qualified and of particular value to Australia (Tavan 2005, p. 421). Changes that did eradicate the White Australia policy occurred under Labor Prime Minister Whitlam particularly through the introduction of the Racial Discrimination Act which made it unlawful to discriminate based on race and and passing laws to allow all migrants access to citizenship in three years (Tavan 2005, p. 427). No mention of such Labor achievements were in the article. Therefore, while Fraser’s views in the article were not in line with the Liberal party, the article still shows some bias towards the Liberal party. Therefore, it cannot be relied upon as looking at Australian foreign policy from an objective