Australian Strategic Policy Institute: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

Line 75:

ASPI's inaugural director was [[Hugh White (strategist)|Hugh White]], who served as director from 2001 to 2004. White was [[Defence Strategic Policy and Intelligence Group#Deputy Secretaries|Deputy Secretary for Strategy and Intelligence]] at the Australian Department of Defence between 1995 and 2000, and previously worked for the [[Office of National Assessments]] and as an adviser to Prime Minister [[Bob Hawke]] and Defence Minister [[Kim Beazley]]. White is [[Emeritus Professor]] of Strategic Studies at the [[Australian National University]].{{citation needed|date=July 2020}}

White was succeeded by [[Peter Abigail|Major General (retired) Peter Abigail]] in April 2005. In February 2012, the Minister for Defence [[Stephen Smith (Australian politician)|Stephen Smith]] announced the appointment of [[Peter Jennings (Australia)|Peter Jennings]] PSM as ASPI's new Executive Director, effective in May 2012.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Smith|first1=Stephen|title=Minister for Defence|url=http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2012/02/01/minister-for-defence-new-executive-director-for-the-australian-strategic-policy-institute/|accessurl-datestatus=29 June 2012dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120510044548/http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2012/02/01/minister-for-defence-new-executive-director-for-the-australian-strategic-policy-institute/|archive-date=10 May 2012|urlaccess-statusdate=dead29 June 2012}}</ref> Jennings assumed the role of Executive Director in May 2012. Jennings "has worked at senior levels in the [[Australian Public Service]] on defence and national security. Career highlights include being Deputy Secretary for Strategy in the Defence Department (2009-12); [[Chief of Staff]] to the Minister for Defence (1996-98) and Senior Advisor for Strategic Policy to the Prime Minister (2002-03)".<ref>{{cite web|title=Peter Jennings|url=https://www.aspi.org.au/bio/peter-jennings|website=Australian Strategic Policy Institute|accessurl-datestatus=9 January 2019live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190109155412/https://www.aspi.org.au/bio/peter-jennings|archive-date=9 January 2019|urlaccess-statusdate=live9 January 2019|website=Australian Strategic Policy Institute}}</ref>▼

White was succeeded by [[Peter Abigail|Major General (retired) Peter Abigail]] in April 2005. Abigail is a former senior [[Australian Army]] officer whose positions included [[Deputy Chief of Army]] (1998–2000) and [[Land Commander Australia]] (2000–2002). Abigail served as Executive Director of ASPI until 2012.{{citation needed|date=July 2020}}

In September 2021, the Australian government announced that it would fund the establishment of an ASPI office in [[Washington, D.C.]] at a cost of $5 million for the first two years.<ref>{{cite news |title=Establishing an ASPI Office in Washington DC |url=https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/minister/peter-dutton/media-releases/establishing-aspi-office-washington-dc |access-date=21 September 2021 |work=www.minister.defence.gov.au |date=17 September 2021 |language=en}}</ref>

==Current leadership==

▲In February 2012, the Minister for Defence [[Stephen Smith (Australian politician)|Stephen Smith]] announced the appointment of [[Peter Jennings (Australia)|Peter Jennings]] PSM as ASPI's new Executive Director.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Smith|first1=Stephen|title=Minister for Defence|url=http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2012/02/01/minister-for-defence-new-executive-director-for-the-australian-strategic-policy-institute/|access-date=29 June 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120510044548/http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2012/02/01/minister-for-defence-new-executive-director-for-the-australian-strategic-policy-institute/|archive-date=10 May 2012|url-status=dead}}</ref> Jennings assumed the role of Executive Director in May 2012. Jennings "has worked at senior levels in the [[Australian Public Service]] on defence and national security. Career highlights include being Deputy Secretary for Strategy in the Defence Department (2009-12); [[Chief of Staff]] to the Minister for Defence (1996-98) and Senior Advisor for Strategic Policy to the Prime Minister (2002-03)".<ref>{{cite web|title=Peter Jennings|url=https://www.aspi.org.au/bio/peter-jennings|website=Australian Strategic Policy Institute|access-date=9 January 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190109155412/https://www.aspi.org.au/bio/peter-jennings|archive-date=9 January 2019|url-status=live}}</ref>

==Funding==

ASPI was established by the Australian Government in 2001 as a company limited by guarantee under the [[Corporations Act 2001|2001 Corporations Act]].<ref>{{cite web|title=Company Constitution|url=https://www.aspi.org.au/about-aspi/company-constitution|website=Australian Strategic Policy Institute|access-date=22 April 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160407201427/https://aspi.org.au/about-aspi/company-constitution|archive-date=7 April 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref> At the time it was 100% funded by the Australian Department of Defence, but this had fallen to 43% in the 2018-19 financial year. It is currently funded by the Australian government, the [[United States]] [[United States Department of State|State Department]], the Embassy of Japan and the [[Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in Australia]], and by military contractors including [[Lockheed Martin]], [[BAE Systems]], [[Northrop Grumman]], [[Thales Group]], and [[Raytheon Technologies]].

<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Australian Strategic Policy Institute |title=Annual Report 2018-19 |journal=Annual Report |date=2019 |publisher=Australian Strategic Policy Institute |location=Canberra |pages=18–21 |url=https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/ad-aspi/2019-10/ASPI%20AR_18_19_acc.pdf?KUIH5L_aiOUu4hm96FaCXmN2cqEv5Do8= |issn=2651-8694 |access-date=29 March 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200429075536/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/ad-aspi/2019-10/ASPI%20AR_18_19_acc.pdf?KUIH5L_aiOUu4hm96FaCXmN2cqEv5Do8= |archive-date=29 April 2020 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=AFR />.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Sponsors|url=https://www.aspi.org.au/sponsors|access-date=11 September 2020|website=www.aspi.org.au|language=en|archive-date=11 September 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200911020707/https://www.aspi.org.au/sponsors|url-status=live}}</ref>

==Publications==

ASPI regularly publishes a range of different publications. ASPI currently publishes three different kinds of reports: ''Strategies'', ''Strategic Insights'', and ''Special Repor''t.

*Strategies

*Strategic Insights

*Special Report

ASPI also publishes ''The Strategist'', a daily analysis and commentary site. ''The Strategist'' aims to "provide fresh ideas on Australia's critical defence and strategic policy choices as well as encourage and facilitate discussion and debate among the strategy community and Australian public".<ref>{{cite web|title=About, The Strategist|url=http://www.aspistrategist.org.au/about-the-strategist/|website=Australian Strategic Policy Institute|access-date=22 April 2016|archive-date=18 September 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200918024221/https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/about-the-strategist/|url-status=live}}</ref>

==Positions==

ASPI has advocated for the procurement of the [[Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider]] by Australia.<ref name="Diplomat 2021">{{cite web|last1=Abrams|first1=A. B.|title=Why Provide Nuclear Submarines to Australia, But Not South Korea or Japan?|url=https://thediplomat.com/2021/09/why-provide-nuclear-submarines-to-australia-but-not-south-korea-or-japan/|access-date=22 September 2021|website=thediplomat.com|publisher=The Diplomat}}</ref>

==Reception==

ASPI has been described in the ''[[Australian Financial Review]]'', iTnews and the[[The IT News websiteDiplomat]] as being one of Australia's most influential national security policy think tanks.<ref name="AFR" /><ref name=dtasocialcredit>{{cite web |title=DTA attacks China-style social credit claims about Govpass digital identity? |url=https://www.itnews.com.au/news/dta-attacks-china-style-social-credit-claims-about-govpass-digital-identity-514154 |website=ITNews.com |author=Julian Bajkowski |access-date=24 September 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191205141501/https://www.itnews.com.au/news/dta-attacks-china-style-social-credit-claims-about-govpass-digital-identity-514154 |archive-date=5 December 2019 |url-status=live }}</ref> [[The Diplomat]] referred to ASPI as Australia's "most influential think tank.”<ref name="Diplomat 2021" /> Its work has been described as "impressive" by the ''Australian Financial Review''<ref name=AFR/> and "groundbreaking" by the American ''[[National Review]]'' magazine.<ref>{{cite news |last1=QUINN |first1=JIMMY |title=China vs. the Australian Strategic Policy Institute |url=https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/china-vs-the-australian-strategic-policy-institute/ |publisher=national review |date=24 June 2020 |access-date=9 July 2020 |archive-date=28 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200628080918/https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/china-vs-the-australian-strategic-policy-institute/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

In February 2020, [[Australian Labor Party]] Senator [[Kim Carr]] described the ASPI as "hawks intent on fighting a new cold war" and criticised it for accepting what he said was nearly $450,000 from the US State Department to track Chinese government research collaborations with Australian universities. Former Foreign Minister and former Premier of New South Wales [[Bob Carr]] has said the ASPI provides a "one-sided, pro-American view of the world". The ASPI has also been criticised by [[John Menadue]] and [[Geoff Raby]] for treating China as an enemy.<ref name=AFR>{{cite news |last1=Robin |first1=Myr |title=The think tank behind Australia's changing view of China |url=https://www.afr.com/policy/foreign-affairs/the-think-tank-behind-australia-s-changing-view-of-china-20200131-p53wgp |access-date=17 February 2020 |work=Australian Financial Review |date=15 February 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200217095749/https://www.afr.com/policy/foreign-affairs/the-think-tank-behind-australia-s-changing-view-of-china-20200131-p53wgp |archive-date=17 February 2020 |url-status=live }}</ref> ASPI replied that it "doesn’t have an editorial line on China, but we have a very clear method for how we go about our research," and claimed that the true amount of Sate Department funding was less than half that amount stated by Carr.<ref name="ASPI">{{cite web |title=ASPI's China research: the big picture |url=https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/aspis-china-research-the-big-picture/ |publisher=ASPI |access-date=3 March 2020 |archive-date=26 March 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200326234230/https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/aspis-china-research-the-big-picture/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Duckett |first1=Chris |title=Tech giants push back on forced Uyghur labour claims |url=https://www.zdnet.com/article/tech-giants-push-back-on-forced-uyghur-labour-claims/ |publisher=ZDNET |quote=The think tank has drawn criticism from the likes of Labor Party factional warrior and former minister Kim Carr. "[ASPI] berates Australian researchers for collaborating with Chinese partners but ignores the fact that some of its own sponsors do the same," Carr said last month. Defending the organisation, director of the International Cyber Policy Centre at ASPI, Fergus Hanson, said there is no editorial line on China in the reports it produces. "Of course, ASPI has no monopoly on the ability to trawl through CCP policy documents and statements to unearth new insights and shed light on the party's stated plans for China and the rest of the world. It's just that so few others in Australia and elsewhere invest significant time to do so," he wrote on Tuesday. |access-date=9 July 2020 |archive-date=1 July 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200701211233/https://www.zdnet.com/article/tech-giants-push-back-on-forced-uyghur-labour-claims/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

In October 2018, the Australian [[Digital Transformation Agency]] criticised an ASPI report on the Australian Government's [[digital identity]] program. The Agency stated that the report "was inaccurate and contained many factual errors", which "demonstrate a clear misunderstanding of how the digital identity system is intended to work".<ref name="dtasocialcredit" /> The author of the report responded to the criticism, saying his concerns were acknowledged in private despite being publicly rejected by the agency.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Hendry |first1=Justin |title=ASPI's Hanson claims DTA misled on digital ID concerns |url=https://www.itnews.com.au/news/aspis-hanson-claims-dta-misled-on-digital-id-concerns-529197 |agency=ITNEWS |date=8 August 2019 |access-date=9 July 2020 |archive-date=10 July 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200710203547/https://www.itnews.com.au/news/aspis-hanson-claims-dta-misled-on-digital-id-concerns-529197 |url-status=live }}</ref>{{clarify|reason=What concerns, acknowledged by whom, rejected by whom?|date=December 2020}}

In June 2020, ASPI was criticised by [[Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China|Chinese Foreign Ministry]] spokesman, [[Zhao Lijian]] for claiming that the [[Government of China|Chinese government]] was behind a spike in [[Cyberattack|cyber attacks]] against the [[Australian Government|Australian government]] and Australian businesses.<ref name=abcdeny>{{Cite web|date=19 June 2020|title=China denies being behind cyber attack on Australia|url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-19/china-responds-to-accusation-of-australia-cyber-attack/12375324|access-date=19 June 2020|website=www.abc.net.au|language=en-AU|archive-date=19 June 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200619083011/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-19/china-responds-to-accusation-of-australia-cyber-attack/12375324|url-status=live}}</ref> In response, ASPI executive director Peter Jennings said the ministry's comments were an attempt to distract attention from the think tank's research into the Chinese Government.<ref name=abcdeny/> This followed Australia's PM informing the public that a cyber actor was currently carrying out a sophisticated cyberattack against Australian government bodies and private companies. His comments were believed{{by whom|date=December 2020}} to be a warning to China.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Oliveri|first=Natalie|date=19 June 2020|title='Sophisticated state-based' cyber attack hits Australian government, businesses in major breach|work=[[Nine News]]|url=https://www.9news.com.au/national/cyber-attack-australia-scott-morrison-government-private-sector-breach-of-security/e621ae47-f810-4fa7-9c11-3caa3b09f4dc|url-status=live|access-date=17 September 2020|archive-date=8 September 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200908071757/https://www.9news.com.au/national/cyber-attack-australia-scott-morrison-government-private-sector-breach-of-security/e621ae47-f810-4fa7-9c11-3caa3b09f4dc}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Stone |first1=Jeff |title=Australia blames a state actor for major disruptions. China is already denying it. |url=https://www.cyberscoop.com/australia-cyber-attack-china-trade-scott-morrison/ |website=www.cyberscoop.com |publisher=Cyber Scoop |access-date=1 July 2020}}</ref>

In November 2020, the Chinese government released to the media a letter containing a list of grievances it had with the Australian government and a threat of economic retaliation. One of the points of contention was "funding 'anti-China' research at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute". Thewhich Australian governmentwas rejected by the ChineseAustralian government threat.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Bagshaw|first=Eryk|date=19 November 2020|title=Morrison says Australia won't back down to China threats on free speech, security|url=https://www.smh.com.au/world/asia/morrison-says-australia-won-t-back-down-to-china-threats-on-free-speech-security-20201119-p56g10.html|access-date=19 November 2020|website=[[The Sydney Morning Herald]]|language=en|quote=[D]iplomatic protocol was dropped with the publication of a list of grievances through the media ... The list blamed the Morrison government for the deteriorating relationship by banning Huawei, funding "anti-China" research at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, blocking 10 Chinese foreign investment deals, calling for an independent investigation into the origins of COVID-19 and up to 10 other disputes.}}</ref>▼

In August 2021, [[MichaelWestMedia|Michael West Media]] contributor Marcus Reubenstein wrote that "[[Sock puppet account|sockpuppet]]" accounts and accounts that appeared to be linked to ASPI had edited its Wikipedia article.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2021-08-20|title=ASPI's censorship sneaks|url=https://apac.news/aspis-censorship-sneaks/|access-date=2021-08-20|website=APAC News|language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=Reubenstein|first=Marcus|date=2021-08-20|title=Wikipedia v ASPI: on sock-puppets and Wiki-sneaks|url=https://www.michaelwest.com.au/wikipedia-v-aspi-on-sock-puppets-and-wiki-sneaks/|access-date=2021-08-22|website=Michael West Media|language=en-US}}</ref>

▲In November 2020, the Chinese government released to the media a letter containing a list of grievances it had with the Australian government and a threat of economic retaliation. One of the points of contention was "funding 'anti-China' research at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute". The Australian government rejected the Chinese government threat.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Bagshaw|first=Eryk|date=19 November 2020|title=Morrison says Australia won't back down to China threats on free speech, security|url=https://www.smh.com.au/world/asia/morrison-says-australia-won-t-back-down-to-china-threats-on-free-speech-security-20201119-p56g10.html|access-date=19 November 2020|website=[[The Sydney Morning Herald]]|language=en|quote=[D]iplomatic protocol was dropped with the publication of a list of grievances through the media ... The list blamed the Morrison government for the deteriorating relationship by banning Huawei, funding "anti-China" research at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, blocking 10 Chinese foreign investment deals, calling for an independent investigation into the origins of COVID-19 and up to 10 other disputes.}}</ref>

==References==