Australia uses rugby league agreement to counter China’s influence in Papua New Guinea

Papua New Guinea (PNG) is set to become part of Australia’s national rugby league competition, following the signing of an agreement that mandates the country to avoid security partnerships with China. This Pacific island nation has been a source of numerous talents for Australia’s National Rugby League (NRL) and has consistently sought entry into the league. Australia has committed to providing A$600m (£301m, $384m) over a decade to establish the team, which will be situated in Port Moresby and commence competition in 2028. This funding also aims to foster the sport’s development at a grassroots level throughout the Pacific region. Concurrently, PNG entered into a distinct agreement, stating it reinforces its dedication to Australia as its primary security ally. While the exact conditions of these two agreements remain confidential, the BBC has learned that they enable Australia to cease financial support should PNG engage in a security arrangement with any country beyond the designated “Pacific family.” This phrase is generally understood to exclude China, notwithstanding Beijing’s attempts to establish a presence in the area. Should Canberra discontinue its involvement, the NRL would then be required to remove the PNG team. During the announcement of the agreement in Sydney on Thursday, PNG Prime Minister James Marape characterized it as a “monumental” chance for his nation. He stated its purpose was to cultivate “unity,” not only among PNG’s 830 language groups but also between the country and its nearest neighbor. He informed reporters, “For us, it’s not just sport and sport commerce, it is [about]… uniting the most diverse nation on the face of planet Earth and also uniting PNG-Australia together in ways that matter most, people to people.” Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese proclaimed it a “great day” for both nations. He noted that PNG, which is the sole country globally where rugby league is the national sport, “deserves” a position in the competition. Albanese stated, “The new team will belong to the people of Papua New Guinea… And I know it will have millions of proud fans barracking for it from day one.” This development also represents a significant milestone for the NRL. It marks the first occasion the competition, which aims to attract international spectators, has expanded beyond its domestic borders. The New Zealand Warriors, the only other non-Australian team, has participated in the league since its establishment nearly three decades ago. NRL boss Peter V’landys had been a strong advocate for the PNG bid, contending that it presented a substantial opportunity for both the league and for PNG’s economic advancement. The new team’s name and uniform are slated to be determined at a future date. Stuart Murray, an Associate Professor of International Relations, informed the BBC that although Australia’s application of sport as a diplomatic tactic is not novel, this particular agreement stands unparalleled. Dr Murray, affiliated with Bond University, noted that over the last decade, the nation has been “thinking innovatively about how you can marry sport with policy to counter classical security threats.” He further elaborated, stating that “the scale, the size, the scope and the funding, and the fact that it’s being endorsed at such a high level with both prime ministers – that’s never been done before.” He continued, “Basically, through this one channel, we will open up 20 or 30 other channels – for business, trade, policing, educational exchange, gender work, climate change… I think it is fantastic.” In recent years, both Australia and China have actively competed for increased influence within the Pacific region. Following Beijing’s significant policing agreement with the Solomon Islands in 2022, Australia has dedicated years to establishing exclusive security arrangements with various nations across the area, such as a policing accord with Tuvalu last year and a treaty with Nauru introduced earlier this week. The agreement with PNG, which gained independence from Australia in 1975, has been praised by some as another significant strategic triumph for Australia. Oliver Nobetau, a former PNG government lawyer now serving as a policy analyst at the Lowy Institute think tank, commented, “Over the past couple of years, with the heightened geopolitical interest and engagement in the Pacific, something a lot of other middle powers and major powers have struggled to do is to get PNG on a deal of exclusivity for security partnerships.” Both prime ministers have attempted to minimize the security dimension of the agreements, instead portraying them as advantageous for what Mr Nobetau described as a “thinning” relationship between the two nations. Marape specifically stated that the agreement “doesn’t stop us from relating with any nation, especially our Asian neighbours.” He further elaborated, “We relate with China, for instance, a great trading partner, a great bilateral partner,” adding, “But in security, closer to home… our shared territory needs to be protected, defended, policed… together.” According to government sources, these agreements do not grant Australia veto authority over PNG’s security arrangements. Nevertheless, their structure effectively precludes nearly all other potential partners. Mr Nobetau indicated that some individuals in PNG might perceive the announcement as “an exertion of Australian power over PNG sovereignty.” Both Mr Nobetau and Dr Murray, however, also point out that the two agreements reflect a developing “transactional” nature in Pacific relations. Dr Murray remarked, “People that talk about goodwill and who say sport and politics don’t mix, that’s the 20th century view,” further stating, “For us, there’s no way we’re going to give away one of our prize cultural assets for nothing. That doesn’t happen in diplomacy.” Dr Murray and Mr Nobetau concur that these agreements signify a pivotal juncture in the bilateral relationship between the two nations, likely indicating Australia’s ongoing approach to advancing its objectives throughout the region. Mr Nobetau commented, “China puts in a lot of money into sport infrastructure… which is sort of what China is good at… [but] China is not going to be offering any alternatives in this space.” Dr Murray supplemented, “It’s something that other countries can’t do,” emphasizing, “We need to use it, especially in a very, very contested region such as the Pacific.”