By John Q. Hosedrinker 
A Chinese research vessel, the Tan Suo Yi Hao, is currently within Australia’s Exclusive Economic Zone, prompting concerns from Prime Minister Albanese, who expressed his preference for its absence. The vessel, capable of deep-sea exploration and intelligence gathering, is being monitored by the Australian Defence Force. This incident follows a recent, controversial circumnavigation of Australia by Chinese navy ships. Despite the concerns, Albanese affirmed confidence in Australia’s defence and security capabilities to safeguard national interests.
Read the original article here
A Chinese research vessel, the Tan Suo Yi Hao, was recently spotted off the coast of Australia, prompting Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to express his displeasure, stating, “I would prefer that it wasn’t there.” This isn’t the first time a Chinese vessel’s presence near Australia has caused a stir, and the timing, coinciding with an election cycle, suggests that this event might be more about political maneuvering than genuine concern.
The vessel was located approximately 460 nautical miles (852 kilometers) west-southwest of Adelaide. This significant distance raises questions about the use of the term “off the coast,” suggesting a deliberate attempt to sensationalize the situation. It’s a point that has been repeatedly made in past similar incidents; it often seems to be a recurring election-season event.
The stated purpose of the vessel’s presence is scientific research. Reports indicate that the Tan Suo Yi Hao, with its submersibles, conducted a joint research mission with New Zealand scientists in the Puysegur Trench. While this seems benign, suspicions naturally arise given the vessel’s location and the broader geopolitical context.
Many commentators have pointed out that the location is well outside Australian territorial waters, and lies within international waters. This suggests that the concerns are less about infringement of sovereignty and more about potential espionage activities, which is a major concern. The depth of the research mission, six kilometers below sea level, may also indicate reasons beyond simple oceanographic exploration, sparking speculations about mapping the sea bed for future cable cutting or deployment of submarine detection devices. This seems quite reasonable considering the technology involved.
The Prime Minister’s comment, “I would prefer that it wasn’t there,” reveals a diplomatic response that acknowledges the legality of the vessel’s presence but expresses unease about its implications. Australia’s own actions, like sending vessels near China, should also be considered. This reciprocal behavior underscores the complex nature of the geopolitical situation.
This incident evokes memories of past events, like the weather balloon incident, showcasing China’s arguably passive-aggressive approach to information gathering, raising suspicion about the true intentions behind the research mission. Even if research is the primary goal, one can speculate about the potential for secondary objectives. The expense and risk of using a vessel with international collaborators for covert activities like communication relay or interception may be high, but not impossible.
The situation is further complicated by the presence of New Zealand scientists on board. This joint mission underscores the complexities of regional alliances and their inherent vulnerabilities to geopolitical pressures.
The reaction from various commentators is mixed. Some interpret the event as politically motivated, while others express genuine concerns about potential espionage. Both viewpoints have their merits. In the end, while the Prime Minister’s statement voices discomfort, it also highlights the limitations on Australia’s ability to act. International laws strictly limit interference in international waters, leaving them with limited options beyond diplomatic protests. It’s a difficult position, and perhaps unnecessarily politicized.
In conclusion, the sighting of the Chinese research vessel near Australia highlights the ongoing tension in the region. While the vessel’s activities are ostensibly scientific, the geopolitical context raises legitimate questions and concerns. The Prime Minister’s statement reflects the delicate balance between expressing concern and respecting international law. The incident should serve as a reminder of the challenges inherent in managing relations in an increasingly complex geopolitical landscape. Ultimately, finding a balance between maintaining security concerns and ensuring freedom of navigation in international waters remains a crucial challenge.