"The government is of the opinion that discussion of [the ANZUS treaty’s] meaning is almost certain to narrow its meaning… We will only tend to embarrass each other if we try, whether in public or private, to explore such topics. In the government’s view such exploration is bound to weaken rather than strengthen the reliance we can place on ANZUS.”

— Sir Garfield Barwick, Minister for External Affairs, October 1963

IT’S A PITY Sir Garfield didn’t share this powerful insight with the Australian public rather than confining it to a minute to his department. His candid assessment of the elusive meaning of the ANZUS treaty has ongoing relevance to the current Australian debate about the challenge posed by China’s growing economic and strategic power. Barwick wrote the minute after American officials made it plain in high-level talks that ANZUS did not oblige the United States to send troops to help Australian forces in Malaysia during the period of its “confrontation” with Indonesia. His department didn’t really need to be told. Senior diplomats were well aware that the United States had been a reluctant party to the 1951 treaty and only signed after ensuring that the wording precluded an automatic security guarantee…