Australian Journal of International Affairs
LightNews LightNews
banner
austjia.bsky.social
Australian Journal of International Affairs
@austjia.bsky.social
2.4K followers 300 following 320 posts

Flagship academic journal of the Australian Institute of International Affairs. Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Editors-in-Chief: Profs.Joanne Wallis & Tim Legrand (Uni of Adelaide)
Website: https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/caji20/current
Posts Replies Media Videos
austjia.bsky.social
Please see what makes the Australian Journal of International Affairs Australia's premiere international affairs journal here:
tandfonline.com/action/showA...
As always: thanks to our authors, reviewers, readers, &
@tandfresearch.bsky.social
Latest articles from Australian Journal of International Affairs
Browse the latest articles and research from Australian Journal of International Affairs
tandfonline.com
November 3, 2025 at 12:27 AM
austjia.bsky.social
Slated for edition 80.1 of 2026. Eyes peeled. 👀
November 3, 2025 at 12:22 AM
austjia.bsky.social
All the papers in the running for the 2024 Boyer Prize are #OpenAccess. We thank all the authors for choosing to publish in the AJIA. #AcademicPublishing #AcademicSky #InternationalRelations
tandfonline.com/journals/caj.... /end.
The Boyer Prize
Explore the article collection: The Boyer Prize. Published in Australian Journal of International Affairs.
tandfonline.com
October 2, 2025 at 2:40 AM
austjia.bsky.social
Song and Kim were commended for a paper that provides valuable empirical data and content analysis that will be of great benefit to scholars seeking to better theorise political communications and geopolitics.
tandfonline.com/doi/full/10..... /6.
ABSTRACT How does China signal foreign policy intentions to domestic and international audiences during territorial conflicts? While China can signal its resolve by provoking nationalism at home, doing sc may risk appearing threatening to neighbouring countries in the region. We argue that China resolves the dilemma by sending different types of messages to domestic and international audiences. Focusing on China's maritime conflicts in the South China Sea and the East China Sea, we examine China's narratives regarding the maritime disputes through the analysis of state-run media. Our findings from text mining and topic analyses of more than 31,000 state media reports from 2002 to 2021 suggest that China signals to the international audience on international cooperation emphasising diplomatic and peaceful resolutions while relatively less so in domestic media. The analyses have implications for how China signals foreign policy intentions amidst rising nationalism.
October 2, 2025 at 2:39 AM
austjia.bsky.social
Jack Butcher was commended for a paper that should stimulate more precision in how to explain and evaluate the proliferation of security partnerships in the Asia-Pacific and beyond.
tandfonline.com/doi/full/10..... /5
ABSTRACT Strategic partnerships (SPs) have grown exponentially over the last decade in the Asia-Pacific. However, little remains known in the international security studies (ISS) literature regarding why they have proliferated now and how to best understand what they mean for regional security. In this article, I argue that SPs are best understood as a new security practice in the Asia-Pacific that allows states and multilateral actors to flexibly manage threats, strategic challenges, and interests through cooperation and common norm building. To evidence this argument, I adopt a functional approach to SPs that draws upon the mainstream ISS theories of realism, liberalism and constructivism and synthesises them where possible to draw attention to a wide range of causal factors responsible for them. Analyses guided by eclecticism can provide an all-encompassing tool for explanatory and comparative studies on Asia-Pacific security to draw a broader range of conclusions than any one approach allows for.
October 2, 2025 at 2:38 AM
austjia.bsky.social
Heiduk and Wilkins were commended for their persuasive and important argument about the need to distinguish between scale and function when analysing the significance of multilateralism. /4
tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....
ABSTRACT Even as essential definitional and conceptual issues related to 'minilateralism' remain unresolved, conjecture has arisen as to the future trajectories of established institutions, such as the Trilateral Strategic Dialogue (TSD), AUKUS, and the Quad. - Could they evolve into formal military alliances over time, or serve as the foundation of a new organisation aimed at providing regional security governance? To systematically evaluate such contingencies this article traverses set of interrelated conceptual issues relating to minilateral institutionalisation. It seeks to differentiate minilaterals in terms of their 'hybridity' both in structural composition and functionality, and ascertain what this implies for their institutional progression. This process assists us in identifying on what grounds minilaterals might potentially evolve into a more formalised institutional paradigm - either (i) a military alliance or ii) a cooperative security governance organisation. This foregoing conceptual apparatus is then brought to bear of on the case studies above to draw out clues as to their prospective institutional development pathways. The article concludes that, while such putative institutional transformations remain conceivable, in none of the cases is a particular pathway preordained. Instead, minilaterals may simply continue to adapt within the parameters of their present institutional boundaries.
October 2, 2025 at 2:38 AM
austjia.bsky.social
Harijanto was commended for the conceptualisation of middle-powers enabling the incorporation of non-democratic and democratic countries, in a way that transcended cultural relativism. /3
tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....
Abstract: This article maps the behaviours of two middle powers, Australia and Indonesia, as a response to the emergence and evolution of the Indo-Pacific concept. The background for this analysis is the emergence and development of the 'Indo-Pacific' concept as a response to crises of legitimacy enveloping the region and how countries in the region, including middle powers, respond to it. Using a minimalist definition which I have developed of a middle power as a country with a middle level of power capabilities and a penchant for cooperation, this article develops a framework based on two dimensions of outcome (ranging from status-quoist to reformist outlooks) and process (ranging from Lockean to Kantian strategies) to facilitate a more open-ended approach towards looking at middle-power behaviours beyond the common categorisation of traditional/emerging, and Western/non-Western. Using Australia's 2017 Foreign Policy White Paper and 2023 National Defence: Defence Strategic Review, and Indonesia's 2015 Defence White Paper and 2019 ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific, this article concludes that while Australia is exhibiting a status-quoist/Lockean approach, Indonesia is demonstrating a reformist/Kantian approach towards the Indo-Pacific. The outcome-process dimension framework developed in this article is useful as a tool to map other middle power behaviours in various contexts. • KEYWORDS: Middle power Indo-Pacific
October 2, 2025 at 2:36 AM
austjia.bsky.social
Edney & Turcsányi were commended for the immensely valuable fine-grained data that highlight divergences within & between Anglosphere countries, stimulating wider scholarly debate about the "Anglosphere".
tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.... /2.
ABSTRACT China is an important security concern for the United States and its allies, including the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing group that is sometimes described as the core of the 'Anglosphere' security community. While we would expect securitising discourses at the elite level to reproduce some common perceptions of China, to what extent are attitudes to China shared across the publics in these countries? In this article, we unpack public attitudes towards China in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Drawing on the results of public opinion surveys we conducted in 2022, we note areas of similarity and divergence then drill down into the drivers of public attitudes. We show that even though aggregate attitudes towards China in the five countries appear to align with official security discourses, this hides significant variation in how different groups within these societies view China. In particular, ethnic minorities and recent immigrants, along with members of higher socio-economic classes, urban residents, and young people, tend to be more positive towards China. Our findings bring new insights into the potency of government-driven securitisation, particularly in terms of identifying groups within societies that are less inclined to follow their government's view of China.
October 2, 2025 at 2:36 AM
austjia.bsky.social
We would also like to thank the members of our adjudicating panel: @daraconduit.bsky.social, @timlegrand.bsky.social,
Garry Rodan, Sarah Percy, and Stephen Noakes. 🙏
October 2, 2025 at 2:09 AM
austjia.bsky.social
The article was highly commended for its masterful theoretical and empirical, as well as its important contribution to policy discussion around Pacific regionalism and Pacific regional relationships.
October 2, 2025 at 2:08 AM