The Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) is an Australian think tank that has been central to anti-China propaganda as a source. Members of ASPI are frequently quoted and interviewed and its reports are considered by media outlets to be authoritative. ASPI has been instrumental in forming Australia's failed strategic policy in regard to China and also has undue influence on Australian foreign policy.

ASPI is funded by governments and US arms manufacturers. At one stage, ASPI boldly declared sponsors, and attached a disclaimer at the bottom of the page.¹⁾

However, when ASPI's funding sources received international attention, ASPI made the claim that “In 2019-2020 Defence Industry sponsors accounted for 2% of ASPI’s funding and other industry sponsors accounted for 9%.”, clearly displayed at the top of their sponsors page. Apart from the obvious question as to why Australian defence policy should be influenced at all by US arms manufacturers, this change reflects an attempt to project independence that has never been the case.

In a piece in The Australian Financial Review, The think tank behind Australia's changing view of China, Myriam Robin challenged the role of ASPI in influencing Australian policy. “ASPI, which is funded by the Department of Defence, foreign governments and military contractors, has also been accused of fomenting anti-China hysteria, to the alleged benefit of its benefactors”.

The piece quotes various experts and commentators.

“Former NSW premier Bob Carr has accused it of pumping out a “one-sided, pro-American view of the world”. Veteran foreign editor Tony Walker has slammed its “dystopian worldview” which “leaves little room for viewing China as a potential partner”. “It lacks integrity and brings shame to Australia,” says retired former DFAT chief and ex-Qantas CEO John Menadue. “I see it as very much the architect of the China threat theory in Australia”, adds ex-ambassador to China turned Beijing-based business consultant Geoff Raby.”

The piece also summarises the funding:

“The first is filled with defence contractors such as Lockheed Martin, BAE, Northrop Grumman, Thales and Raytheon. The second, technology companies like Microsoft, Oracle Australia, Telstra, and Google. And lastly, there are the contributions from foreign governments, many being strategic competitors to China, including the Embassy of Japan and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office (that is, Taiwan).”

ASPI Director Paul Jenning's claim that “the organisation is 'remarkably arm's-length'” is challenged by a former director. “A few years ago, ASPI was best known for its work on evaluating the military budget, which is still a key part of its output. White believed, when he was in charge, that this was incompatible with taking cash from the companies the military buys things from.”

The idea that such a gross conflict of interest should simply be ignored should be alarming for Australian citizens. But Australians should also be aware of “the existence of a deep-seated cultural appetite in Australia for hawkishness on China. Many don't need much nudging to believe the worst of China and its people. Concerns about xenophobia appear to underlie some of the alarm over public discussion of such issues.”

‘Blacklist’ claim: Australian Research Council admits scanning applicants for ‘sensitivities’, China links (Guardian, Daniel Hurst, @danielhurstbne, Tue 8 Jun 2021)

While ASPI attempts, quite laughably, to claim independence, their reports on China (as distinct from those on other issues) are consistently anti-China and hawkish, replete with conclusions preceding data and evidence and simple errors of translation.

Here are some of the most notable reports and some of the analysis of them.

“Uyghurs for Sale” report by Vicky Xu: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1415976139479162880.html The China Defence Universities Tracker The China Defence Universities Tracker critique.