Illustration: Chen Xia/GT

At a ceremony marking the completion of a runway at an airport in Bougainville, an autonomous region of Papua New Guinea, the president of Bougainville and the prime minister of Papua New Guinea, wearing safety helmets bearing the logo of China Railway Construction Corporation (CRCC), were cited by Australian officials as an example of "China expanding its influence". This discontent reveals Australia's Monroe Doctrine mentality toward the South Pacific Island countries.

According to The Guardian on Sunday, the Australian side said that "China is bolstering its geopolitical influence in the Pacific by 'branding' Asian Development Bank (ADB) projects." Pat Conroy, Australia's Minister for the Pacific, told the newspaper that Chinese "branding" of multilateral development projects to bolster its influence in the region is a consistent "frustration."

However, using corporate logos at project sites is a standard practice in international engineering. On-site photos show that the ADB's logo was clearly visible.

Australia's complaint is more of a reflection of its own unease with its diminishing dominance. For decades, Australia has viewed the South Pacific as its natural sphere of influence. That's why even legitimate cooperation by other countries is easily interpreted by Canberra as a challenge.

"Australia views aid as a tool for competition over influence, rather than a development cooperation. This mindset consistently interprets China's collaboration in the region through a zero-sum, confrontational lens," Chen Hong, director of the Asia Pacific Studies Center at East China Normal University, told the Global Times.

Pat Conroy's remarks confirm this mentality. He told The Guardian: "We've been very clear that there's a permanent state of contest in the Pacific, that Australia is seeking to be the partner of choice for every Pacific nation and that China is seeking a role there as well."

In reality, China has not excluded any country from participating in these projects. On the contrary, China has always advocated open cooperation. On May 28, the Third China-Pacific Island Countries Foreign Ministers' Meeting in Xiamen, East China's Fujian Province, was attended by foreign ministers or representatives from 11 island countries. At the meeting, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi reaffirmed that "the Pacific Ocean is large enough to accommodate win-win cooperation among all countries."

Bougainville's deputy president, Patrick Nisira, said concerns over Chinese influence were fueled by skeptical "Western media sources." He pointed out that "the dearth of options from traditional development partners over the last 20 years … and now Chinese companies' approaches for partnerships in these very areas, make such opportunities worth considering for the benefit of the people." 

"What has China done right? China's assistance to Pacific island countries aligns precisely with their needs, targeting the most urgent sectors," Chen added.

"Who gets seen" is not a matter of public relations - it's a reflection of long-term results. Take the Solomon Islands as an example. The 2023 Final Investment Monitoring Report for the Solomon Islands Governance Program received a "less than adequate" rating by the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. The "invisible Australia" may not be due to Chinese "branding," but rather a lack of memorable contributions from Australia itself.

Against this backdrop, if Australia continues to cling to outdated notions of "dominance," they will only drift further from the real expectations of Pacific Island nations. Only by becoming true "partners in development" can Western powers regain trust in the region. The logo on a helmet at a construction site should not become a target in diplomatic rivalries. Pacific nations are not anyone's "natural allies," nor are they "obligated" to reciprocate simply because of financial input. They have their own judgment and development priorities. Cooperation is never a zero-sum game. Being seen does not mean others must disappear. What the South Pacific needs is not a war of labels, but more development.