It is obvious that the people have lost the confidence of the elites. Perhaps it would be better for the elites to dismiss the people, and appoint another.

Dear Editor,

I very much appreciated Daniel Flitton's article on such an important aspect of foreign policy. He quotes John Locke, and as one who has made a study of the 17th Century English philosopher, I would say that in Locke's day with such a lack of education among the people, Locke's belief that foreign policy should stay in the hands of the professionaals was well up to the mark.

Furthermore, even though the masses these days are far more intellectual and well in touch with a media, events such as ignorant Australian public utterances concerning the Corby case, prove that Locke's advice should still be kept in mind.

I would also like to add to Professor Stephen Fitzgerald's quoted suggestion that John Howard has broken Locke's rule by pandering to the worst elements of public prejudice at times. Here it could be argued that Howard in his attempt to reach the people, has been deliberately developing a political strategy by means of what the Canadian philosopher John Ralston Saul has termed a friendly "dumbing down" of the public, possibly with the occasional half-truth, as Howard used during the Tampa Incident-and even more so since 9/11.

Further to "dumbing down", as part of political policy, it could typify a side-element of patriotism, "Your's is not to reason why, etc." these days a ruse to build up faith in a ruler as in wartime, which Howard has kept in vogue with his stiff upper lip - British colonial-style appearance all part of the scene.

In today's world affairs, however, it is believed that unlawful actions by the US and cohorts, including our Australian leaders, concerning both global politics and economics, must eventually break through our glib foreign policy rhetoric like a cancer, proving that behind all this foreign policy "means to an end" jargon concerning the Middle East especially, we need to put ourselves in our so-called Moslem enemy's shoes for a while, which might help us to use much less of the old superior colonialistic attitude than we have so far.

Regards - Bushbred - WA

Daniel Flitton’s essay on Australian foreign policy is interesting but it seems to me asks the wrong question. Foreign policy is neither set by the masses, nor guided by the elite as Fitzgerald (and, it seems, Flitton) define it:
“ … people with power or influence: political, bureaucratic, business, professional, academic and other elites.”

For in Australia today , the reality is that foreign policy is made by the government of the day as part of its envelope of images and messages sent out to the public that are designed to keep it popular and in government. The public can hardly be blamed if, schooled over the years by our present government to a particular jingoistic, fearful, US-dependent and somewhat aggressive view of the world (which is, precisely, John Howard’s view of the world), it picks up and reflects that view in responding to real human crises like the Corby case. And then, ironically, Howard and his News Limited friends belatedly cry “Stop, we didn’t really mean this to go so far …”

It is futile to dream of giving foreign policy back to the professional elites – it will never happen now. The question to be asked, rather, is: How can Australian governments be persuaded of their duty to approach foreign policy more responsibly, in the national interest rather than for domestic political gain ? That is the real challenge for Fitzgerald’s elites. Some of them – Geoffrey Barker, Dick Woolcott, Dick Smith, Kevin Rudd - are leading the way. Others (whom I will not name here) have totally dropped the ball.

Further reading: my essay on foreign policy in Robert Manne’s (ed.) “ The Howard Years” [Black Inc, 2004}

I always thought Oz foreign policies were guided by sheepishly following and shadowing American allegiances, who ever and wherever they were. Why develop a parochial and apparently sophisticated theory to describe the obvious?

It's a double edged sword: You can't trust the masses because of their ignorance but you cannot trust the eleites and professionals because of their possible coruption.

scruffyloather, good points, Can you (or anyone else here) tell me who elites are? Over the years this label has been bandied about without explanation. Its a bit like Santa Claus, we are know he doesn't really exist but make reference to him. Pray tell?