This topic has been suggested as a branch of the topic concerning Australia's status as a constitutional monarchy. Thanks Saintfletcher let's get it started.
We are told by some politicians that Australia 'needs to become part of the Asian region'. Asia however tends to view as a European country in a geographically isolated position. We are viewed as guests or visitors at their forums and not as 'part of the family'.
Would Australia's role in the world be enhanced if we applied to be a surrogate member of the EU or should we keep trying to be accepted as a full member of the Asian, particularly the South-East Asian community as this is where we are geographically located?

i know a lot of ozzies would like to tow oz into the english channel, but sorry, we're here to stay. tell yer kids to study mandarin and/or bahasa indonesia.

"surrogate" eu member? i think you mean associate. either way, they don't want you. look, yer grandkids are going to be light brown, get used to it. it won't be so bad, i remember what ozzie cuisine was like 35 years ago.

DEMOS, what makes you think that the EU does not want us our membeship, associate, surrogate or whatever? Many of us have very close ties with EU citizens, some even have dual citizenship.

Good point Comunicat. I wonder how many responses there will be?

The EU grows every year. Once Russia and Turkey join the EU, as they aspire to, this brings the EU line over a part of "Asia".

To be European does not mean that you are "white" in the 21st century.

As the EU grows, to be European is also not a clear geography.

In terms of culture, a modern European standard brings together pluralism in an agreement of EU countries.

We share with them an idea of dignity. The standard is not to lower living standards but to endeavor to always raise them in every possible way. Standards include minimum wages, less exploitation, health, education and economic responsibility. The EU Parliament also raises human rights standards.

In a system of dignity, European standards allow for many member nation to have a Monarchy, a Republic and some EU countries have hybrid systems recognising both.

Increasingly people will come to a conclusion that what makes a person "European" has nothing to do with race in contemporary times. Have you seen London lately? Being "European" has little to do with a specific geography in these times. Look at Russia and Turkey.

As Russia and Turkey work so hard to be part of the EU; it is perplexing that Australia hasn't caught on yet as to who and what we are. In the most contemporary way you can identify as "European" in such a membership, under a new concept of a European identity.

You can see now why so many humanitarians are now reviewing how they see the importance of the British Monarchy. This could be our last chance to secure our family reunion. That is a good reason why this is not the time have "Republican" aspirations.

It is time to come home to a bigger family with the help from the Royal Family.

Sorry but the thread is at best amusing.
The idea that we can become part of the EU is funny but idiotic.
We could not join if we wanted to and who wants to?
We only need look to America to see a nation based on WASP can survive while remote from England.
However we in this thread get the chance to understand not every thing we say, do or think is right always.
Amusing but unlikely.

Geographically we are further removed from Asia than are parts of Europe. Turkey being in both.
Just thought that I'd throw that in before someone says that we are in Asia.
In reality we ought to apply to become the 51st State of the Union of the United States of America.
We have closer ties with the USA than with most of Europe.

Not sure you are right Belly - the idea was touted when the EU was first set up and it has never entirely gone away. It is the blinkered insistence on trying to be something we are not and never will be (i.e. Asian) that has prevented Australia from even attempting to decide what it really is.
We are an essentially European nation isolated by physical geography. The vast majority of Australians are of European descent and that is not going to change now or in the foreseeable future (unless of course you believe that we are going to be overrun by our neighbours to the north).
We are missing out on market opportunities everywhere(not just in Europe) by the failure to look beyond the narrow minded focus on South East Asia, China and Japan as the only places where we can do real business. We do almost no business with the Indian sub-continent, Africa or South America and the EC is moving in to those regions to ur detriment.
Our "Asian" focus is also denying our children the right to learn about their cultural literacy and the languages of their forebears. Of course it is good to know about other cultures...but not good if we do not know about our own. With the added emphasis on maths and science there is no time left for children to gain the knowledge they need to understand even the most common references to our own past and yet they can tell you about a religious festival in Indonesia in great detail.
Some people think it does not matter but others do.

Hello, i already identify as European, one reason is that i have never met my father. On my mother's side, my ancestors are Irish.
I feel more European than Australian, especially since Howard came to power and became a Bush puppet, closely connecting us to the American way.
I also feel a citizen of the world, as most Australians turn their backs on the poverty and suffering in so many countries. We have become too selfish and ignorant.

This isn't even a real question, unless we've been invited to join the EU.

However, if it's just about plain hypotheticals, then there is no choice. Our ethics are fundamentally European, so we can never be Asian. Moreover, many leaders of Asian countries have bluntly told us with their typical racist tones that Australia will never be a part of Asia until we are fundamentally yellow in skin colour.

This sort of racism goes unnoticed by the general populus, and our weak leaders should respond to such xenophobic comments.

Who wants to be Asian anyway? Culturally, the entire planet is becoming western. English is the world language. It's our movies they all want to watch, our countries they all want to educate their children in, our nations they would live if they could pay people smugglers the fees.

Australia is great because of it's heritage. Anglo countries in particular have a proud record of running great nations, inclusive,

Lately though leftist historians have tried to sully our reputation by claiming all sorts of rubbish about genociding Aboriginies, and stolen generations.

Good grief.

Yet, due to the madness of leftist discourse, which believes in cultural relativism and that non-whites can't be racist, we get the vilest bigots like Malaysia's Mahatir, and Singapore's Lon Gook (it's his name, don't blame me!), the current PM of that country, stating that we can't be Asian until our population is 90% yellow.

Utter bigotry.

Yet one can only assume by the zero reaction that the populations of such countries are inherently racist. Like Indonesia's, which we already know about from their reactions to Bali, among other things.

Australia will never be part of Asia until we are yellow.

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/001856.html

Imagine if a western leader said something like that! Where is the outrage!

actually, we should beg nz to let us enter oceania. right now they are the economic core, but they might be willing to share if we allow them to annex bondi. the resulting multinational island union won't have a big industrial base, but we will have a lock on tourism.

best of all, we don't have to participate in genocidal wars, unless fiji completely loses it's mind.

It is only a hypothetical question until someone actually does something about it... like the question of a union between Australia and NZ...only hypothetical until someone actually does something about it.
I certainly don't feel Asian...despite being a godparent to the children of one of my closest friends who just happens to be Chinese.
My ancestors come from the north of Scotland - and I take great pride in my Scots heritage. It is interesting though that I do not get labelled as Scots while my Australian born brother in law of Greek Cypriot heritage gets labelled "Greek" and his mob get funding for ethnic affairs and cultural events and we don't. What sort of message does this give those who share my heritage? That we are not important, that we are unworthy of consideration, that we have no heritage worth preserving - or perhaps no heritage at all?
Being told that we 'must become part of the Asian region' fails to take into account that we approach almost everything differently. There are, as I understand it, no definite and indefinite articles in Japanese - just one small language difference that has big cultural implications, to say nothing of the fact that it is virtually impossible to migrate to Japan and become a Japanese citizen!

There's no comparison between the EU and Asia.

The EU is a bunch of different countries who've agreed to act like a federation for some purposes, none of them cultural. People are encouraged to 'feel' European rather than German, British or French, but it's not mandatory. To join the EU a country has to meet a bunch of requirements Australia is just not prepared to meet, particularly the ones that require ratifying various UN measures. Turkey could probably explain why our application would be rejected.

Asia is just a name for a geographical region. It's ridiculous to even talk of Asia as if it's one entity in political, trade or cultural terms. Think Japan/North Korea/China/Indonesia and the word 'Asia' starts looking like just a convenient, but largely meaningless word. It's also true that a lot of Asian countries are less than enamoured with Australia at the moment.

You can't just join the EU because you don't feel Asian, and you can't just join Asia because of geography. Oceania would have been a good bet, but we've been so busy bucket-mouthing rather than negotiating with our nearest neighbours that we've put quite a few of them offside too.

We should leave off thinking about it until we've learned to play nicely. Then some of the bigger kids might be prepared to let us into their sandpit.

We obviously can't join the EU, but if Asian nations start forming free trade blocks, peace agreements etc, we should join - as I believe we are. We should do the same with the EU, US and anyone else, just not expect to become part of them. Europeans are far more similarly culturally than Australia and Asia so we aren't going to do anything as drastic as the EU in the forseeable future. A common currency with NZ would probably be a good start.

Should Australia and NZ merge? http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1170029462

I agree Freediver; the common currency and common market with NZ is way overdue. It is hypothetical to join the EU, but we all know it has been discussed in the background.

In terms of currency, the UK has Sterling: English Pounds and Scottish Pounds, both are legal tender in the UK as they are worth the same. In Australia, our dollar with NZ could be, for example be something like the ANZAC dollar, that is Australia and New Zealand Associated Currency. Yeah, creative but it has a ring to it. But the Australian and NZ (or ANZAC if you like) could be legal tender in both countries much like the Scottish and English Pounds. Maybe later we could be trading in Euros, but if the UK doesn't have to do this, I can't see why Australia would need to do so.

A common market with NZ is overdue and could be a good start as Oceania. We have so much in common with NZ, but our countries must keep our national identities.

Both countries, I believe, would overwhelmingly prefer to join the EU together. Joining the US or Asia would be akin to a reluctant chore like going to some economic dentist. We do have to be a part of an economic block to survive as on OECD or western, economically vibrant democracy.

Joining the EU, I think, would cause celebration if it ever happens.

BTW, having Prince William as the next GG would help the UK sweeten to the idea of remembering some kinship with our countries. Having Prince William as our next GG could be the catalyst for this hypothetical idea to come closer to a real option.

Yes, Turkey and Russia are seriously being considered as future EU countries. Why not us?

Australia has a special historical bond with the nations of Europe and we should be looking for ways to expand upon those ties. One should not discount the crucial role cultural and people-to-people links play in the formation of trade relations.

Those pushing the "Asianisation" agenda are effectively trying to transmogrify Australian nationhood, denying our people the right to sustain their own culture and civilization. As another poster noted, Australia's European heritage is what makes our nation so great. Why disgard that in favour of geographical determinism?

The misguided notion that Australia should "become part of the Asian region" seems even more ludicrous when you consider that the major Asian capitals such as Beijing and New Delhi are geographically closer to London, Paris and Berlin than to Canberra.

To quote international affairs expert Owen Harries:

"To emphasise geography as decisive at the very time when technology is making physical distance and proximity less significant than they have ever been in human history, and when communication with any part of the world is virtually instantaneous, seems perverse. Far from being inescapable, the reality of geography, in a sense of it's human significance, is constantly changing, constantly being circumvented."

Demos,
Australia is already part of Oceana, we don't need to ask New Zealand.
Others in Oceana are Indonesia, the Phillipines and Papua New Guinea.

Sometimes on the train I think we are already Asia, but in fact Paris
is closer to Asia than Australia.

I am more inclined to think we should saw off the rest of the world and
only import what is not practical to import such as large jet aircraft.

Is Mise said: "We have closer ties with the USA than with most of Europe."

One obvious route for further expanding intra-Anglosphere ties would be to extend NAFTA to include Australia and New Zealand as associate members (a North American-South Pacific trade bloc). Considering Australia's close relationship with the United States, this is something that Canberra should be seriously pursuing.

Reading some of the comments, I guess the question splits to four.

1. Should Australia be part of the Asian region?
2. Should or could Australia be a part of the EU?
3. Should Australia be a part of the American NAFTA? (Canada, US, Mexico).
4. Should Australia just focus on an economic community with Oceania? (Does this include Indonesia?).

Of course there is the substance to the whole matter of why we need any closer economic community at all. Should we be concerned that nearly all other modern western democratic countries are a part of closely bonded trade blocks and we could be left out? Is that a problem?

In trade, bringing down barriers seems to be everything. Incumbent with agreements, there are cultural considerations where cultural and economics are interconnected.

New Caledonia is also a part of Oceania, which France guards as a gem. I wonder if France would see Oceania being a part of the EU as being part of France's interests are well.

Indonesia, East Timor, and even Fiji would have a difficult time raising to European standards. They don't prove to be that secure in their systems, their economies are unpredictable and currently their human rights records are intimidating. This is the same reason why I can imagine Australia or New Zealand wanting any local economic union with them is not yet likely.

This question is not going away in a hurry and the EU option is not impossible.

My suggestion is that we all become members of the "Family of Man", no division of colour, religion, ethnicity.

Nice thought Glendabeth but unrealistic. We should aim for the EU for the purposes of diversity perhaps?

saintfletcher said: "Should or could Australia be a part of the EU?"

While Australia would not be eligible to join the EU, Canberra could seek associate status, as Switzerland, Norway, Iceland, Israel, Jordan and some South American countries already have. Because of Australia's wealth and common culture and values, we would be eagerly embraced.

Australia's problem is that it still looks at Europe from London's perspective. Not from the perspective of London today, but from the anachronistic perspective of pre-1973 London (before the UK joined the ECC). Just because Australia is no longer a "branch office of empire" doesn't mean we have to abandon our traditional ties with Europe. We simply need to renew and reinvigorate them.

The other Anglosphere countries also offer much promise for Australia. One feasible way to expand intra-Anglosphere ties would be to align the Australia-New Zealand CER with NAFTA. Canadian Brent Cameron, author of "The Case for Commonwealth Free Trade", has advocated Canadian entry into the CER. No reason why it couldn't be expanded to include the rest of NAFTA.

What a BS,Australia should only join "hands" with Australians.
Canberra should be'told' by it's citizens and not they other way around. NZ and Australian TGA were going to join forces which is met with great resistance from both our peoples, how successful are both gov's?
I also am an europian by birth but hey why did I leave on my own accord?
EU started as BeNeLux, meaning Belgium,Nederland,Luxemburg joined in the trade deal with sinister result of bringing a Worldorder closer to fruition.Thanks to the Bilderbergers and the "house of Orange" with ties of course with England,Germany,Austria,Denmark etc. So my advice is to you lot, study a bit of history and start making some decisions and take some real action before you haven't got Australia any more.If you need help with action taking ...let me know on this blog.

Belly,

As a “CONSTITUTIONALIST” I can assure you that the Commonwealth of Australia is under the rulings of the European Union and for example the European Human rights Provisions apply as such to the Commonwealth of Australia (other then Section 51(xxvi) constitutional provisions) as I have canvassed extensively in my blog at http://au.360.yahoo.com/profile-ijpxwMQ4dbXm0BMADq1lv8AYHknTV_QH.

HANSARD 11-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates
Mr. CLARK:
Representative government is not an expedient or a makeshift to obviate the necessity of having every man brought into one chamber to give his vote; but it is a substantial institution devised for the special purpose of endeavouring, so far as possible, to get the intelligence and the judgment of the community to decide what shall, and what shall not, be law, and not simply to count mere heads.

We, the people, should take back our constitutional and other legal rights!

Again, if anyone desires to really contribute a intelligent post to this threat then at least consider what I have stated and you may just discover that you are using LEGAL FICTION rather then LEGAL FACTS.

THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA IS NOT A COUNTRY, DOMINION, REPUBLIC, KINGDOM OR EMPIRE AS IT IS A “POLITICAL UNION”, AND IF YOU DO NOT EVEN COMPREHEND THIS THEN YOU CERTAINLY ARE POLITELY STATED “TOTALLY MISGUIDED”

I'm confused.

From reading all the posts so far I am left with the impression that the question being pondered is actually:

"Is it economically more beneficial for Australia to define itself as European or Asian?"

I would've thought that the current cultural similarities between Australia and Europe would exist whether we were a member of any organisation. Equally, our cultural differences with Asia would also exist.

Understanding other people's cultures is undoubtedly important for trade reasons. However, it hasn't been mentioned here yet, equally for security reasons (and no, I don't just mean terrorism).

We can already leverage our cultural similarities. It makes sense to broaden our cultural boundaries so that we can accept, and be accepted by, more than just the cultures contained in the majority of our citizen's heritage's.

The purpose of "Divide and Conquer" is to create conflict. I'm not convinced that any one should be trying to adopt a stance that encourages additional conflict.