Earlier this month, the Australian government published an inquiry into the development of the country’s Asia capability titled “Security and Prosperity in Asia: Building Asia Capability in Australia through the Education System and Beyond.” The capability this inquiry sought to evaluate includes the teaching and learning of Asian languages and cultures, alongside how best to facilitate the public’s broader regional engagement. 

The report argued that Australia’s prosperity, diplomacy, and strategic independence increasingly depend on Australians developing stronger knowledge of the Asian region; yet the institutions responsible for building this capability are weakening. Without a public who have a good ability to understand and engage effectively with Asia, there is a diminished capacity for Australia to advance itself and secure its future. 

The report distinguished between general Asia literacy for the broader population and the deeper specialist expertise required for diplomats, researchers, business leaders, defense officials, and policymakers. Yet the former feeds into the latter. Without a high baseline of knowledge within the general public, it is more difficult for the country to produce the critical mass of experts required to do the specialist roles. Schools should provide all students with a strong general knowledge of the region, and then universities can hone this into producing highly skilled experts with advanced knowledge. 

The report highlighted that this pipeline is exhibiting serious problems. It presented evidence that fewer Australians are studying Asian languages than in previous decades, particularly in languages deemed to be the priority for the Australian government – Indonesian, Japanese, and Mandarin. These have fallen sharply in secondary schools, and declined dramatically at universities. 

The study of Indonesian was singled out as facing a crisis. Indonesia is Australia’s largest near neighbor, so strategically it should be considered a vital subject. Yet the report described study of the Indonesian language as approaching “functional extinction” within the education systems of some states. 

This decline risks having a compounding effect. With fewer students studying Asian languages at school, universities will reduce or close language programs due to low demand. This then diminishes the number of future teachers, academics, and researchers required to sustain the system. The report warned that Australia risks losing the institutional capacity to build the Asia expertise it requires. 

There are some structural hurdles that Australia faces. The first is that responsibility of building Asia capabilities is fragmented across schools, universities, state governments, federal departments, and businesses. Because no single institution oversees the system as a whole, there is little coordination between school language programs, university pathways, workforce needs, and national strategic priorities. 

Despite the report being chaired by a government MP, former Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs Tim Watts, the report highlighted the absence of national leadership from the federal government. 

The other structural hurdles are cultural, and this has two components. First, there is a deep complacency within the Australian psyche that restricts the country from investing in key capacities. It has long been identified that Australia has prospered from luck rather than effort, and this has bred an ingrained lethargic culture that prevents the country from engaging in foresight and preparedness. 

The second cultural problem is one of suspicion toward the region. While Australia has become a highly multicultural society and this has created strong diaspora links within Asia, there remains a cohort of people in the country who do not see the merit in developing greater cultural knowledge of the region and often see this as a threat. The current rise of the One Nation party especially can be viewed as a revolt against the country’s geography. 

Yet the thing about geography is that it cannot be changed. Mature countries understand their geographic positions and seek to take advantage of them. Australia’s run of extraordinary luck hasn’t ended, as the world’s economic center of gravity has shifted to the Indo-Pacific. That provides the country with a wealth of opportunities should it develop the skills to harness them. 

The report argued that advances in AI or translation technology are no solution, that instead these are lazy ways to address the capability deficit. These digital tools are unable to replace deeper cultural understanding, contextual knowledge, and the human relationships necessary for diplomacy, economic opportunity, and broader regional engagement. 

For once, Australians may be required to do some actual work. The report offered 34 recommendations that can create a path forward for Australia to enhance its Asia capabilities. These fall short of making priority languages compulsory school subjects, but they do present a blueprint for improvements. Yet these recommendations may still be futile if Australia cannot confront its own cultural resistance and lack of political will.