Perfectly mediocre: Australia’s ranking in Asia Power Index reveals deeper issues

As both a nation and a people, Australia has had a long, convoluted and often confused relationship with its place both in the world writ large and our place in the regional order closer to home in the Indo-Pacific.

This strained relationship has largely come as a result of our comparatively small population and geographic isolation from our “great and powerful friends”, coupled with the continent’s natural endowment of immense wealth and prosperity combining to underpin our sense of societal and cultural confusion, apprehension, and collective anxiety towards the global balance of power.

The history of the 20th century only served to exacerbate these feelings, culminating in the fallout following the fall of Singapore in early-1942 and Australia’s pivot from the British Empire to the United States as primary strategic benefactor.

While the Cold War period and the immediate decades of stability and peace following the collapse of the Soviet Union went a long way towards shifting the psyche of the nation and its policymakers, in many ways, it established a false reality that is like a runaway train now rapidly approaching.

This period also fundamentally reshaped the nation’s relationship with power and its application on the global stage as the United States stood unopposed as the world’s sole superpower, effectively lulling us into a false sense of security that the world would forever remain this benign and the US would continue to reign supreme.

Today, we know that was naive optimism as the world around us has rapidly become a more dangerous, competitive, and unpredictable environment characterised, in large, by the simmering competition between the United States and the People’s Republic of China.

In the Australian context, this shift in global and increasingly regional dynamics has only served to exacerbate the long-held national anxiety and cultural ambivalence towards power, which has a major impact on the position, status and security of Australia in the Indo-Pacific.

VIEW ALL

Highlighting this, the Lowy Institute’s latest Asia Power Index has shed light on the shifting sands of the regional and global balance of power and, importantly, Australia’s position in the newly emerging paradigm.

Before diving in, we have to understand that the scope of the research is critical, with Lowy explaining the geographic focus of the index, saying, “The index ranks 27 countries and territories in terms of their capacity to shape their external environment – its scope reaching as far west as Pakistan, as far north as Russia, and as far into the Pacific as Australia, New Zealand, and the United States.”

Adding further data points for the analysis, Lowy measured national power across a number of metrics including diplomacy, resilience, cultural influence, military capability, defence networks, economic relationships and capability, and future resources.

Key findings

At the core of Lowy’s study is a series of key findings that serve to truly illuminate the shifting power dynamics and changing reality of the Indo-Pacific that has immense implications on Australia’s future economic, political and strategic security and the continuing post-Second World War period of relative stability on the global stage.

First and foremost of these key findings is one that wasn’t necessarily foreseen, that is that China’s power is beginning to “plateau”, which Lowy explained, saying, “China’s power is neither surging nor collapsing. It is plateauing at a level below that of the United States, but still well above any Asian competitors,”

This is relatively positive news, contributing to the broader US-led narrative around deterrence being preferable to conflict largely because it hopefully reinforces in the minds of Beijing’s decision makers that kinetic conflict would be utterly devastating for the regime, let alone the broader regional and global environment.

Lowy’s first key finding is subsequently reinforced by the resilient staying power of the United States and its position in the global order; however, it isn’t infinite and can indeed be challenged, with the analysis revealing, “The United States has buttressed its standing in Asia – though it is losing ground to China on military capability.”

Perhaps one of the most interesting key findings is the recognition that India – Australia’s trusted partner in the Quad and the growing focal point of the nation’s economic diversification shift away from dependence on China – won’t necessarily become the superpower many an analyst and academic have predicted it will, with the nation falling short of it’s potential.

Meanwhile, Southeast Asia has emerged as a rapidly growing centre of economic, political and strategic power in the broader Indo-Pacific, with nations like Indonesia rocketing up the rankings and others, including the Philippines, Vietnam and even the city-state of Singapore, experiencing a rapid transformation of their relative power when measured against the broader regional trends.

Lowy detailed this reality, saying, “Southeast Asia’s heavyweights are getting heavier: Indonesia’s power has grown more than any other index country since 2018.”

The global reorientation towards the Indo-Pacific has also seen the re-emergence of Japan as a “nation of consequence” both within the region and more broadly on the global scale, with the nation emerging as a third pole within the region, capable of providing an element of balancing power to continued competition and tension between Washington and Beijing.

Lowy explained this, saying, “Japan is changing from an economic and cultural powerhouse to one much more active in defence and security cooperation ... While Asia remains a ‘bipolar” game dominated by two superpowers, when it comes to diplomatic influence, power is more widely distributed, and Japan is a leading player.”

Bringing us of course back to Australia and our position and status within this rapidly evolving part of the global environment and competition between the world’s powers.

However, it isn’t all good news for Australia when measured against our regional partners, with Lowy setting the scene, saying, “Australia continues to rise up the Asia Power Index, making it into the top five as others falter, but its own power is just holding steady.”

So what does this “just holding steady” actually mean?

Holding steady or managed decline?

I have made the point extensively in the past about Australia seeming to be in the early stages of a period of “managed decline”, characterised by declining economic performance, diversity and opportunity, domestic political division and polarisation, a significant lack of policy ambition and vision for the nation and, of course, lacklustre investment in our defence capabilities.

As part of this, I have also stated that this period of “managed decline”, which has devastating impacts on the lives of average Australians, will have to be confronted in order to secure our nation’s future economic, political and strategic security, and while not alone in confronting this malaise, Australia is one of the nations with the most to lose in the 21st century.

For important context, it is worth noting that Lowy’s findings ranked Australia as the third most influential of the region’s “middle powers”, just ahead of Russia and South Korea, but behind both Japan and India and well behind the United States and China. But the lacklustre performance of Australia, combined with the evolving definitions of power in this new multipolar world, raises more questions than the information answers.

Lowy’s summary analysis of Australia’s ranking in the Asia Power Index has a few key takeaways, beginning with the nation’s apparent “rise” through the power rankings: “In 2024, Australia surpassed Russia to rank fifth in the Asia Power Index, with a gain of one point in its comprehensive power. This increase in ranking, Australia’s second since the inception of the Asia Power Index (it surpassed South Korea in 2020), is more a function of Russia’s decline since 2018 than Australia’s rise. Russia has lost 3.7 points for comprehensive power since 2018, while Australia’s score is only 0.4 points higher over the same period.”

But the kicker really comes in the next statement, with Lowy stating, “Still, the fact that Australia’s power is holding steady contradicts a more pessimistic view that over time, it will become a smaller and less relevant player as other much larger economies rise.”

This, of course, makes sense, particularly as nations like Indonesia, Vietnam, the Philippines and Thailand continue to develop their immense populations compared to Australia’s will correspond with an equal economic, political and strategic rise, placing increased strain on Australia’s capacity and, indeed, willingness to stay relevant.

However, it does conflict with the following statement from Lowy, “Yet when it comes to the Asia Power Index influence measures, Australia has proved resilient, trending upwards for diplomatic influence, cultural influence, and economic relationships. Australia’s score for defence networks – always a strong suit for Canberra, dropped slightly but its second-place rank remained unchallenged...

“In line with this dynamic, Australia’s positive ‘power gap’ – the degree to which it has influence outstripping its resources – increased in the 2024 Asia Power Index. This finding suggests that Australia need not fear irrelevance in Asia in the years to come if it can continue to make sound decisions and leverage its capabilities creatively to achieve its goals,” the Lowy Institute analysis concluded.

I take issue with this last statement as it seems to confine Australia to continued economic, political and strategic decline when compared to our regional and global neighbours, instead deferring to deft diplomacy in an effort to effectively stay out of the way of larger powers seeking to flex their newly found muscle and influence.

It should be said that I am fully prepared to admit that I have misinterpreted the intent of these statements, but it does seem to conform with the theory of Australia’s “managed decline”.

Final thoughts

Despite the rhetoric and lofty ambition highlighted by both sides of the political debate, this all paints a fairly gloomy picture for the average Australian, no matter the demographic group in which they fall, but especially the younger generations.

Declining economic opportunity, coupled with the rapidly deteriorating global and regional balance of power and the increased politicisation of every aspect of contemporary life, only serves to exacerbate the very reality of disconnection, apathy, and helplessness felt by many Australians.

This attitude is only serving to be compounded and creates a growing sentiment that we are speeding towards a predestined outcome, thus disempowering the Australian people and, to a lesser extent, policymakers, as we futilely confront seemingly insurmountable challenges with little to no benefit and at a high-risk/reward calculation.

Taking into account the costs and implications, it is therefore easy to understand why so many Australians, both in the general public and within our decision-making circles, seem to have checked out and are quite happy to allow the nation to continue to limp along in mediocrity because, well, it is easier than having lofty ambitions.

If both Australian policymakers and the Australian public don’t snap out of the comforting security blanket that is the belief in the “End of History”, the nation will continue to rapidly face an uncomfortable and increasingly dangerous new reality, where we truly are no longer the masters of our own destiny.

Our economic resilience, capacity, and competitiveness will prove equally as critical to success in the new world power paradigm as that of the United States, the United Kingdom, or Europe, and we need to begin to recognise the opportunities presented before us.

Expanding and enhancing the opportunities available to Australians while building critical economic resilience, and as a result, deterrence to economic coercion, should be the core focus of the government because only when our economy is strong can we ensure that we can deter aggression towards the nation or our interests.

Get involved with the discussion and let us know your thoughts on Australia’s future role and position in the Indo-Pacific region and what you would like to see from Australia’s political leaders in terms of partisan and bipartisan agenda setting in the comments section below, or get in touch at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..