More information has come to light regarding an Australian government initiative aimed at funding the creation of a rugby league club in Papua New Guinea. The Australian government is proposing to allocate AU$600 million over a decade for the potential club, contingent upon the PNG government refraining from signing a security agreement with China.
This initiative is perceived by Canberra as a means of exercising “soft power,” capitalizing on the immense passion for rugby league in Papua New Guinea. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of this strategy remains uncertain.
Gordon Peake, affiliated with the US Institute of Peace in Washington DC and experienced in PNG affairs, shared his insights on the matter. He emphasized the deep-rooted love for rugby league among Papua New Guineans and noted that Australia’s commitment to backing the nation’s aspirations for NRL inclusion has been ongoing for a couple of years. However, he pointed out that the support appears to be linked to geopolitical considerations rather than purely sporting interests, as it also involves a stipulation against establishing a defense agreement with China.
Peake remarked that this shift from soft power to a more substantial political maneuver complicates the situation. He raised concerns about how the two distinct elements—support for rugby league and the political conditions tied to it—could coexist effectively. Should a PNG official later indicate a willingness to form a security pact with China, it remains unclear how the NRL involvement would be affected.
He also highlighted the potential backlash if the Australian support were to falter, especially given the hopes it has sparked among rugby league fans in PNG. In conversations with Papua New Guineans, he noted a general enthusiasm for rugby league, coupled with skepticism about the prioritization of funds for the bid over pressing needs such as healthcare and education.
Peake concluded that losing face is significant for both Australia and Papua New Guinea in this situation; neither party wants to be seen as failing in their commitment to the rugby league venture. He acknowledged that while soft power tactics are increasingly used in diplomacy in the Pacific, there have been few initiatives of this magnitude, which makes withdrawal from support more complicated.
When discussing China’s perspective on Australia’s rugby league offer, Peake suggested that China might view it as a less efficient method of exercising soft power compared to their own strategies, such as providing scholarships to Pacific Islanders. He noted that fostering educational exchanges is likely a more cost-effective approach for China than backing a rugby league team in the region.