John Varano

Routledge — Once highly desired for prestige and economic benefits, hosting major sports events is now met with caution in western economies due to escalating costs and risks. Conversely, emerging economies view these events as valuable tools for economic growth and global recognition, despite similar financial burdens. This chapter explores these dynamics, highlighting cost overruns, as seen in Tokyo 2020 and Sochi 2014, and the strategic interest from emerging nations, underscoring the complex, often cautionary, considerations facing potential host nations.

Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) — Established in 2012, the 17+1 initiative was Beijing’s flagship effort to promote China’s economic relations with the nations of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). It’s largely perceived as an extension of China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Some in Europe are worried about the subversive effects the 17+1 might have on the European project, while others think that it’s already unravelling. After a decade of cooperation between the CEE countries and China under the 17+1 mechanism, many of the CEE countries now have strong misgivings about partnering closely with China due to three key trends that are taking shape.

Australian Institute of International Affairs (AIIA) — The Australian federal government recently resolved to scrap the Victorian state government’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). The timing of this decision needs to be contemplated as ongoing developments may trouble bilateral relations between Australia and China.

Australian Institute of International Affairs (AIIA) — The COVID-19 pandemic has ignited new debate on China’s flagship foreign policy, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Against the official position of the Australian federal government, the state of Victoria has recently signed on.

The Conversation — It used to be that hosting any of the major sporting events, particularly the Olympic Games and the FIFA World Cup, would carry significant prestige. It was an honour that would help to shape the legacy of a country or city. It could be a powerful moment of national symbolism and economic transformation. Why then, over the last few years, have many advanced Western economies decided not to bid for such major events, and in some cases, even withdrawn their proposals? Hosting an internationally prominent sporting event invites the global spotlight, provides an injection of tourism money, and a chance for a city or a country to rebuild or develop infrastructure. However, it also brings an immense financial commitment and great risk.

The Conversation — Leaving the EU is one of the most intricate and transformative challenges that the UK has ever confronted. Brexit has significant implications for the British civil service and its capability to deliver on the government’s 12 priorities for Brexit.

IPA Review — Did you know that the seventh most expensive building in the world is being built right here in Australia? No, it’s not a giant apartment block on the Gold Coast. It’s not a flashy new casino. It’s not even the recently announced hotel and apartment complex that will be attached to MoNA in Hobart. It’s the new Royal Adelaide Hospital (nRAH)—a project that is 18 months behind schedule and $640 million over budget. This makes the 800-bed hospital—a public-private partnership—the most expensive building in Australia and the largest capital investment project in South Australian history. But why has this project blown-out? Aside from the optimistic assumptions, project scope changes, ignorance of the technical demand and safety concerns, the nRAH has gone through legal action between the SA government and the builders and unlawful industrial action and anti-competitive behaviour by the CFMEU. In this way the nRAH is a contemporary example of why desperate reform is needed in the delivery of state-based major projects.

The Australian — The forced departure from China of Australian journalists Bill Birtles and Mike Smith is immensely disappointing. The move consequently means Australia has no remaining accredited journalists based in China. It is a sad moment for Sino-Australian relations. It is a great loss for Australia as it is no longer able to chronicle the story of China — one that remains of significant importance.