Populism and international law: the Morrison years in Australia

There exists a growing literature on a claimed populist anti-elitist backlash, within liberal democracies, against international law and institutions. Yet this literature tends to paint generalised trends and lack context-specific studies on where, and with what effects on multilateral engagement, political leaders have used scapegoating or de-legitimisation of supra-national institutions for national-level political advantage. This article is one contribution to addressing this empirical deficit. It considers Prime Minister Morrison’s 2019 address attacking the ‘negative globalism’ of international institutions staffed by an ‘unaccountable internationalist bureaucracy’. That address announced a review into Australian multilateralism. The similarity between Morrison’s phraseology and that of President Donald Trump (promoting US isolationism) generated alarm among those who value Australia’s commitment to (and reliance upon) the ‘rules-based international order’. The article assesses Morrison’s rhetoric and action in light of the ‘populism + international law’ literature, the relevance of which continues given the tone of the second Trump presidency. Reinforcing the call for greater empiricism, the article argues that the Morrison example does not necessarily support the literature’s assumption of ‘populism = multilateral disengagement’. The article also explores the research agenda in exploring tensions between bureaucrats’ commitment to multilateralism and their imperative to be responsive to elected leaders.