Australia relies on rugby as a key diplomatic instrument in the Pacific. However, the influence of sport depends not only on how much it invests but also on where, how and with whom those investments are made.

While there is much to admire, learn and study about rugby league’s diplomacy, there is a growing need for rugby union and rugby league to work together. A bipartisan approach to rugby diplomacy built on comity, teamwork and balance between the two codes is vital, particularly when China is also investing in the sport.

In December, the Australian government announced a landmark $600 million investment into Pacific Rugby League. While most of this figure is committed to Papua New Guinea, around $250 million of it will be invested in Fiji, Samoa and Tonga.

Quite rightly, Australia promotes the PNG deal as a triumph of sports diplomacy. However, the investment has generated an unhelpful ‘rugby war’ between league and union, and pushed old friends to seek new partners.

It’s no secret that Samoan and Tongan rugby union executives are ‘negotiating with Chinese government officials’ about further investment in their sport as ‘they grapple with the prospect of losing players to rugby league’s multimillion-dollar Pacific expansion.’

Speaking on 3 July, 1938, Neville Chamberlain said that ‘in war, whichever side may call itself the victor, there are no winners, but all are losers.’ Facing the prospect of a divisive rugby war, Australian diplomats and sport administrators would do well to heed such advice.

In Samoa, Fiji and Tonga, rugby union is a cultural, spiritual and family institution. Sports diplomacy is also something that Pacific nations excel at, projecting their identity, culture and pride globally through rugby. For Pacific communities, when a player makes the national team, the achievement is seen as a shared uplifting of the communal mana, rather than an individual triumph.

For decades, rugby union has been a staple of Australia’s sports diplomacy in the Pacific. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade supports rugby activities, including Fiji’s participation in Super Rugby Pacific, as well as grassroots initiatives such as Get Into Rugby PLUS through its PacificAus Sports program. These initiatives are developed in partnership with diplomats, Pacific unions and Rugby Australia, generating the trust and goodwill of Pacific governments.

But rugby union is under significant financial pressure across the Pacific. Revenue gaps after the Covid-19 pandemic, rising travel costs and limited commercial investment have left national unions bereft. The sport is struggling to retain talent, keep up with operational demands, or exploit the exciting and rapid growth of women’s and girls’ participation in the game.

These challenges make Canberra’s investment in league a bit hard to swallow. The decision to pump $600 million into rugby league—a predominantly Australian code with young Pacific roots—has raised tensions and may suggest a disconnect between Australia’s strategic intent and local sporting realities. For some, the investment may also be seen as a neo-colonial project, funding an Australian code to displace a Pacific one.

Without a similar investment in union, Australia risks further isolating key partners, people and leaders across the region. There is also a concern that union, the region’s most popular and culturally embedded sport, may struggle to compete with league.

The Australian government also failed to consult national unions before announcing the league investment. Many of those involved in Pacific Rugby Union learned of the program’s scale through media coverage—hardly a good look for our regional diplomacy, engagement and security. It suggests that Australia brokered the deal for the Pacific, not with it.

New players are also stepping onto the rugby diplomacy pitch, compounding the consequences that could arise from Australia’s strategic miscalculations. In May, for example, China signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Fiji Rugby Union (FRU) and has committed to deepening its partnership with Samoa and Tonga. As FRU representative Jenny Seeto noted at the time, the memorandum was ‘more than a document,’ but rather ‘a commitment to building bridges through rugby.’ She said that ‘For Fiji, China offers vast potential for competition, career development, and youth training.’

The battle for hearts and minds across the Pacific is intensifying. If Australia wishes to counter China’s sports diplomacy in the region, it should invest in one of its most effective, influential and cultural tools: rugby union.

Further neglect could dilute the benefits the government seeks to achieve through its new Sports Diplomacy Strategy 2032+, or through mega sports events such as the Rugby World Cup—events that purport to benefit the region, not just Australia.

To be fair, through some deft diplomacy, rugby league has earned its place in parts of the Pacific, most notably in PNG. However, the scale and structure of Australia’s current investments call for greater balance.

Perhaps the best way to quickly create balance, somewhat crudely for diplomats, is cash. A level playing field should include a significant, possibly matching, funding envelope for rugby union.

Dialogue, listening and empathy are just as good places to start as any, and there is still plenty of time for Australia to strike the right balance between the two rugby codes. A rugby diplomacy summit, workshop or dialogue over time would provide opportunities for networking, collaboration and deeper relationships. Diplomatic training for sports representatives may also facilitate better communication and representation between the many different stakeholders with an interest in sports diplomacy across the pacific.

Measurement and evaluation of the scope, scale and clout of union, delivered through partnerships between Australian and Pacific universities, would demonstrate clearly the power and influence of rugby across the region.

These actions could lead to coordinated efforts from DFAT, Rugby Australia, universities and Pacific unions to scale up high-performance programs, competitions and pathways for women and girls, alongside rugby-based community development. Not to forget the colossal sporting mega-event elephants in the room: the two rapidly approaching rugby world cups offer global platforms to amplify all of the above.

In Samoa, Fiji, and Tonga, rugby union is not just a pastime. The game is the soul of the nation, worn on jerseys and projected to the world through song, strength, culture and power. Preserving Pacific rugby union through balanced funding is not only the right thing to do but a strategic imperative.

Dare we say it, a bipartisan approach to rugby diplomacy where the two codes work together in pursuit of Australian national interests, foreign policy outcomes and key relationships is long overdue.

There is no point using rugby league or union to compete for influence, players or audiences across the Indo-Pacific if we lose the soft power game to China and other adversaries. No one wins in wars—real or figurative—and international security and survival are more important than old-fashioned domestic code wars.