tag:theconversation.com,2011:/uk/topics/richard-marles-13162/articlesRichard Marles – The Conversation2023-08-18T08:25:00Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2118272023-08-18T08:25:00Z2023-08-18T08:25:00ZView from The Hill: Labor conference gives Albanese a firm ‘yes’ on AUKUS<p>Predictably, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese got his way on AUKUS at Labor’s national conference on Friday.</p>
<p>But, ironically, he and his colleagues had to do a good deal more wrangling with the party than Albanese had done when Labor embraced the agreement in opposition and then followed through in government.</p>
<p>After Scott Morrison, US President Joe Biden and then-british Prime minister Boris Johnson announced AUKUS, Albanese had the then opposition quickly fall in behind it, in line with his small target election strategy. </p>
<p>When implementation fell to the Labor government, again there was no hesitation. But extensive unease about AUKUS has been rippling around the Labor rank and file. <a href="https://theconversation.com/paul-keating-lashes-albanese-government-over-aukus-calling-it-labors-biggest-failure-since-ww1-201866">Paul Keating articulated the sentiment strongly a long time ago</a>.</p>
<p>In the run up to the national conference, Defence Minister Richard Marles and other Labor heavyweights have been taking soundings and smoothing the waters where possible. Marles briefed unions and rank and file party members as the conference loomed. </p>
<p>Intense negotiations among factional movers and shakers continued right up until the last minute. </p>
<p>On the conference floor, the vote was clear. It was taken on the voices. </p>
<p>They didn’t even bother with a formal count (although anyone could have asked for one). That was the way the power brokers wanted things - it left no record of precise numbers. </p>
<p>Like almost everything at this conference, the AUKUS debate was carefully orchestrated. </p>
<p>Albanese came in at the end to make the final pitch. He told delegates that AUKUS “is an act of clear-eyed pragmatism that works in the context of our national interest and in the context of the greater good.”
AUKUS involved “the choices of a mature nation.” </p>
<p>“We have to analyse the world as it is, rather than as we would want it to be. We have to bring our defence capabilities up to speed and AUKUS is central to that.” He said.</p>
<p>“I have come to the position, based upon advice and analysis, that nuclear-powered submarines are what Australia needs in the future”.</p>
<p>Government advocates put AUKUS in the context of Labor’s track record on defence. </p>
<p>The name of Labor icon and second world war prime minister John Curtin was invoked for some heavy-lifting for AUKUS. Minister for Defence Industry Pat Conroy said Curtin had argued in the 1930s for increases in the Australian air force and navy, and contrasted this with the stand of Robert Menzies. </p>
<p>“Do you want to be on the side of John Curtin, or do you want to be on the side of ‘Pig Iron Bob’,” Conroy asked. </p>
<p>In a debate where everyone was trying to be polite to everyone else - apart from some heckling from the floor - the link between appeasement and anti-AUKUS sentiment triggered some blowback. Michael Wright, from the Electrical Trades Union (ETU) who led the opposition against AUKUS, condemned any suggestion that this was akin to appeasement.</p>
<p>Behind the scenes and on the floor of conference, the ability of AUKUS and its submarine program to create jobs was used as a powerful argument. Albanese said it was expected to generate 20,000 well-paid, secure, unionised jobs. </p>
<p>In the pro-AUKUS statement the conference agreed to, jobs featured heavily. </p>
<p>“Labor will ensure that the nuclear-powered submarine program will deliver secure, well-paid unionised jobs and establish a skills and training centre of excellence, with Australian workers trained in the latest technologies that add to Australia’s sovereign capability,” the statement says.</p>
<p>“Labor commits that Australia’s SSN-AUKUS submarines will be built by Australian workers in South Australia, with a peak of 4,000 workers employed to design and build the infrastructure at Osborne and a further 4,000 to 5,500 jobs created to build the submarines.”</p>
<p>One speaker on the opposing side noted that the conversation before the debate was “union-led - both for and against”.</p>
<p>The opponents put forward a range of objections. Wright raised the prospect of a future Coalition government using the nuclear-powered submarines as “the wedge to drive the opening of a nuclear industry in Australia”. </p>
<p>Co-convenor of the Labor Environment Action Network, Felicity Wade, said: “Our people hate nukes”. </p>
<p>Federal Labor backbencher, Josh Wilson, the member for Fremantle, raised the challenge of nuclear waste, and said the decision involved “too many risks”. He rejected the appeasement argument as “ridiculous”. Wilson earlier this year spoke out strongly against the submarines deal.</p>
<p>The statement the conference endorsed says that Labor will “ensure that all Australian warships, including submarines, are Australian sovereign assets, commanded by Australian officers and under the sovereign control of the Australian Government”. It also provides assurances on the disposal of nuclear waste associated with the sumbarines and declares Labor “will maintain the prohibition on the establishment of nuclear power plants”. </p>
<p>Labor conferences are not what they once were in terms of power, but the government’s intense pre-conference efforts to get support for AUKUS showed it recognised it was important to formally sign up the party to this historic agreement. </p>
<p>By maximising the consultation, it minimised the fracture within Labor over this issue. </p>
<p>This sends a significant message to Australia’s US ally, where there is some (minority) questioning of the submarine deal.</p>
<p>Albanese can be well satisfied with this Labor conference, which wraps up on Saturday. It’s been smooth sailing. His authority has been highlighted.</p>
<p>The next few weeks, however, will be much rougher for the PM.</p>
<p>He must soon name the date for the Voice referendum vote. With the polls looking poor, that issue is shaping up as an extremely difficult battle for Albanese and other “yes” campaigners. </p>
<p>If the numbers are turned around, Albanese will end the year on a high. If, however, the double majority needed for success is not reached, it will be a significant blow for him. </p>
<p>That might not translate into the popular vote, especially given most people have their attention on other issues, notably cost of living. But it could diminish Albanese’s authority among his senior colleagues, who might start to question his judgement.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/211827/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>After last-minute deliberations between Labor powerbrokers and unions, the AUKUS pact was endorsed by the ALP at its national conference this FridayMichelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2116732023-08-16T07:05:12Z2023-08-16T07:05:12ZView from The Hill: Albanese unveils boosted housing target and incentive payments ahead of Labor national conference<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/542924/original/file-20230816-17-pt2y6e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=17%2C11%2C3968%2C2970&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/aerial-view-typical-suburb-australia-642167575">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has announced $3 billion in incentives for states and territories and a boosted target for the number of homes to be built, in a package aimed at alleviating Australia’s housing crisis. </p>
<p>A Wednesday national cabinet meeting in Brisbane also advanced work on renters’ rights. But there will be no rent freeze or caps, as demanded by the Greens.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1691684990789230845"}"></div></p>
<p>National cabinet agreed on a new national target to build 1.2 million “new, well located homes” over the five years from July 1 next year. The National Housing Accord target was one million homes.</p>
<p>The federal government will provide $3 billion to go to states and territories that exceed their share of the one million homes under the National Housing Accord. </p>
<p>“This will incentivise states and territories to undertake the reforms which are necessary to boost housing supply and increase housing affordability,” Albanese told a news conference after the meeting.</p>
<p>There will also be a $500 million competitive funding program for local and state governments to kickstart supply by such measures as connecting essential services, supporting amenities for new housing development, and building planning capability.</p>
<p>The meeting also endorsed a blueprint that promotes medium and high density housing in “well-located areas close to existing public transport connections, amenities and employment”, as well as “streamlining approval pathways”.</p>
<p>There will be more collaboration with the states on migration settings. </p>
<p>The “Better Deal for Renters” includes developing a nationally consistent policy on eviction grounds, moving towards limiting rent increases to once a year, and phasing in minimal rental standards.</p>
<p>The Greens said in a statement: “Labor’s announcements today largely enshrine the status quo, leaving millions of renters exposed to unlimited rent increases”.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1691716139209142335"}"></div></p>
<p>The housing package comes as Labor prepares for its national conference, amid intensive efforts to defuse contentious issues, especially AUKUS, to ensure the prime minister and the government are not embarrassed. </p>
<p>Defence Minister Richard Marles has held briefings for rank and file party members and unions on AUKUS. There has been deep unease among the party membership over the agreement, which Albanese accepted in opposition virtually immediately, in order to keep Labor a small target on national security for the 2022 election. </p>
<p>The conference will not reject or condemn the AUKUS agreement, with its promise of nuclear-powered submarines. Whatever motion is passed is expected to be relatively anodyne. </p>
<p>One left source who has attended many conferences said the attempted control of this one “is the most rigid I’ve ever seen”. </p>
<p>This is the first national conference in decades where the left has the controlling numbers, but it is not a solid bloc. </p>
<p>There are 402 delegates. The left has 202, including 25 from the CFMEU and industrial left who are not part of the state or territory left groups. The right has 185, with 12 delegates not aligned. The remaining delegates are the president and two vice presidents. </p>
<p>Factions were meeting on Wednesday. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-labor-president-wayne-swan-on-the-partys-coming-national-conference-211342">Politics with Michelle Grattan: Labor president Wayne Swan on the party's coming national conference</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The conference, being held in Brisbane, runs three days, with Albanese delivering his keynote address on Thursday morning. </p>
<p>While the party’s policy platform, settled by the conference, is formally binding on an ALP government, these conferences have nothing like the clout they once did, and are more stage-managed. </p>
<p>On Thursday delegates will discuss the economy, including taxation and housing, climate, the environment and energy security, and health and aged care.</p>
<p>The CFMEU plans to push for support for a super profits tax. This will be backed by the party’s Labor for Housing group. </p>
<p>The union’s national secretary Zach Smith, said recently: “A super profits tax is the fairest way to raise the billions of dollars needed to guarantee every Australian has the basic right of shelter”.</p>
<p>The convener of Labor for Housing, Julijana Todorovic, from the Victorian socialist left, told The Conversation a super profits tax could provide ongoing funds for housing. She said the group would also be advocating structural policy reform that focused on intergenerational inequity in housing. </p>
<p>The AUKUS debate will come on Friday when the foreign affairs and defence sections of the platform are considered.</p>
<p>The government has adjusted its policy on Palestine and Israel ahead of the conference to head off trouble over what is a sensitive issue among party members.</p>
<p>A key feature of the conference will be whether there is a general sentiment that the government should move faster on change or whether the party is generally satisfied with the government’s pace. </p>
<p>Albanese stresses that to achieve major change, Labor has to be a long term government and therefore cannot move so fast that it alienates voter. </p>
<p>In his foreward to the new national platform he writes: “I’m proud of what we have achieved together so far, but it is just the beginning. Maintaining the momentum we have built is an important part of the responsibility and privilege of forming Government.</p>
<p>"It is my deep hope that this is a long-term Labor government because real, enduring reforms that change a country for the better take time.”</p>
<p>Albanese is set to attend the Matildas’ match against England in Sydney on Wednesday night.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/211673/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The conference, being held in Brisbane, runs three days, with Albanese delivering his keynote address on Thursday morningMichelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2084652023-06-26T04:18:30Z2023-06-26T04:18:30ZAustralia announces $110 million in new military and humanitarian assistance for Ukraine<p>Australia will provide $110 million in further assistance to Ukraine, bringing its total support to $790 million during the conflict. </p>
<p>The new package includes 70 military vehicles, artillery ammunition and $10 million to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, which manages the Ukrainian Humanitarian Fund, to assist with shelter, health services, clean water and sanitation. </p>
<p>Australia will also extend duty-free access for goods imported from Ukraine for another year. </p>
<p>Of the total $790 million Australia has provided, $610 million has been in military assistance. </p>
<p>But Australia still has not returned its ambassador back to Ukraine, despite many other countries having done so. </p>
<p>Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the extra support “will make a real difference, helping the Ukrainian people who continue to show great courage in the face of Russia’s illegal, unprovoked and immoral war”. </p>
<p>Defence Minister Richard Marles said Australia was “one of the largest non-NATO contributors in support of Ukraine, and will continue to support Ukraine to end the war on its own terms”.</p>
<p>Foreign Minister Penny Wong said “Russia cannot be allowed to infringe upon another country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity”. </p>
<p>Ukraine’s ambassador to Australia, Vasyl Myroshnychenko, welcomed the latest assistance, pointing to the importance of transportation capability in the war, and expressing his thanks to the prime minister. </p>
<p>Opposition leader Peter Dutton said the package didn’t go far enough: “this has taken too long and is too little”. </p>
<h2>Russia loses court bid over embassy lease</h2>
<p>Meanwhile, the High Court on Monday dismissed Russia’s attempt to challenge the government’s cancellation of its lease of a site for a proposed new embassy near Parliament House. The lease was quashed on security grounds. </p>
<p>Albanese told the media: “The court has made clear that there is no legal basis for a Russian presence to continue on the site at this time, and we expect the Russian Federation to act in accordance with the court’s ruling”.</p>
<p>Soon after the decision, a Russian diplomat who had been squatting on the site departed.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/208465/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The new package includes military vehicles, artillery ammunition and $10 million for a UN humanitarian agency.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2018662023-03-15T05:58:33Z2023-03-15T05:58:33ZPaul Keating lashes Albanese government over AUKUS, calling it Labor’s biggest failure since WW1<p>Former Prime Minister Paul Keating has launched a swingeing attack on the Labor government over the AUKUS submarine agreement, accusing Anthony Albanese of relying on “two seriously unwise ministers, Penny Wong and Richard Marles”. </p>
<p>Keating lashed the deal for a tripartite build of nuclear-powered submarines as “the worst international decision by an Australian Labor government since the former Labor leader, Billy Hughes, sought to introduce conscription” in the first world war. </p>
<p>“We have gone from a defend Australia to a forward defence policy,” Keating said, while insisting China posed no threat to Australia. </p>
<p>He made his criticisms in a long speech and question-and-answer session at the National Press Club.</p>
<p>In a direct challenge to Albanese, Keating said: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>I dare the prime minister to explicitly suggest or leave open the question that Australia might go to war over Taiwan – at the urgings of the United States or anyone else. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Keating said the Chinese had never implied or said they would threaten Australia. He added that threatening Australia would mean “an invasion”. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>It doesn’t mean firing a few missiles off the coast like the Japanese submarines did in 1943, firing a few things into the eastern suburbs of Sydney. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>It would mean bringing an armada of ships with a massive army to invade, which it would not be possible for the Chinese to do. “We wouldn’t need submarines to sink an armada,” he said.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1635840697604657153"}"></div></p>
<p>Keating said one of the critical problems in Australian policy was “that defence has overtaken foreign policy. As a consequence, we’re not using diplomacy.”</p>
<p>He recalled saying previously that Taiwan was not a vital interest of Australia’s – and that remained the case. </p>
<p>In earlier times, he said Labor has “invariably got the big international ones right”. This includes former Labor leaders Arthur Calwell <a href="https://sa.org.au/interventions/leftvietnam.htm">opposing</a> Australian military participation in the Vietnam war and Simon Crean <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/labor-s-decision-to-oppose-the-iraq-war-was-correct-history-shows-20180319-p4z51v.html">opposing</a> the Iraq war.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>This one, AUKUS, is where Labor breaks its winning streak of now over a century.</p>
<p>Falling into a major mistake, Anthony Albanese, befuddled by his own small target election strategy, emerges as prime minister with an American sword to rattle at the neighbourhood to impress upon it the United States’ esteemed view of its untrammelled destiny.</p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/if-aukus-is-all-about-nuclear-submarines-how-can-it-comply-with-nuclear-non-proliferation-treaties-a-law-scholar-explains-201760">If AUKUS is all about nuclear submarines, how can it comply with nuclear non-proliferation treaties? A law scholar explains</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Labor quickly supported AUKUS while in opposition after then-Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced it with the US and UK leaders in 2021. </p>
<p>And after the announcement of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/aukus-submarine-plan-will-be-the-biggest-defence-scheme-in-australian-history-so-how-will-it-work-199492">submarine program details</a>, which could cost Australia up to A$368 billion over three decades, Albanese said “a new chapter in the relationship between our nation, the United States and the United Kingdom begins”.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/515427/original/file-20230315-16-ld71lk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/515427/original/file-20230315-16-ld71lk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/515427/original/file-20230315-16-ld71lk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/515427/original/file-20230315-16-ld71lk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/515427/original/file-20230315-16-ld71lk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/515427/original/file-20230315-16-ld71lk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/515427/original/file-20230315-16-ld71lk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Anthony Albanese (left), with US President Joe Biden and British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak at the AUKUS announcement in San Diego.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Leon Neal/Getty pool/AP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Keating said he had generally found Albanese to be responsive to his calls, texts and emails. But last month when he spoke to an Albanese staffer seeking a conversation with the PM especially about AUKUS, the message was delivered but Keating said he “heard nothing” from the prime minister. </p>
<p>“The fact is, he did not wish to hear the message or have the conversation,” he said. </p>
<p>Keating was especially scathing about Wong, the foreign minister, and Marles, the defence minister. </p>
<p>“Penny Wong took a decision in 2016, five years before AUKUS, not to be at odds with the Coalition on foreign policy on any core issue,” he said. Under this approach, “you may stay out of trouble but you are compromised. Self compromised.”</p>
<p>Though Keating said Marles was “well-intentioned”, he believed the defence minister was “completely captured by the idea of America.”</p>
<blockquote>
<p>And the then-opposition leader [Albanese] not ever having displayed any deep or long-term interest in foreign affairs, fell in with Wong and Marles as leader of the great misadventure. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Keating said Albanese this week “screwed into place the last shackle in the long chain the United States has laid out to contain China”.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>No mealy-mouthed talk of ‘stabilisation’ in our China relationship or resort to softer or polite language will disguise from the Chinese the extent and intent of our commitment to United States’ strategic hegemony in East Asia with all its deadly portents.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Among his targets, Keating also attacked Andrew Shearer, the head of the Office of National Intelligence, and the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. He said, “remarkably, a Labor government has picked up Shearer’s neo-con proclivities and those of ASPI”, describing the latter as “a pro-US cell” headed by a former chief of staff to ex-Foreign Minister Marise Payne. </p>
<p>He also attacked journalists, including those asking questions, telling one he should hang his “head in shame” for the articles he had co-authored. </p>
<p>Keating said the majority of the Labor party in the branches would share his views, saying when the average branch member “gets onto this […] there will be a big reaction”. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/with-aukus-australia-has-wedded-itself-to-a-risky-us-policy-on-china-and-turned-a-deaf-ear-to-the-region-201757">With AUKUS, Australia has wedded itself to a risky US policy on China – and turned a deaf ear to the region</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/201866/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The former prime minister also said Albanese was relying on two ‘seriously unwise’ ministers, Penny Wong and Richard Marles.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1998912023-02-14T07:55:24Z2023-02-14T07:55:24ZWord from The Hill: Defence review goes to government; Dutton’s apology for boycotting Sorry; Phil Lowe under fire<p>As well as her interviews with politicians and experts, Politics with Michelle Grattan includes “Word from The Hill”, where she discusses the news with members of The Conversation’s politics team.</p>
<p>In this podcast Michelle and politics + society editor Amanda Dunn discuss the landmark Defence Strategic Review, handed to the government on Tuesday, which Defence minister Richard Marles describes as the “single most important re-evaluation of Australia’s strategic posture in the last 35 years”. The review, not yet released, comes ahead of a major speech on national security Anthony Albanese will deliver at the National Press Club next week.</p>
<p>They also canvass Peter Dutton’s Monday apology for boycotting Kevin Rudd’s 2008 Apology to the Stolen Generations, and the pile-on targeting Governor Phil Lowe over the Reserve Bank’s aggressive interest rates policy to bring down inflation.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/199891/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>As well as her interviews with politicians and experts, Politics with Michelle Grattan includes “Word from The Hill”, where she discusses the news with members of The Conversation’s politics team.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1961182022-12-07T06:35:09Z2022-12-07T06:35:09ZAustralia and US take realist approach to regional influence<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/499431/original/file-20221207-27-isifob.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Michael Reynolds/EPA/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Foreign Minister Penny Wong and Defence Minister Richard Marles met with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III for the Australia-United States Ministerial Consultations (AUSMIN) in Washington, DC, on December 6. </p>
<p>While there is notable continuity with last year’s agenda, this year’s AUSMIN clearly bears the Albanese government’s foreign and defence policy imprint – one that has a receptive audience in the Biden administration.</p>
<p>With greater military co-operation, and a priority on climate action, the meeting outlines an agenda to vigorously compete with China for regional influence while advancing the alliance’s long-standing defence and security co-operation objectives.</p>
<h2>A realist shift from 2021</h2>
<p>There is a decidedly realist tone to this year’s AUSMIN, at least from Australia’s perspective. In her remarks at the <a href="https://www.state.gov/secretary-antony-j-blinken-defense-secretary-lloyd-austin-australian-foreign-minister-penny-wong-and-australian-deputy-prime-minister-and-minister-for-defense-richard-marles-at-a-joint-press-avail/">joint press conference</a>, Wong largely dispensed with talk of shared history and values. Instead, she cast AUSMIN as “the primary forum for us as an alliance […] to make progress on shared interests”.</p>
<p>Ideology has also taken a backseat. The emphasis on “democratic values” and human rights that occupied an entire section in last year’s joint statement has been condensed and accompanied by a more balanced assessment of China. This notes the need for responsible competition, risk reduction, and co-operation on issues of shared interest. </p>
<p>This year’s statement also sharpens the alliance’s focus on Australia’s region. The Pacific Islands are front and centre. There are four detailed paragraphs on how the Australia-US alliance is engaging these countries diplomatically, economically, militarily and in the maritime environment. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/as-apec-winds-up-summit-season-brought-successes-but-also-revealed-the-extent-of-global-challenges-193934">As APEC winds up, 'summit season' brought successes but also revealed the extent of global challenges</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>From Wong’s relentless regional <a href="https://www.foreignminister.gov.au/minister/penny-wong/speech/speech-pacific-islands-forum-secretariat">engagement</a> since taking office, to US President Joe Biden’s hosting of the first <a href="https://www.state.gov/u-s-pacific-islands-country-summit/">US-Pacific Islands Summit</a> in September, and <a href="https://asean.mission.gov.au/aesn/CSP.html#:%7E:text=On%252027%2520October%25202021%252C%2520at,Comprehensive%2520Strategic%2520Partnership%2520(CSP).">both</a> <a href="https://asean.usmission.gov/fact-sheet-president-biden-and-asean-leaders-launch-the-u-s-asean-comprehensive-strategic-partnership/">countries’</a> Comprehensive Strategic Partnerships with ASEAN, Australia and the United States have clearly increased their diplomatic engagements with these two vital subregions. </p>
<p>The focus on maritime security co-operation with the Pacific Islands, in particular, complements similar alliance activities in <a href="https://www.ussc.edu.au/analysis/australia-us-contributions-to-southeast-asian-maritime-security-resilience">South-East Asia</a>, where Australia and the United States should be looking to better integrate their respective lines of effort. </p>
<p>By contrast, there was no reference to the Afghanistan conflict or the threat of terrorism. The statement thus reflects the conclusion of the alliance’s Middle East period.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/499456/original/file-20221207-24-2o3fgz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/499456/original/file-20221207-24-2o3fgz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499456/original/file-20221207-24-2o3fgz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499456/original/file-20221207-24-2o3fgz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499456/original/file-20221207-24-2o3fgz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499456/original/file-20221207-24-2o3fgz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499456/original/file-20221207-24-2o3fgz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Penny Wong’s efforts in the Pacific have been a focal point of her early months as foreign minister.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Australian Department of Foreign Affairs/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Incremental steps in defence cooperation</h2>
<p>As we <a href="https://www.ussc.edu.au/analysis/ausmin-2022">predicted</a> last week, no new details of the AUKUS partnership were announced. However, Marles did emphasise the need to “uplift” Australia’s shipbuilding industry to meet the task. An update on export control reform was also not forthcoming, other than mentions of the need for “seamless” bilateral defence industrial co-operation.</p>
<p>On the alliance’s force posture initiatives, the meeting flagged some progress on key issues without making major new announcements. For instance, there will be an increase in the frequency and sophistication of US Air Force rotations through Australia, as heralded last year. By comparison, little was said about mooted US Army and Navy deployments to Australia.</p>
<p>Importantly, the statement identifies measures to strengthen the resilience and sustainability of combined Australia-US operations. This includes targeted logistics exercises and co-development of “agile logistics” capabilities, as well as efforts to enhance Australia’s ability to maintain and repair munitions in-country. This will be done by streamlining US technology transfer and information-sharing arrangements – measures that Marles <a href="https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/marless-focus-for-the-us-australia-alliance-integrate-integrate-integrate/">emphasised</a> during the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Czfq1bYCaCI">joint press conference</a>. </p>
<p>Making good on these commitments will be critical to sustaining a higher tempo of joint operations in the region.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/jnB4HUoUMjQ?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>Bringing Japan on board</h2>
<p>Perhaps the most eye-catching development is the invitation to Japan to “increase its participation in [US-Australia] Force Posture Initiatives”. Though short on specifics, this development underscores how the Australia-US alliance has become a <a href="https://www.9dashline.com/article/advancing-collective-defence-through-the-australia-us-alliance?rq=Tom%2520Corben">mechanism</a> for “advancing a strategy of collective defence among other Indo-Pacific allies”. </p>
<p>Future years could see larger and more frequent deployments of Japan Self-Defence Forces in more sophisticated bilateral and trilateral joint exercises. These forces would include <a href="https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/Indo-Pacific/Japan-sends-fighter-jets-to-Philippines-for-1st-time-in-air-force-exchange">fighter aircraft</a> and <a href="https://www.mod.go.jp/en/article/2021/08/e46ef03882f39c7d040c42d5213d446317636b61.html">marines</a> rotating through Australian facilities. </p>
<p>Indeed, this announcement is consistent with the trajectory of the Australia-Japan relationship set by the recently updated <a href="https://www.dfat.gov.au/countries/japan/australia-japan-joint-declaration-security-cooperation">Joint Declaration on Security Cooperation</a>. It makes the Australia-Japan 2+2 ministerial talks scheduled for Friday in Tokyo all the more interesting. Both countries are looking to take their defence co-operation, including with the United States, to the <a href="https://asia.nikkei.com/Opinion/U.S.-will-listen-more-to-Australia-and-Japan-if-they-speak-together">next level</a>.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1600266262894227456"}"></div></p>
<h2>Climate co-operation to the fore</h2>
<p>Wong emphasised climate co-operation as a primary area of joint collaboration. This is not entirely novel, as “climate, clean energy and the environment” received significant attention at AUSMIN <a href="https://www.dfat.gov.au/geo/united-states-of-america/ausmin/joint-statement-australia-us-ministerial-consultations-ausmin-2021">2021</a>. There was also a brief mention in <a href="https://www.dfat.gov.au/geo/united-states-of-america/ausmin/Pages/joint-statement-ausmin-2015#:%7E:text=Joint%2520Statement%2520AUSMIN%25202015%2520October%252013%252C%25202015%2520Minister,Boston%2520for%2520the%2520Australia-United%2520States%2520Ministerial%2520%2528AUSMIN%2529%2520consultations.">2015</a>. </p>
<p>Nevertheless, the framing of climate collaboration as one of three specific areas of focus (the others being engagement with South-East Asia and the Pacific Islands) reaffirms Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s and Biden’s November statement of climate partnership as a “new pillar” of the alliance.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/499465/original/file-20221207-4529-gs1utb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/499465/original/file-20221207-4529-gs1utb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499465/original/file-20221207-4529-gs1utb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499465/original/file-20221207-4529-gs1utb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499465/original/file-20221207-4529-gs1utb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499465/original/file-20221207-4529-gs1utb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499465/original/file-20221207-4529-gs1utb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The AUSMIN meeting brought climate co-operation to the fore, consolidating the discussions between Anthony Albanese and Joe Biden in November.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This is likely to be well received by <a href="https://www.ussc.edu.au/analysis/an-incomplete-project-australians-views-of-the-us-alliance">domestic and regional audiences</a> alike. The <a href="https://www.dfat.gov.au/international-relations/joint-statement-australia-us-ministerial-consultations-ausmin-2022">2022</a> joint statement confirms the elevation of climate, with this issue addressed in second as opposed to fourth place in 2021. </p>
<p>Climate efforts were also prioritised in relation to regional engagement with South-East Asia and particularly the Pacific Islands. This is a marked elevation from 2021, when climate was mentioned in less stark terms within these contexts. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-and-the-us-are-firm-friends-on-defence-now-lets-turn-that-into-world-beating-climate-action-195905">Australia and the US are firm friends on defence – now let's turn that into world-beating climate action</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Finally, the visuals of this year’s AUSMIN were also notable. Watching the first Asian-Australian foreign minister standing alongside the first African-American secretary of defense was a poignant reminder of the power of identity in shaping bilateral narratives. Wong has often said that “<a href="https://www.foreignminister.gov.au/minister/penny-wong/speech/whitlam-oration">foreign policy starts with who we are</a>”, and it was good to see this year’s AUSMIN reflect the diversity of our multicultural societies.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/196118/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The USSC Foreign and Defence Policy Program receives funding from the Australian Department of Defence, Northrup Grumman, and Thales. Peter K. Lee also receives funding from the Korea Foundation.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>The USSC Foreign and Defence Policy Program receives funding from the Australian Department of Defence, Northrup Grumman, and Thales. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>The Foreign Policy and Defence Program at the United States Studies Centre receives funding from the Department of Defence, Northrop Grumman Australia, and Thales Australia.</span></em></p>This year’s talks had a noticeable shift of tone, reflecting the new Australian government. They include an emphasis on climate action and an invitation to Japan.Peter K. Lee, Research Fellow, Foreign Policy and Defence Program, USSC, University of SydneySophie Mayo, Research Associate, Foreign Policy and Defence, United States Studies Centre, University of SydneyThomas Corben, Research Fellow, Foreign Policy and Defence, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1959052022-12-06T02:50:52Z2022-12-06T02:50:52ZAustralia and the US are firm friends on defence – now let’s turn that into world-beating climate action<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/499126/original/file-20221205-18-j6alt4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=1244%2C337%2C4612%2C3705&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Climate action is firmly on the political agenda in both Australia and the United States, following a recent change in government in both nations. As this year’s Australia-US Ministerial Consultations (<a href="https://www.dfat.gov.au/geo/united-states-of-america/ausmin/ausmin-australia-united-states-ministerial-consultations">AUSMIN</a>) get underway in Washington, the Albanese and Biden administrations appear keen for deeper bilateral cooperation on tackling climate change.</p>
<p>New research has found the political impetus for this cooperation is reflected in the views of Australians. <a href="https://www.ussc.edu.au/analysis/us-midterms-2022-the-stakes-for-australia-and-the-alliance">It shows</a> many Australians believe our defence alliance with the US should be extended to include greater collaboration on climate action.</p>
<p>In this respect, the US-Australia Alliance is seen by many Australians as an <a href="https://www.ussc.edu.au/analysis/an-incomplete-project-australians-views-of-the-us-alliance">incomplete project</a>. It’s now time for both the Australian and US governments to turn their rhetoric on climate cooperation into reality.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="one woman and four men sit in front of flags" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/499129/original/file-20221205-5837-ps0r1p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/499129/original/file-20221205-5837-ps0r1p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499129/original/file-20221205-5837-ps0r1p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499129/original/file-20221205-5837-ps0r1p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499129/original/file-20221205-5837-ps0r1p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499129/original/file-20221205-5837-ps0r1p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499129/original/file-20221205-5837-ps0r1p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Many Australians believe our defence alliance with the US should be extended to include greater collaboration on climate action.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Evan Vucci/AP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The shifting sands of climate politics</h2>
<p>In August, the Albanese government <a href="https://www.pm.gov.au/media/albanese-government-passes-climate-change-bill-house-representatives">passed</a> its Climate Change Bill, enshrining into law an emissions reduction target of 43% from 2005 levels by 2030, and net-zero emissions by 2050.</p>
<p>On taking office, Albanese also announced a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/22/anthony-albanese-to-order-intelligence-chief-to-examine-security-threats-posed-by-climate-crisis">major review</a> of security threats posed by the climate crisis. </p>
<p>The Biden administration has also passed a number of laws with significant climate provisions. They include <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/bipartisan-infrastructure-law/">new infrastructure laws</a>, the <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/08/09/fact-sheet-chips-and-science-act-will-lower-costs-create-jobs-strengthen-supply-chains-and-counter-china/">CHIPS and Science Act</a> and the <a href="https://www.pwc.com/us/en/services/esg/library/inflation-reduction-act-climate-considerations.html#:%7E:text=Billed%20as%20the%20largest%20climate,by%20President%20Biden%20on%20Aug.">Inflation Reduction Act</a> – the latter billed as the most significant climate legislation in US history.</p>
<p>The outcome of last month’s midterm US elections will, however, <a href="https://www.ussc.edu.au/analysis/explainer-the-foreign-policy-implications-of-the-2022-us-midterms">hamper</a> Biden’s climate efforts. Republicans now narrowly control the US House of Representatives. This means climate policy will likely be targeted and piecemeal at least until the 2024 US presidential elections. </p>
<p>But the Democrats’ continued control of the Senate still leaves room for progress on climate action. This is most likely on issues with bipartisan consensus such as boosting US competitiveness with China and reducing dependence on Russian oil and gas. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-us-has-finally-passed-a-huge-climate-bill-australia-needs-to-keep-up-188525">The US has finally passed a huge climate bill. Australia needs to keep up</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="man waves at lectern surrounded by supporters" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/499140/original/file-20221206-20-cple79.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/499140/original/file-20221206-20-cple79.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499140/original/file-20221206-20-cple79.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499140/original/file-20221206-20-cple79.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499140/original/file-20221206-20-cple79.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499140/original/file-20221206-20-cple79.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499140/original/file-20221206-20-cple79.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Ohio Republican JD Vance declares electoral victory in the midterm elections last month. The Republicans gained control of the House, but the Democrats still control the Senate.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Stronger together</h2>
<p>Both the US and Australian governments have also recognised the need for deeper bilateral cooperation on climate action. </p>
<p>In opposition, Albanese <a href="https://anthonyalbanese.com.au/media-centre/70th-anzus-anniversary">said</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We should immediately deepen US-Australian cooperation on climate change security issues […] On coming to office, I will make comprehensive co-operation on climate change a hallmark of Alliance co-operation.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And in Washington in July this year, Defence Minister Richard Marles <a href="https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/speeches/2022-07-12/address-center-strategic-and-international-studies-csis">reiterated</a> that climate change was “the single greatest threat” to the lives and livelihoods of Australia’s Pacific Island neighbours. He declared “Australia will lift its weight” in response – including by making climate change a pillar of the US-Australia alliance. </p>
<p>Senior Australian and US defence officials have also <a href="https://news.defence.gov.au/media/media-releases/australia-and-united-states-military-leaders-reinforce-shared-commitment-free">reaffirmed</a> their commitment to “evolving” the alliance – including through better engagement on climate change – to support stability and security in the Indo-Pacific.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/cop27-was-disappointing-but-2022-remains-an-historic-year-for-international-climate-policy-195288">COP27 was disappointing, but 2022 remains an historic year for international climate policy</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>What does the Australian public want?</h2>
<p>Our research suggests the Australian community also wants to see greater collaboration with the US on the wicked climate change problem.</p>
<p>Polling conducted by the University of Sydney’s United States Studies Centre <a href="https://www.ussc.edu.au/analysis/us-midterms-2022-the-stakes-for-australia-and-the-alliance">found</a> climate change was the most important international issue for respondents (57%). It came ahead of security cooperation with the US and Japan (56%), increasing trade and investment in Asia (49%) and standing up to China (48%). </p>
<p>Some 77% of participants said fighting climate change with the US was important for Australia. This view was largely bipartisan: 87% of Labor voters and 73% of Coalition voters said this cooperation was very important or somewhat important.</p>
<p>Respondents aged 18 to 34 were the most likely to support climate action in concert with the US.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="people hold signs and march in climate rally" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/499144/original/file-20221206-5837-ud41nv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/499144/original/file-20221206-5837-ud41nv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499144/original/file-20221206-5837-ud41nv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499144/original/file-20221206-5837-ud41nv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499144/original/file-20221206-5837-ud41nv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499144/original/file-20221206-5837-ud41nv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499144/original/file-20221206-5837-ud41nv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">People aged 18 to 34 were most likely to support US-Australia cooperation on climate action.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">James Ross/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This data is backed by qualitative evidence gathered by myself and colleagues Andrew O'Neil and Caitlin Byrne (of Griffith University) and Stephan Fruhling (of the Australian National University). It involved <a href="https://www.ussc.edu.au/analysis/an-incomplete-project-australians-views-of-the-us-alliance">community focus groups</a> across all states and territories in Australia over the last 14 months.</p>
<p>We held 29 discussions with 232 community members to gauge their views on the Australia-US Alliance. The participants were drawn from wide-ranging backgrounds and recruited via a range of strategies to ensure diverse representation. </p>
<p>One key theme to emerge was that climate change is considered an important policy area for the future of the alliance. As one participant said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>There is an opportunity for Australia to use the Alliance for climate change and elaborate on how we define security. I think there’s a shared interest in climate policy and climate security and bringing that into AUKUS. There’s an opportunity to tie that more closely to the Alliance.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Participants broadly expressed the view that the alliance should adapt to new and emerging challenges to remain relevant in the 21st century. As one participant put it:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The Alliance is considered unbreakable so we should see how far it can be stretched.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Another participant observed:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The alliance needs to be repurposed to address real security threats rather than imagined ones — most significantly the impacts of climate change.</p>
<p>There is a real opportunity now to expand thinking around the alliance beyond binary questions of security and defence, to position Australia as an active peace-builder rather than a reactionary force. Climate action, and leveraging the alliance to pursue it, is central to that.</p>
</blockquote>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="defence personnel fire weapon in training exercise" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/499146/original/file-20221206-21-c7a0hd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/499146/original/file-20221206-21-c7a0hd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499146/original/file-20221206-21-c7a0hd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499146/original/file-20221206-21-c7a0hd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499146/original/file-20221206-21-c7a0hd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499146/original/file-20221206-21-c7a0hd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499146/original/file-20221206-21-c7a0hd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Many Australians believe cooperation with the US should extend far beyond defence. Pictured: Australian and US defence personnel fire a M777 Howitzer during a joint exercise last year.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Department of Defence</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Climate collaboration is key to an enduring alliance</h2>
<p>The Australian government — by itself and in partnership with US counterparts — should inject greater energy into deeper collaboration with the US on climate action.</p>
<p>In opposition, Albanese outlined what that cooperation should entail, saying: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>We must develop operational plans to address the natural disasters and humanitarian outcomes. We must study and plan for how other states may seek to exploit its impacts on regional security. </p>
<p>We must develop capabilities and shared responsibilities to mitigate its worst impacts. We should cooperate on technological development to take advantage of the economic opportunity that comes from the shift to clean energy.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>As our research shows, the Australian public sees such collaboration is a key to the alliance’s future.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/cop27-one-big-breakthrough-but-ultimately-an-inadequate-response-to-the-climate-crisis-194056">COP27: one big breakthrough but ultimately an inadequate response to the climate crisis</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/195905/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter J Dean receives funding from Australian Research Council, Department of Defence, and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. </span></em></p>The US-Australia Alliance is seen by many Australians as an incomplete project. Government rhetoric on climate cooperation must now become reality.Peter J. Dean, Director, Foreign Policy and Defence, United States Studies Centre, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1948172022-11-17T09:31:11Z2022-11-17T09:31:11ZGrattan on Friday: A lot may be changing in China-Australia relations, but a lot is staying the same<p>In retrospect, there were various signposts pointing to Chinese President Xi Jinping’s ice-breaking meeting with Anthony Albanese in Bali on Tuesday. </p>
<p>One of the more obscure, perhaps, was China’s ambassador to Canberra, Xiao Qian, seeking out Peter Dutton for a chat, which took place last week.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1590150049354645506"}"></div></p>
<p>Why would the ambassador want a catch-up with the opposition leader, who in the former government had been one of the loudest voices warning of the danger posed by the increasingly assertive superpower? </p>
<p>One answer is that preparation for what has been dubbed Xi’s current broad “<a href="https://www.afr.com/world/asia/china-s-schizophrenic-friendship-with-cherished-australia-20221115-p5bylx">charm offensive</a>” was comprehensive. </p>
<p>The meeting with Xi has been the showstopper of Albanese’s summit-season trip – including the East Asia and ASEAN-Australia summits, the G20 and APEC – from which he returns this weekend.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1592436720733388801"}"></div></p>
<p>For the PM, having the bilateral relationship begin to stabilise and move to a more constructive footing, after China had relegated Australia to “the freezer” for years, is the culmination of a very successful first six months on the world stage. </p>
<p>It will be all the more satisfying for Albanese personally, because December 21 marks the 50th anniversay of the Whitlam government establishing diplomatic relations with China. This was one of that government’s earliest acts, following Gough Whitlam’s ground-breaking visit to China as opposition leader and preceding a 1973 prime ministerial trip.</p>
<p>The new Australia-China rapport has to be seen in both multilateral and bilateral contexts. </p>
<p>China, for its own reasons, is lowering the temperature in its international relations. Its economic problems (fuelled by its COVID-zero policy) may be one factor driving this. Also Xi, now his leadership has been further strengthened by the recent 20th Party Congress, may feel he has more latitude to alter the tone of foreign policy. </p>
<p>Hence the very long meeting with Joe Biden, which the US president cast as positive, and Xi’s benign attitude to several other leaders in the past few days. </p>
<p>The change in stance towards Australia may partly be in the slipstream of this wider move. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/word-from-the-hill-albanese-xi-meeting-is-the-first-step-on-long-march-194730">Word from The Hill: Albanese-Xi meeting is the first step on long march</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Bilaterally, however, the defeat of the Morrison government has enabled and facilitated the recalibration of the relationship. If Scott Morrison were still PM, the fridge door would likely have remained shut for some time. </p>
<p>The Albanese government, from its first days, has handled adroitly the run-up to Tuesday’s meeting. It responded appropriately to China’s initial overtures for a rapprochement, sending positive signals while making it clear it would not give ground on substantive issues. </p>
<p>We now find ourselves in a somewhat paradoxical situation. While we look to better times with China, Australia’s defence preparations, which include a strategic review to report in March, are all about improving our preparedness (including our interoperability with the Americans) against a possible threat from that country. </p>
<p>Defence Minister Richard Marles, who was also acting prime minister this week, sought to square this circle when he addressed the Sydney Institute on Monday. </p>
<p>“A commitment to stabilising our relationship with China does not mean we won’t also maintain a clear-eyed focus on our security,” Marles said. </p>
<p>“The idea that Australia has to choose between diplomacy and defence – or as some critics would have it, between co-operation and confrontation – is a furphy, and a dangerous one at that.</p>
<p>"Speaking frankly about what we see in our region isn’t confrontation, it’s common sense. Improving our national security isn’t provocation, it’s prudence.”</p>
<p>On the threat side, Marles was blunt. “We must adapt to the world as it is, not as we would wish it to be. A world where post-Cold War optimism has been replaced by the reality of renewed major-power competition. A competition in which Australia is more relevant now than at any time in our history because its centre of gravity is in our region, the Indo-Pacific, where it is driving the biggest military build-up we have seen anywhere in the world over the last 70 years.</p>
<p>"The risk that this competition becomes confrontation, with all the destructive power of modern weapons, is a threat that we recognise and want to avoid.</p>
<p>"That’s why sober, responsible and clear-eyed statecraft has never been more important,” Marles said.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-g20-may-be-a-talk-fest-but-its-a-talk-fest-we-need-at-a-time-of-growing-division-194156">The G20 may be a talk fest, but it's a talk fest we need at a time of growing division</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The Xi meeting was never expected to yield immediate “announceables”, whether the lifting of restrictions on $20 billion in Australian trade or the release of detained Australians, journalist Cheng Lei and writer Yang Hengjun. </p>
<p>There is some speculation an easing of the trade sanctions might begin around the anniversary of diplomatic recognition. Ambassador Xiao has been showing a keen interest in that milestone, talking to people with first-hand knowledge of Whitlam’s travel to Peking (now Beijing). </p>
<p>A cursory glance at history indicates it is important to put the Xi meeting into a longer-term, cautionary context. It was only in 2014-15, under the Abbott government, that Xi addressed the Australian parliament, and the two countries signed and celebrated their free trade agreement.</p>
<p>Then things went quickly downhill. During Malcolm Turnbull’s prime ministership, China was riled by Australia legislating against its actual and potential interference. In particular it was infuriated by the rejection of Huawei’s participation in the 5G network.</p>
<p>The climate (on both sides) grew colder under Morrison. China progressively ramped up trade restrictions. It was angered by the Australian government’s call for an inquiry into the origins of COVID, which began in Wuhan. Australian ministers could not get calls returned.</p>
<p>Now we have the defrost, with Xi declaring at the start of his talks with Albanese: “China-Australia relations had been at the forefront of China’s relations with developed countries for a long time, which is worth cherishing. In the past few years, China-Australia relations have encountered some difficulties, which we didn’t want to see.” </p>
<p>It is worth recalling that the ups and downs of recent years have come within Xi’s presidency. It is not as though there was regime change; rather, it has been changes of stance during one man’s leadership, prompted often by Australia’s push-back against China’s behaviour (or the perceived risk of it). </p>
<p>Relieved as we are to be out of the freezer, we have to remember circumstances can always see us returned there. </p>
<p>That’s where Canada is at present, following its reaction to China’s meddling and pressure. At the G20, Xi did not accord PM Justin Trudeau a bilateral meeting. After Trudeau <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/world/xi-jinping-filmed-in-staged-public-rebuke-of-justin-trudeau/news-story/fa889f31f721857db47b79d78e4969c2">grabbed him for a “pull-aside”</a> (as such encounters are termed) and the Canadian media were briefed on the discussion, Xi publicly upbraided Trudeau. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/albanese-xi-meeting-wont-resolve-australias-grievances-overnight-but-it-is-a-real-step-forward-194511">Albanese-Xi meeting won't resolve Australia's grievances overnight. But it is a real step forward</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>As the bilateral relationship unfolds in coming days, Dutton should have the opposition maintain, as far as possible, a solid front with the government. </p>
<p>After his session with the ambassador, he tweeted: “We had a constructive meeting where we discussed security, trade and human rights issues. I will continue to engage in an open and honest dialogue in matters relating to the safety, security and prosperity of our region.”</p>
<p>It’s important that government and opposition present a united face to China.</p>
<p>Australia should take full advantage of the new rays of sunshine in the relationship. But Australians should, and probably do, understand that this is a relationship where clouds can quickly gather, brought about by both the actions of China and the reactions that an Australian government may consider (rightly or wrongly) to be necessary in the national interest.</p>
<p>Dennis Richardson, who has formerly headed the defence department and the foreign affairs department, captures the moment succinctly. </p>
<p>“We’ve reached the end of the first phase of the Albanese government’s efforts to improve Australia’s relationship with China. The substantive challenge of turning that into real outcomes in trade now begins. But whatever happens on that front, Australia and China’s strategic perspectives remain at odds.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/194817/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>For the PM, having the bilateral relationship begin to stabilise and move to a more constructive footing culminates a very successful first six months on the world stage.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1921552022-10-09T11:32:35Z2022-10-09T11:32:35ZAlbanese insists tax position ‘hasn’t changed’, as the government targets defence delays<p>Anthony Albanese on Sunday insisted the government’s intention to deliver the Stage 3 tax cuts has not changed, while he reinforced the expectation of deep spending cuts in this month’s budget to attack “waste”. </p>
<p>Meanwhile the government on Monday will point to at least 28 major defence projects that are running a total of more than 97 years late, as it highlights pressures it faces on the budget. It says project management must be improved.</p>
<p>After a week of speculation that the Stage 3 cuts could be recalibrated, and then suggestions on Sunday there would be no change, Albanese said repeatedly at a news conference in Perth, “Our position hasn’t changed”. </p>
<p>He denied any conflict with the Treasurer, Jim Chalmers, who has been pushing for modification of the tax cuts, which are legislated to start mid-2024. In the election campaign Labor committed to keeping them. The tax cuts favour higher income earners, and Labor strongly criticised them when in opposition.</p>
<p>Albanese said the government was going through the budget “line by line, making sure that we get rid of the waste.</p>
<p>"Labor will always present responsible budgets,” he said.</p>
<p>Defence is one of the areas Chalmers regularly names when talking about the spending pressures on the budget. The others are aged care, health, the NDIS and interest payments on the debt. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-jim-chalmers-plays-the-tease-as-he-pushes-to-change-stage-3-tax-cuts-192022">Grattan on Friday: Jim Chalmers plays the tease as he pushes to change Stage 3 tax cuts</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Some 18 projects are running over budget, and there are at least $6.5 billion of variations from approved estimates. A large share of this is due to exchange rates and price indexation, the government says, but “they still have a real impact on the defence budget”. </p>
<p>The Coalition’s March budget estimated defence spending as a proportion of GDP would increase from 2% in 2021-22 to 2.2% over the decade, reaching more than $80 billion annually by 2032. The government says this doesn’t include future requirements not funded by the Coalition, including AUKUS and an increase in the force size. </p>
<p>Projects running behind schedule include: Hunter Class Frigates, Battlefield Airlifters, Offshore Patrol Vessels, Evolved Cape Class Patrol Boats, P-8A Poseidon aircraft, The Battlefield Command System, and a series of Defence Satellite Communications projects.</p>
<p>To strengthen the “Defence Projects of Concern” process the government says it will</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Establish an independent projects and portfolio management office within Defence</p></li>
<li><p>Require monthly reports on Projects of Concern and Projects of Interest to the minister for defence industry and the defence minister</p></li>
<li><p>Establish formal processes and “early warning” criteria for placing projects on the “Projects of Concern” and “Projects of Interest” lists.</p></li>
<li><p>Foster a culture in Defence of raising attention to emerging problems and encouraging and enabling early response</p></li>
<li><p>Provide troubled projects with extra resources and skills</p></li>
<li><p>Convene regular ministerial summits to discuss remediation plans.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>Blaming the former government for blowouts in the time and cost of projects, Defence Minister Richard Marles said: “We face the most challenging circumstances since the Second World War, compounded by the fact that the economy is facing serious pressures. </p>
<p>"Reaching record spending within Defence as a per cent of GDP means we need to be more responsible about the way in which we manage.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/192155/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>the government on Monday will point to 28 major defence projects running a total of more than 97 years late, as it highlights pressures it faces on the budgetMichelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1858782022-06-28T12:06:06Z2022-06-28T12:06:06ZAustralians favour more defence spending in Lowy poll, as Labor extends ADF chief Angus Campbell’s term<p>Australians are becoming more fearful in an insecure world, and want to see the country armed up, favouring more defence spending and the planned acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines. </p>
<p>Three quarters of Australians say it is likely China will become a military threat to Australia in the next 20 years, according to the 2022 <a href="https://poll.lowyinstitute.org/">Lowy Institute’s Poll</a>. This is an increase of 29 points since 2018. </p>
<p>Moreover, for the first time a majority (51%) would favour Australian military forces being used if China invaded Taiwan and the United States intervened. This was an eight-point rise since 2019 when the question was last asked. </p>
<p>Just over half (51%) say Australia should boost defence spending – a 20-point rise since 2019. Seven in ten favour the plan to acquire nuclear-powered submarines. More than six in ten support the American military being based in Australia.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/471293/original/file-20220628-25-k3n6bj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/471293/original/file-20220628-25-k3n6bj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/471293/original/file-20220628-25-k3n6bj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/471293/original/file-20220628-25-k3n6bj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/471293/original/file-20220628-25-k3n6bj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/471293/original/file-20220628-25-k3n6bj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/471293/original/file-20220628-25-k3n6bj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Defence Minister Richard Marles, who is acting prime minister, on Tuesday announced the government is extending the terms of the Chief of the Defence Force, Angus Campbell, and the ADF’s vice chief, Vice Admiral David Johnston, by two years. The government has also asked the CDF to extend the term of the Chief of Joint Operations, Lieutenant General Greg Bilton. </p>
<p>Marles said the extensions were because it was “a time which is as strategically complex as any since the end of the Second World War in terms of our national security and the needs of our defence procurement”. </p>
<p>In his preface to the poll, Lowy executive director Michael Fullilove writes:
“Australians are increasingly concerned about the potential for great power competition to spill over into confrontation. </p>
<p>"In 2022, Australians report feeling unsafe, and as the potential for conflict in our region feels more possible, support for Australia’s alliance with the United States has returned to a record high.”</p>
<p>Nearly seven in ten (68%) believe Russia’s foreign policy poses a critical threat to Australia’s vital interest in the next decade – a 36-point increase since 2017. Russian foreign policy tops the list of threats to Australia’s vital interests, narrowly ahead of China’s foreign policy (65% – up 29 points since 2017). </p>
<p>In general, anxiety about Russia, China and a war over Taiwan have overtaken Australians’ concerns about COVID-19 and climate change. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/471295/original/file-20220628-13-3kbb82.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/471295/original/file-20220628-13-3kbb82.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/471295/original/file-20220628-13-3kbb82.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/471295/original/file-20220628-13-3kbb82.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/471295/original/file-20220628-13-3kbb82.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/471295/original/file-20220628-13-3kbb82.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/471295/original/file-20220628-13-3kbb82.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The poll was conducted March 15-28 with a sample of 2006. It is the 18th in the Lowy Institute’s annual series and is authored by Natasha Kassam.</p>
<p>In the election campaign the Coalition tried to make national security and fears about China an issue to its advantage but this backfired when it came under attack for having been unable to head off the China-Solomons security pact. </p>
<p>The poll found 88% of people were concerned about China potentially opening a military base in a Pacific Island country. </p>
<p>While there has been a 11-point (to 58%) fall in confidence in US President Joe Biden since 2021, this is still 28 points above the confidence expressed in President Donald Trump in 2020 (30%). </p>
<p>On climate change, there is overwhelming support for federal government subsidies for renewable technology (90%), committing to a more ambitious emissions target for 2030 ((77%), and Australian hosting a United Nations climate conference (75%). Nearly two thirds (65%) support reducing coal exports, and banning new coal mines (63%). </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/471323/original/file-20220628-21-dbyohw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/471323/original/file-20220628-21-dbyohw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/471323/original/file-20220628-21-dbyohw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/471323/original/file-20220628-21-dbyohw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/471323/original/file-20220628-21-dbyohw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=492&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/471323/original/file-20220628-21-dbyohw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=492&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/471323/original/file-20220628-21-dbyohw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=492&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>COVID has receded but not disappeared as a threat in the minds of Australians. Only just over four in ten (42%) see COVID as a critical threat to Australia’s interests, 17 points down on 2021 and 34 points down on 2020. </p>
<p>More than six in ten people (62%) are optimistic about Australia’s economic performance in the world over the next five years, but this is a 17-point fall from 2021. </p>
<p>With Anthony Albanese’s visiting Paris later this week, in the poll 49% blame both Australia and France for the tensions in the relationship over the cancellation of the submarine contract; 35% say Australia is more to blame, while 12% blame France more. </p>
<p>Making his announcement about the defence chief, Marles said the Albanese government “is putting a premium on continuity. This applies to strategic advice and the timely and effective delivery of key procurements including through the AUKUS framework. Australia cannot afford any further delay in the next generation of submarines.”</p>
<p>Marles announced new chiefs of the navy, army and air force. </p>
<p>Navy: Rear Admiral Mark Hammond. </p>
<p>Army: Major General Simon Stuart. </p>
<p>Air Force: Air Vice-Marshal Robert Chipman.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/185878/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Australians are becoming more fearful in an insecure world, and want to see the country armed up, favouring more defence spending and the planned acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1850322022-06-17T02:29:43Z2022-06-17T02:29:43ZMarles shifts tone on China at defence summit – but the early days of government are easiest<p>In its first month in power, foreign policy and national security have played a major part of the new government’s activities. </p>
<p>Very soon after the election, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese attended the Quadrilateral Security Initiative (Quad) leaders’ meeting in Tokyo. Foreign Minister Penny Wong has made trips to the South Pacific and Indonesia. And this month, Defence Minister Richard Marles met ministers and other key figures in Singapore and Japan.</p>
<p>Marles’ historic trip sheds some light on the new government’s approach to national security matters.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/its-great-albanese-is-in-indonesia-but-australia-needs-to-do-a-lot-more-to-reset-relations-here-are-5-ways-to-start-184446">It's great Albanese is in Indonesia, but Australia needs to do a lot more to reset relations. Here are 5 ways to start</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Signalling a new approach</h2>
<p>Marles was in Singapore to join the first in-person Shangri-La Dialogue to be held since 2019.</p>
<p>This meeting, also known as the <a href="https://www.iiss.org/events/shangri-la-dialogue/shangri-la-dialogue-2022">Asia Security Summit</a>, has been run annually since 2002 by the think tank International Institute for Strategic Studies. It brings together defence ministers, chiefs of defence forces and related security policy makers from across Asia and beyond.</p>
<p>Marles’ plenary <a href="https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/minister/rmarles/speeches/address-iiss-19th-shangri-la-dialogue-singapore">speech</a> at this meeting was one of the most interesting made by an Australian leader in some years.</p>
<p>It underscored the continuity in Australian policy: the importance of the UN and international law, the focus on the alliance and the commitment to defence expenditure increases made by the previous government. </p>
<p>But it also showed where key changes would be made, including a much greater focus on climate change, a change in attitude and approach to the South Pacific and a subtle but significant shift in tone toward China. </p>
<p>Marles’ predecessor had tended to paint China’s regional activity in <a href="https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/defence-and-foreign-affairs/prepare-for-war-peter-dutton-issues-ominous-warning-as-he-says-china-is-on-a-very-deliberate-course-at-the-moment/news-story/6807bf2105118d8a31da4a663292ee38">semi-apocalyptic terms</a>. </p>
<p>By contrast, the new defence minister emphasised recognising the reality of China’s rise but framed it in terms of responsibilities that come with it. He also stressed the need for China to accept and respect the restraints the great powers must exercise.</p>
<p>It was a thoughtful and measured approach that is a good sign of the direction of Australia’s regional policy.</p>
<h2>Getting back on track with France, sideline meetings with allies</h2>
<p>The deputy prime minister also had an extensive set of meetings on the sidelines of the dialogue.</p>
<p>This included 15 bilateral meetings with the defence ministers of Singapore, Solomon Islands, New Zealand, South Korea, Japan, Malaysia, Fiji, Indonesia, Canada, the US, Timor Leste, Philippines and Sri Lanka. </p>
<p>He also met with the French defence minister, himself newly appointed, making the point on <a href="https://twitter.com/RichardMarlesMP/status/1535747742441828352">social media</a> that Franco-Australian defence cooperation was “back on track”. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1535747742441828352"}"></div></p>
<p>While in Singapore, Marles took part in the latest meeting of the Trilateral Security Partnership, an initiative of Japan, the US and Australia to advance shared security goals.</p>
<p>This produced a wordy <a href="https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/minister/rmarles/statements/united-states-japan-australia-trilateral-defense-ministers-meeting-2022">joint statement</a> of intent to strengthen their collaborative initiatives in Asia.</p>
<h2>An historic meeting with China’s defence minister</h2>
<p>But the meeting garnering the most attention was with China’s defence minister, Wei Fenghe.</p>
<p>This was notable less for its content, which by all accounts followed relatively routine patterns, but for the fact it happened at all. </p>
<p>There have been no meetings between Australian and senior Chinese government figures for some years. The Australian ambassador in China has had virtually no access and the broader diplomatic relationship has been essentially non-functional. </p>
<p>It was a brief meeting and involved no major breakthroughs. But the fact it happened at all indicates Australia should be able to navigate back to a working relationship with Beijing without having to make concessions.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1535863722086113280"}"></div></p>
<h2>Shoring up the Japan-Australia relationship</h2>
<p>Marles then travelled to Tokyo for meetings with counterparts in Japan. </p>
<p>Australia and Japan are one another’s most important security partners after the US, and each sees the other as a crucial component in their regional security strategy. </p>
<p>Despite considerable goodwill, this part of the trip did not yield any significant further developments in the two countries security cooperation – as was made clear by the somewhat sparse joint <a href="https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/minister/rmarles/statements/joint-statement-advancing-defence-cooperation-tokyo-japan">statement</a> it produced. </p>
<p>This may well be a function of the fact the two are already doing a lot together. Their practical capacity to do a great deal more, particularly of any strategic significance, is relatively constrained by resource limitations.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/469385/original/file-20220617-25-vy4kml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=5%2C35%2C3956%2C2322&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/469385/original/file-20220617-25-vy4kml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=5%2C35%2C3956%2C2322&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/469385/original/file-20220617-25-vy4kml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=358&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/469385/original/file-20220617-25-vy4kml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=358&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/469385/original/file-20220617-25-vy4kml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=358&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/469385/original/file-20220617-25-vy4kml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/469385/original/file-20220617-25-vy4kml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/469385/original/file-20220617-25-vy4kml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Marles travelled to Tokyo for meetings with counterparts in Japan.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Kyodo via AP Images</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The early days are the easiest</h2>
<p>The new Labor government has had a good first month or so on the foreign policy front.</p>
<p>It has been are active, engaged and well received by regional powers. It has struck a prudent balance between the changes it seeks and the importance of continuity. </p>
<p>Marles has played his part successfully, particularly in communicating the need to have a productive relationship with China while not giving ground on core issues. </p>
<p>But the early days are the easiest ones and the true test of the new government’s foreign policy has yet to come.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/as-wong-makes-her-mark-in-the-pacific-the-albanese-government-should-look-to-history-on-mending-ties-with-china-184144">As Wong makes her mark in the Pacific, the Albanese government should look to history on mending ties with China</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/185032/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nick Bisley is a member of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, the think tank that runs the Shangri-La Dialogue.</span></em></p>Defence minister Richard Marles’ historic trip sheds some light on the new government’s approach to national security matters.Nick Bisley, Dean of Humanities and Social Sciences and Professor of International Relations at La Trobe University, La Trobe UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1850442022-06-14T07:49:53Z2022-06-14T07:49:53ZWord from The Hill: Bowen says “bumpy” time ahead for power supply – but don’t turn the heater off<p>As well as her interviews with politicians and experts, Politics with Michelle Grattan includes “Word from The Hill”, where she discusses the news with members of The Conversation politics team.</p>
<p>This week Michelle and politics editor Amanda Dunn discuss the apparent early signs of a thaw in China’s attitude towards Australia. But Anthony Albanese has responded by saying China needs to do something tangible – removing trade restrictions it has imposed on Australia. </p>
<p>On the domestic front, Energy Minister Chris Bowen warns of a “bumpy” time ahead for power supplies but says you should keep the heater on (just switch off outside lights if they’re not needed). </p>
<p>Amanda and Michelle also canvass the people smugglers testing the new government on border protection, and Friday’s national cabinet meeting where premiers will be pressing the federal government for more funds for their struggling health systems.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/185044/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Michelle Grattan discusses politics with politics + society editor, Amanda DunnMichelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1818682022-04-26T19:56:19Z2022-04-26T19:56:19ZMorrison, Dutton go hard on national security - but will it have any effect on the election?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/459677/original/file-20220426-14-4550kz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Mick Tsikas</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Elections held in the shadow of war or overarching national security concerns tend to favour incumbents.</p>
<p>In the three elections since the second world war that have been directly affected by security worries, incumbent governments have prevailed.</p>
<p>In 1951, Robert Menzies fought an election on his determination to ban the Communist party. This was an effort to wedge the Labor party on divisions within its own ranks between a Soviet Union-sympathetic left and an anti-communist right.</p>
<p>Menzies’ <a href="https://electionspeeches.moadoph.gov.au/speeches/1951-robert-menzies">election speech of April 28, 1951</a>, delivered in his own electorate of Kooyong, makes interesting reading in light of debates now about surging Chinese influence in the region. He said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I need not tell you that every way the Communists are delighted with the Labor Opposition.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This speech was delivered against the backdrop of the Korean war, in which Mao Zedong’s forces fought on the side of North Korea and against Australian soldiers defending the south.</p>
<p>Menzies’ Coalition went on to win the election against Ben Chifley’s Labor Party. While the Coalition lost five seats, it was a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1951_Australian_federal_election">status quo result</a> in the 121-member House of Representatives, with the Liberal and Country parties maintaining a comfortable majority 69-52. Labor lost control of the Senate.</p>
<p>Menzies subsequently <a href="https://www.robertmenziesinstitute.org.au/on-this-day/communism-referendum">failed to ban the Communist Party</a> at a referendum.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/459665/original/file-20220426-24-aplnmh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/459665/original/file-20220426-24-aplnmh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=814&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459665/original/file-20220426-24-aplnmh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=814&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459665/original/file-20220426-24-aplnmh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=814&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459665/original/file-20220426-24-aplnmh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1023&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459665/original/file-20220426-24-aplnmh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1023&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459665/original/file-20220426-24-aplnmh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1023&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Harold Holt won the 1966 election largely on his position on the Vietnam War.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Museum of Australian Democracy</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In 1966, Harold Holt, as newly-anointed leader of the Liberal Party and prime minister, won a <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/from-the-archives-1966-holt-sweeps-back-20201113-p56eiv.html">landslide victory</a> against Arthur Calwell’s Labor largely on the issue of Australia’s commitment to Vietnam.</p>
<p>This was a popular cause at a time of significant community concern about communist influence in the region accompanied by the spectre of dominos falling towards Australia.</p>
<p>Calwell, who had given one of the <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/opinion/vietnam-the-other-war-we-need-to-remember-20150413-1mjqq6.html">great parliamentary speeches</a> in 1965 in which he opposed Australia’s commitment to Vietnam, presided over a catastrophic loss for Labor. It was reduced to 41 seats in the 124-member House of Representatives against the Coalition’s 82, with one independent.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/issues-that-swung-elections-labors-anti-war-message-falls-flat-in-landslide-loss-in-1966-114745">Issues that swung elections: Labor's anti-war message falls flat in landslide loss in 1966</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In the third example of incumbency proving to be an important element in an election victory, <a href="https://theconversation.com/issues-that-swung-elections-tampa-and-the-national-security-election-of-2001-115143">John Howard in 2001</a> parlayed anxiety about boat arrivals and a terrorist attack on American soil to propel him to victory.</p>
<p>The Coalition had been faltering in the polls.</p>
<p>Howard’s win over Kim Beazley’s Labor in the shadow of the commitment of Australian troops to Afghanistan to root out al Qaeda underscored the advantages of tenure in uncertain times.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/australian-politics-explainer-the-mv-tampa-and-the-transformation-of-asylum-seeker-policy-74078">Tampa episode</a> on the eve of the 2001 poll, in which a Norwegian vessel with stranded boat people on board was refused entry to Australia, prompted one of the more telling interventions in an Australian political debate. Howard responded with:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come.</p>
</blockquote>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/459666/original/file-20220426-22-xotxmb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/459666/original/file-20220426-22-xotxmb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=394&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459666/original/file-20220426-22-xotxmb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=394&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459666/original/file-20220426-22-xotxmb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=394&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459666/original/file-20220426-22-xotxmb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=495&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459666/original/file-20220426-22-xotxmb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=495&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459666/original/file-20220426-22-xotxmb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=495&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">At the 2001 election, John Howard capitalised on national security fears - highlighted by the Tampa incident and the September 11 attacks - to win the election.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Dean Lewins</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This brings us to the election of 2022 in which Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Defence Minister Peter Dutton are seeking to use legitimate concerns about a Chinese presence in the Pacific as election fodder.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-04-19/china-and-solomon-islands-sign-security-pact-says-chinese-foreig/101000530">Solomon Islands security pact</a> with China has provided a pretext for wedge-politics electioneering, aimed at Labor.</p>
<p>In <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-04-25/peter-dutton-anzac-day-china-russia-nazi-germany/101013116">remarks on Anzac Day,</a> Dutton returned a familiar theme in which he likened China’s rise to that of Third Reich in Nazi Germany, and compared Russian President Vladimir Putin with Adolf Hitler in his efforts to subjugate Ukraine.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We’re in a period very similar to the 1930s. And I think there are a lot of people in the 1930s that wish they would have spoken up much earlier in the decade.</p>
</blockquote>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ie8fC-LVN3k?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>In his own efforts to exploit security concerns arising from China’s growing presence in the Pacific, Morrison warned of a <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-04-24/scott-morrison-china-naval-base-solomon-islands-red-line/101011710">“red line”</a> should Beijing seek to establish base facilities in the Solomon Islands.</p>
<p>With its long history of having paid the price politically on national security, Labor has been skittish on the China issue in its efforts to minimise differences with the government.</p>
<p>Morrison and Dutton have sought to make capital out of Labor’s attempts to argue for a more constructive relationship with Beijing. This has caused discomfort among Labor frontbenchers, notably its deputy leader Richard Marles.</p>
<p>In a <a href="https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/labor-urges-closer-defence-ties-with-china-20190920-p52ta1">speech to Beijing’s Foreign Studies University</a> in September 2019, Marles described talk of a new Cold War as “silly and ignorant”. He went on to say, “to define China as an enemy is a profound mistake”.</p>
<p>These words have been seized on by the government and its friends in the media to portray Marles, who may well become defence minister in an Albanese government, as <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-04-22/scott-morrison-criticises-richard-marles-china-solomon-islands/101007786">“soft” on China.</a></p>
<p>Marles has pushed back against these slurs, but it is unlikely he would deliver a similar speech today given China’s further encroachment into the region.</p>
<p>His Beijing speech is absent from his website.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wBL8WWSik3Y?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>In his efforts to exert pressure on his opponent over Labor’s more nuanced approach to China, Morrison used a peoples’ forum debate to claim Anthony Albanese had taken <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-04-20/morrison-albanese-clash-during-leaders-debate-in-brisbane/101000332">“China’s side”</a> in debates over the pandemic and border closures.</p>
<p>Albanese responded “that’s an outrageous slur by the prime minister”.</p>
<p>This matters because if a Coalition is re-elected, the prospects of an improvement in relations with China would remain poor. Morrison’s and Dutton’s interventions have hardened the edges of Australia’s relationship with its largest trading partner.</p>
<p>All this is a <a href="https://pmtranscripts.pmc.gov.au/release/transcript-23977">very long way</a> from the agreement between then Prime Minister Tony Abbott and visiting Chinese President Xi Jinping in Canberra in 2014, to upgrade relations to a “comprehensive strategic partnership”.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202204/1260302.shtml">Beijing’s mouthpiece, the Global Times</a>, commented:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>When Morrison made the ‘red line’ statement, he jeopardised the red line of the Solomon Islands, an independent country, by failing to recognise the latter’s diplomatic sovereignty.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This year, unlike 1951, 1966 and 2001, Australians are going to the polls not when lives might be lost in foreign conflicts, but at a time when voter concerns are domestically-focused.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-morrison-government-wants-a-khaki-election-how-do-the-two-major-parties-stack-up-on-national-security-179472">The Morrison government wants a 'khaki' election. How do the two major parties stack up on national security?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>A <a href="https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/cost-of-living-top-of-mind-for-voters-as-pandemic-concern-wanes-20220318-p5a5qp">“True Issues” survey by JWS Research</a> in the Australian Financail Review in March found that cost of living and healthcare trumped concerns about defence, security and terrorism.</p>
<p>An <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-04-22/vote-compass-federal-election-issues-data-climate-change-economy/101002116">ABC Compass poll</a> this month found that climate change was top of mind, followed by cost of living and affordability. Defence and public security rated a lowly eighth in the ABC poll, as it did in the JWS Research poll.</p>
<p>In other words, there is no clear indication a “China threat” will prove significant in an election dominated by bread and butter issues.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/181868/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tony Walker is a member of The Conversation board.</span></em></p>Elections where a national security threat have been a major talking point have historically played well for incumbent governments. But this time is different.Tony Walker, Vice-chancellor's fellow, La Trobe UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1817922022-04-22T08:15:19Z2022-04-22T08:15:19ZView from The Hill: ‘The bug’ gives Albanese opportunity to sell the team but less time to sell himself<p>“Well, the boss has got the bug, so you’ve got me.” Labor campaign spokesman Jason Clare fronted the media the morning after Anthony Albanese tested positive for COVID, and the contrast didn’t go unnoticed. </p>
<p>Clare answered questions confidently and without waffling, let alone stumbling. So much so that at the end of the news conference one journalist said, “You come in today and have been comfortable, nuanced and on message. Are you not the Labor leader that many will be looking for?”</p>
<p>If Albanese was watching at home he might have winced at that question. </p>
<p>There was laughter in the room. Clare stayed on course. “It is time to give Albo a go,” he said.</p>
<p>Labor had always anticipated Albanese could come down with COVID during the campaign. Unlike Scott Morrison he had not had a bout of the virus. Contingency plans were put into place, and they swung into action on Friday, after Thursday night’s positive test. </p>
<p>Clare was an obvious choice to front the first “plan B” news conference. As one of the two campaign spokespeople (the other is Katy Gallagher), he is well across the policy and the lines. And indeed a few years ago he used to be in lists of possible future Labor leaders, although he’s dropped out of those more recently. </p>
<p>What Albanese’s COVID means is that we will be seeing a lot more of Labor’s frontbench over the coming few days. </p>
<p>The opposition is fortunate in that it has a strong shadow ministry. Apart from Clare, Jim Chalmers, Penny Wong, Gallagher, Tony Burke and Tanya Plibersek are very good performers before the cameras. Labor is not having a “surrogate” leader take Albanese’s place, which could have created more problems than it solved. </p>
<p>How much Albanese can do from home in the next few days will depend on how hard he is hit by COVID. Morrison said on Friday, a touch competitively, that he was sure Albanese would be able to work on, as he himself had done. “I’m sure he will keep on with the campaign just as I kept on with the governing.”</p>
<p>On Friday Albanese did some “virtual” media, while admitting, “I’ve had better days”. </p>
<p>In one sense there might be advantage in having the team more to the fore. Indeed, the frontbenchers have probably been underused in the run up to the election. </p>
<p>On the other hand, given the need in this campaign for Albanese to get himself better known in the electorate, a week out means lost time for that mission. And if his Covid symptoms become serious, requiring him to be absent for longer, that becomes a greater problem. </p>
<p>Albanese was set to fly to Perth when he was diagnosed. But, as things turned out, there would have been no appearances with premier Mark McGowan, who has also now tested positive. </p>
<p>The Labor leader is still confident of being able to do his planned campaign launch in Perth on Sunday May 1. The choice of Perth is notable, out of the groove for federal campaign launches. It indicates the weight Labor is putting in trying to wrest seats in the west. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, as the war of words between Labor and the government continues to rage over the Solomons security treaty with China, the government on Friday homed in on what Labor deputy leader Richard Marles wrote in his book Tides That Bind: Australia in the Pacific, which came out last year. </p>
<p>Marles argued that for Australia to base its Pacific actions “on an attempt to strategically deny China would be a historic mistake”.</p>
<p>“Not only would this be detrimental to our regional relationships, it would be a failed course of action. </p>
<p>"Australia has no right to expect a set of exclusive relationships with the Pacific nations. They are perfectly free to engage on whatever terms they choose with China or, for that matter, any other country. Disputing this would be resented, as the recent past has shown.”</p>
<p>Marles knows something of the Pacific, serving as parliamentary secretary for Pacific island affairs in the Gillard government. He became Labor’s defence spokesman after the 2016 election but early last year moved to a “mega” portfolio of national reconstruction. </p>
<p>It’s widely speculated that if Labor won the election, Marles would switch back into defence. While Albanese has indicated he would expect his current frontbenchers to stay in their present roles he hasn’t ruled out some change. </p>
<p>For Morrison, the Marles quotes presented a doubly welcome opportunity. Labor has been on full attack against the government for not being able to head off the China-Solomons security deal. Wong, shadow foreign minister, called it the worst failure of Australian foreign policy in the Pacific since World War Two. </p>
<p>Also, any chance to attack Labor in relation to China feeds into the government’s push to make this, among other things, a khaki election. Part of this is claiming a distinction between government and opposition over policy towards China – which is in fact substantially bipartisan. Thus Morrison accused Marles of thinking “it’s a good idea for Pacific Island nations to sign up to security agreements with the Chinese government”. </p>
<p>How much impact the “khaki” element will have on how people vote is up for debate. Most voters are probably more concerned with issues closer to home. On the other hand, national security does reinforce the government’s mantra that a vote for Labor is a vote for uncertainty.</p>
<p>Regardless of how the row over the Solomons plays into the election, what is clear is that whichever side wins, it will face a major challenge in navigating policy in the Pacific against an assertive, determined and apparently persuasive China.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/181792/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>“Well, the boss has got the bug, so you’ve got me.” Labor campaign spokesman Jason Clare fronted the media the morning after Anthony Albanese tested positive for COVID, and the contrast didn’t go unnoticedMichelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1795802022-03-18T09:35:48Z2022-03-18T09:35:48ZView from The Hill: Labor’s treatment of Kimberley Kitching – ‘tough politics’ or ‘bullying’?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/453008/original/file-20220318-10615-9969lk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Sam Mooy/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The so-called “mean girls” story following the death of Victorian Labor senator Kimberley Kitching, has opened up issues of alleged bad behaviour by very senior figures within the Labor party. </p>
<p>The allegations are serious, and Anthony Albanese and his colleagues were never going to get away with denying them oxygen by pushing them aside, as they hoped. </p>
<p>But the fact the claims and denials are being played out even before Kitching’s funeral takes them into an extraordinary realm. </p>
<p>Although only junior in the parliamentary pecking order, Kitching – who was a close friend and ally of former Labor leader Bill Shorten – made herself a substantial presence in the senate, and a strong voice on issues including China and national security. </p>
<p>Some of her views were more akin to those of the Liberals than to her own side, and she had good friends in the government. </p>
<p>For these and other reasons, she became a square peg in the round Labor hole. She was accused of leaking by Labor’s Senate leadership and frozen out, including being removed from the tactics committee. </p>
<p>From what we know now, she was highly upset by her treatment, but she also fought back, reportedly late last year complaining of bullying by her colleagues to a consultant brought in as part of the effort to clean up Parliament House’s toxic culture. </p>
<p>Earlier, she had complained to deputy Labor leader Richard Marles about how she was being treated. Marles refuses to be drawn, repeatedly saying in a Friday TV interview, “I’m just not going to walk down that path”.</p>
<p>Apart from the pressure she felt under in the parliamentary party, recently Kitching had been stressed by her preselection being up in the air. </p>
<p>Kitching’s friends allege Labor’s Senate leader Penny Wong, her deputy Kristina Keneally and Katy Gallagher, manager of opposition business in the Senate, bullied her. The Australian reported Kitching and her supporters had dubbed these senators “the mean girls”. </p>
<p>Like Albanese, at first the senators refused to engage with the allegations. By Friday, with more information dribbling out, this had become unsustainable. </p>
<p>Wong, Keneally and Gallagher issued a statement saying: “The allegations of bullying are untrue. Other assertions which have been made are similarly inaccurate.” </p>
<p>The statement went on: “Politics is a challenging profession. Contests can be robust and interactions difficult. All of its participants at times act or speak in ways that can impact on others negatively. We have and do reflect on this, as individuals and as leaders.</p>
<p>"It is for this reason Senator Wong wishes to place on record a response to specific claims regarding an exchange in a meeting with Senator Kitching.” </p>
<p>This related to a 2019 discussion in Labor about school children participating in civil disobedience at climate protests. </p>
<p>Kitching’s opposition to this brought the response from Wong who said “if you had children, you might understand why there is a climate emergency.”</p>
<p>In Friday’s statement, Wong said when the incident was publicly reported more than two years ago she had apologised to Kitching. </p>
<p>“Senator Wong understood that apology was accepted. The comments that have been reported do not reflect Senator Wong’s views, as those who know her would understand, and she deeply regrets pain these reports have caused,” the statement said.</p>
<p>While it will seem shocking to many people that all this is playing out even before Kitching’s funeral on Monday, it is also relevant that most of the information and claims being put forward are from Kitching’s friends. </p>
<p>Albanese has denounced the way the Kitching issue has been “politicised”. He defended his senior Senate women, saying “politics is a really tough business”. </p>
<p>The latter observation is something Kitching would have understood extremely well. In the Victorian Labor party over the years she was one of the very tough players herself. </p>
<p>In the context of the battle between government and opposition, the internal Labor claims about how one of its women was treated reduce the scope for Labor to point fingers at the Liberals, who’ve had much trouble themselves on this front.</p>
<p>There have been calls for Albanese to launch an inquiry into the allegations. With the alleged victim dead, it is hard to see what this could achieve. And that’s leaving aside the political considerations, when Labor is weeks from the election. </p>
<p>There’s no doubt Kitching was subjected to harsh treatment by her party. Whether this is judged as “tough politics” or “bullying” is more complex, depending on who is doing the judging. It can be a fine, albeit very important, line between the two.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/179580/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Whether the late senator’s treatment was unfairly harsh or part of the tough business of politics depends on who you ask – and in public life, the line between the two can be very fine indeed.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1777412022-02-27T19:11:58Z2022-02-27T19:11:58ZScare-mongering on China is a threat to our democracy, and responsible media must guard against it<p>There is a great deal more at stake than national security in Scott Morrison’s hyper-partisan and grossly dishonest accusation that Anthony Albanese and his deputy, Richard Marles, are carrying the hopes of the Chinese regime at the forthcoming election.</p>
<p>It undermines the stability of our democracy and shows we have reached a dangerous point in our political discourse.</p>
<p>Two factors are at work here: extremely divisive political rhetoric and the willingness of the country’s dominant newspaper company, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, to lend it a megaphone.</p>
<p>Morrison and Murdoch are trying to do to Australia’s democracy what Murdoch and Donald Trump did to America’s between 2016 and 2021.</p>
<p>They are working together to create division where none exists in pursuit of their own political and ideological interests. No lie is too big to be used for this purpose.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wBL8WWSik3Y?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>The English philosopher A.C. Grayling and two American political scientists, Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt – among many others – <a href="https://oneworld-publications.com/the-good-state.html">have shown</a> how these factors have combined to weaken democracy in the United States and the United Kingdom.</p>
<p>Broadly speaking, their arguments go like this:</p>
<p>Hyper-partisanship – in which fierce disagreement is expressed in extreme language – leads to a breakdown in the consensus on which democracy depends.</p>
<p>When the consensus breaks down, so does the acceptance by each side that the other side has political legitimacy.</p>
<p>When that acceptance breaks down, the peaceful transfer of power that democracies achieve by holding elections is severely threatened. We saw this on January 6 2021, when the Trumpian mob assailed the Capitol in Washington.</p>
<p>Propaganda, spin and outright falsehoods promoted in the professional mass media and on social media contribute powerfully to these consequences.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/448480/original/file-20220225-13-4spelu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/448480/original/file-20220225-13-4spelu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448480/original/file-20220225-13-4spelu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448480/original/file-20220225-13-4spelu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448480/original/file-20220225-13-4spelu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448480/original/file-20220225-13-4spelu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448480/original/file-20220225-13-4spelu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The storming of the US Capitol in January 2021 is an example of what can happen when hyperpartisanship spirals out of control.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">John Minchillo/AP/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Levitsky and Ziblatt, in their book <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/562246/how-democracies-die-by-steven-levitsky-and-daniel-ziblatt/">How Democracies Die</a>, argue extreme polarisation leads political rivals to see each other as mutual threats. This in turn encourages a win-at-all-costs attitude and leads to a corrosive refusal to accept that the other side is entitled to govern.</p>
<p>If democracies were to be diverted from this destructive course, it was necessary for them to recapture the civility, sense of freedom and shared purpose that defined democracy’s essence in the mid-20th century.</p>
<p>It is here that the professional mass media have a crucial role to play. It lies within their power to promote civility of discourse, articulate a society’s shared purpose and debunk lies.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/too-much-sugar-not-enough-spice-60-minutes-morrison-interview-was-not-journalism-it-was-confected-pap-177058">Too much sugar, not enough spice: 60 Minutes' Morrison interview was not journalism, it was confected pap</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>However, after Morrison’s crude and baseless accusations, Murdoch’s newspapers, including <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/chinese-propaganda-outlet-endorses-anthony-albanese-as-better-pm-than-scott-morrison/news-story/e3e26b3a608654854fef7c64f853bfb1">The Australian</a>, The Daily Telegraph and the Herald Sun, and his <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAhbhM7oNaU">Sky News channel</a> all trumpeted the message that Albanese and Marles were Beijing’s preferred candidates for the election.</p>
<p>Morrison used as evidence <a href="https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202202/1252207.shtml">an article in the Global Times</a>, a propaganda mouthpiece for the Chinese government, written by former Australian diplomat Bruce Haigh, entitled “Weak Australian leadership inhibits potential relationship reset with China”.</p>
<p>Purely as a matter of logic, it is difficult to follow the Morrison argument.</p>
<p>The proposition seems to be that he can swallow material from a recognised Chinese government propaganda outfit and use it as credible evidence that someone else – namely the Labor leadership – is being manipulated by the Chinese government.</p>
<p>On top of that, the article quoted was far from flattering of Albanese. It characterised him as a cautious politician inclined to accept the US view of the world without giving it any independent thought.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/448483/original/file-20220225-13-1s5ko2h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/448483/original/file-20220225-13-1s5ko2h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448483/original/file-20220225-13-1s5ko2h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448483/original/file-20220225-13-1s5ko2h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448483/original/file-20220225-13-1s5ko2h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448483/original/file-20220225-13-1s5ko2h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448483/original/file-20220225-13-1s5ko2h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Morrison government has gone hard on accusing Richard Marles (left) and Anthony Albanese of being China’s ‘pick’ to win the 2022 federal election.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>At this point, it is only fair to point out there have been two remarkable exceptions to the Murdoch media chorus. Both <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/pm-right-on-china-wrong-on-labor/news-story/26cb39b079521e597fee796ee5296891">Greg Sheridan</a>, The Australian’s foreign editor, and <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/episodes/china/13763928">Andrew Bolt</a>, the Herald Sun and Sky News commentator, have spoken out, strongly disapproving of Morrison’s accusations.</p>
<p>In doing so, they echoed what the more responsible elements of the Australian media have done, <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/former-diplomats-spy-chiefs-warn-against-politicising-china-debate-20220216-p59wy6.html">focusing on the warnings</a> from the current head of ASIO, Mike Burgess, and a previous head, Dennis Richardson, that Morrison’s conduct undermines national security.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-faraway-conflict-feeds-into-morrisons-national-security-pitch-177833">Grattan on Friday: Faraway conflict feeds into Morrison's national security pitch</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The election is still scheduled for three months’ time, and the pressure on these responsible elements of the media is only likely to become more intense. Who knows what new conspiracy theories and hobgoblins the politicians will drum up between now and then?</p>
<p>Much will depend on whether Australia’s political leaders can climb out of the gutter, not forgetting that Albanese slung the “Manchurian candidate” slur back at Morrison.</p>
<p>Another important factor will be what happens on social media.</p>
<p>Hyper-partisanship is fuelled by social media through the echo-chamber effect, a phenomenon American political analyst Cass Sunstein examines <a href="https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691175515/republic">in his book #republic</a>.</p>
<p>He argues people could join the political debate wholly within these echo chambers among like-minded people, isolated from alternative views. They are exposed only to information of questionable quality and arguments that become increasingly strident and extreme as participants stir themselves up into a frenzy of hostility towards the opposing viewpoint.</p>
<p>This hostility then provides further incendiary material for unscrupulous politicians to exploit. Not long after, the contents of echo chambers can seep out into the public discourse.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/national-security-once-meant-more-than-just-conjuring-up-threats-beyond-our-borders-177632">'National security' once meant more than just conjuring up threats beyond our borders</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Australia’s democracy is in some respects better designed than America’s, especially with its independent electoral commission, preferential ballot and compulsory voting. These all provide some protection against the electoral impact of extremism.</p>
<p>But it is not indestructible. It rests on consensus, and that is preserved by tolerance and restraint, what Levitsky and Ziblatt call the “guardrails of democracy”.</p>
<p>We have seen precious little of either in the past week from the Morrison-Murdoch machine, leaving it to the rest of the media to try to see that those guardrails hold up.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/177741/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Morrison government has gone hard on accusing Labor of being China’s “pick” at the federal election, and in doing so is leading the country down a dangerous path.Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/473842015-09-10T20:11:02Z2015-09-10T20:11:02ZGrattan on Friday: Under the Abbott government, there are no timelines for war or detention<p>More than any other single factor, 12,000 Middle Eastern refugees have a heartbreaking image to thank for new lives in Australia. The pictures of toddler Aylan Kurdi moved public opinion, and that opinion, reflected through many on his own side of politics, shifted Tony Abbott.</p>
<p>It’s a reminder how politically potent graphic images can be, and also how much easier it is for governments to deflect attention from what is less visible.</p>
<p>No unofficial pictures – apart from the occasional clandestine one – and little information come from the Nauru and Manus Island detention centres where asylum seekers languish.</p>
<p>These detainees are shunned by the Abbott government, minimally mentioned by the Shorten opposition and neglected by the media who, with some honourable and notable exceptions, no longer have them top of mind except when something major happens.</p>
<p>This government and its predecessors have well understood the impact of information and images to sway public opinion. That’s why asylum seekers have been, as far as officialdom can do it, stripped of human faces and hidden from view. It’s why there has been a crackdown on leaks, including with a new tough law that threatens medical and other workers who might speak out about conditions.</p>
<p>There is bipartisanship on accepting displaced people from the Syrian-Iraq conflict, and bipartisanship on the ex-communicated souls on Nauru and Manus.
Abbott sees a “world of difference” between the refugees to be accepted and “people who have done a deal with people smugglers to go way beyond the country of first asylum”.</p>
<p>When Human Rights Commission president Gillian Triggs called for the government to accept that Syrian boat arrivals held in Nauru and Manus should be treated equally to those coming from the Middle East, Labor spokesman Richard Marles said it was essential to maintain the policy that arrivals who went to Nauru and Manus would not come to Australia.</p>
<p>It is indeed important the smuggling trade does not re-start, and that requires deterrence. But we should also remember – even in the absence of haunting images – that it is disgraceful and immoral to keep people indefinitely in hell holes. Is the government envisaging they be there for a decade?</p>
<p>Abbott came slowly to embrace the refugee boost, but he has been raring to go on the other leg of this week’s announcement – the extension of Australian air strikes to Syria.</p>
<p>This is partly driven by politics – not that it seems likely to be that popular – but for Abbott there are two other strong motivators.</p>
<p>He sees the fight against Islamic State in moral terms – a battle against evil. And he has been frustrated by the lack of US progress and aspires, realistically or not, to exert more influence on the Americans.</p>
<p>But this week highlighted that the government has little idea of the road ahead.</p>
<p>When asked what peace would look like, Abbott said: “The outcome that we’re working towards, along with our coalition partners, is a Middle East comprised of governments which don’t commit genocide against their own people nor permit terrorism against ours … This is not an attempt to build a shining city on a hill, this is not an attempt to build a liberal pluralist market democracy overnight in the Middle East.”</p>
<p>He described the objectives as “achievable” and “in a sense modest”. Given the situation in Iraq and Syria, this suggests not only massive optimism but a fundamental failure to grasp the ethnic, religious and political complexities of the region.</p>
<p>Last month, with the air strike tick-off looming, Defence Minister Kevin Andrews was probed on what Australia wanted to see as the outcome in Syria beyond destroying Islamic State (IS, or Daesh).</p>
<p>“Well that’s a complex question beyond what we are considering at the present time,” Andrews said. “Our consideration is quite squarely on Iraq, on the defence of Iraq.” </p>
<p>The collective defence of Iraq is being used to justify legally incursions into Syria, as IS fighters go over a porous border.</p>
<p>Abbott says: “The decision that we have made is to target air strikes against Daesh in Syria. … We haven’t made any new decision in respect of Assad but, in common with the vast majority of countries, we think that the Assad regime should go.”</p>
<p>James Brown, from Sydney University’s United States Studies Centre, poses the question of whether the air-strike extension is a tactical or strategic move. If it is tactical it is not big deal, he says, but if strategic – about increasing Australia’s involvement in Syria – “where is the rest of the policy?”</p>
<p>The timeline for involvement in this conflict is into the never-never. Andrews on Thursday suggested two or three years, but also said “we’re probably there for a number of years”. Warren Truss, acting prime minister while Abbott was in Papua New Guinea, told parliament: “We are there to do a job, and we will be there until the job is finished”. Abbott fell back on the line that “they’ll be there as long as needed but no longer than necessary”.</p>
<p>Equally uncertain is how the Australian commitment might evolve.</p>
<p>Andrews on Thursday flatly ruled out putting in ground combat troops.</p>
<p>Abbott was less definitive on Wednesday. Asked whether eventually “boots on the ground” would be required, he said that while there had been “some disappointments and frustrations in the campaign against Daesh so far, there has also been a degree of success”.</p>
<p>“As to what might happen in the long-term future, it’s just not appropriate to speculate today, but we are continuing to work with our partners and allies to ensure that the response is prudent, proportionate and effective.”</p>
<p>Abbott always wants to keep the debate in the moment. Quizzed last October about the fact he had not ruled out operating in Syria, he said “could I counsel people against wanting to project too far forward here? Let’s focus on what’s been done today rather than speculate on what might be done in months or years to come.”</p>
<p>Now we have a Syria step. Assuming Abbott is still around, what Australia does “in months or years to come” will depend on what the US does. If America at some point deployed ground combat troops, you can bet that would mean an Australian contingent. If the US happened not to make a request, Abbott could be expected to discreetly seek one.</p>
<p>Some might wonder why Australia has a greater military involvement in this conflict than the UK, France, Germany or other countries more immediately affected. It is not just concern about our people becoming foreign fighters, or the threat of terrorism at home. It’s that, for Abbott, this is a crusade.</p>
<p><strong><a href="https://theconversation.com/politics-podcast-josh-frydenberg-on-syria-the-refugee-intake-and-the-economy-47353">Listen to the latest Politics with Michelle Grattan podcast with guest, Assistant Treasurer Josh Frydenberg.</a></strong></p>
<iframe id="audio_iframe" src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/avf89-589b60" width="100%" height="100" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/47384/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>More than any other single factor, 12,000 Middle Eastern refugees have a heartbreaking image to thank for new lives in Australia.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/451622015-07-24T07:54:22Z2015-07-24T07:54:22ZALP conference day one: Labor says turnbacks needed to prevent drownings<p>The man in the deepest ditch on day one of Labor’s national conference was surely the party’s immigration spokesman Richard Marles.</p>
<p>With party feeling still red hot about the plan to allow a Labor government to turn back asylum seeker boats, there were audible groans from a few delegates when leader Bill Shorten said in his conference address that Marles “will deliver immigration policies that are safe and humane”. </p>
<p>Later Marles appeared on a panel at one of the conference’s fringe events. The room was packed. This was hostile territory.</p>
<p>But Marles was blunt. We know that 1200 people had perished at sea, he said, and almost every person familiar with this area believed the figure was far higher. </p>
<p>That human tragedy had now ended and the people smugglers were no longer in business. But if Labor reopened this journey “we will be condemned by history”. </p>
<p>As the number-crunchers continued to work behind the scenes, Marles promised the critics would soon see unveiled “the most generous offering any potential Australian government has made”. Members of the party would be able to “hold their heads high”, he said.</p>
<p>But the questions were critical, and there were mutterings and interjections. For many in Labor, the asylum seeker issue – and especially turnbacks – is highly emotional. </p>
<p>Despite the strong feelings, Shorten and Marles are set for a win on turnbacks when asylum seeker policy is debated on Saturday. The frontbench and the factions were closing behind Shorten over the issue. They could not afford to humiliate him. </p>
<p>Frontbencher Brendan O'Connor, from the left, a former home affairs minister, was on the same wavelength as Marles. “I think if we don’t get right this policy, if we don’t have sufficient deterrents, we’ll see a return to hundreds of people dying at sea. That’s not acceptable,” he said.</p>
<p>Shorten’s push on turnbacks would ensure there is no difference on this front between the ALP and the Coalition at the election. </p>
<p>The emphasis on preventing drownings has a strong echo of the Coalition’s own line at the last election and since. </p>
<p>Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen, a former immigration minister, said Shorten’s position would be supported on the floor of conference and defended him against critics in the left who complained they felt ambushed by his surprise announcement on Wednesday. </p>
<p>Bowen said that Shorten had openly indicated in advance what approach he would take at the conference – if he had left it until the issue was on the floor, people could have accused him of “not being open and honest in advance of the conference”. </p>
<p>Bowen also said Shorten had consulted appropriately with senior colleagues, including him, on the policy initiative. </p>
<p>In his address, Shorten chose to bypass turnbacks, concentrating on issues more congenial to the rank and file. </p>
<p>Shorten’s pitch on climate – the 50% renewables target, the plan for an emissions trading scheme, and a challenge to Tony Abbott to make the next election a contest about climate policy – went down a treat with delegates. </p>
<p>The speech contained no new policy announcements – the renewables target had been flagged earlier in the week. Nor was it particularly inspirational. But it did the job for the delegates on the day. </p>
<p>Notably, despite Shorten being under attack over aspects of his union career and Labor criticised for being too close to the unions, he went out of his way early on to pay tribute to them. </p>
<p>“No group of people in all Australian history has done more to guarantee safety, to build national wealth, to lift the living standards of ordinary people, than our unions. Ten thousand royal commissions won’t change this,” Shorten said.</p>
<p>In his speech Shorten made a particular pitch to women saying: “Our goal should be nothing less than the equal participation of women in work, equal pay for women at work, and an equal voice for women across our parliament.”</p>
<p>For women in the party, Shorten called on the conference to “declare, by 2025, 50% of Labor’s representatives will be women”. A worthy aspiration, no doubt, only remember that Labor has had targets before. When push comes to shove, other considerations – especially factional ones – have overridden lofty sentiments about gender representation. </p>
<p>As he looks to the conference’s second day, with its consideration of asylum seeker policy, Shorten can be feeling easier. But even when he gets his win, turnbacks will continue to be a divisive issue in the rank and file. </p>
<p>Opening the way for a Labor government to return boats should help Shorten in his competition for votes with the Liberals. But the danger for him will be that he loses votes on the left to the Greens, which will be the one party opposing the practice. </p>
<p><strong><a href="https://theconversation.com/politics-podcast-ben-oquist-on-the-direction-of-the-greens-and-the-senate-crossbench-44971">Listen to the latest Politics with Michelle Grattan, with Australian Institute director Ben Oquist, here or on iTunes.</a></strong></p>
<iframe id="audio_iframe" src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/zbt52-577e27" width="100%" height="100" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/45162/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
The man in the deepest ditch on day one of Labor’s national conference was surely the party’s immigration spokesman Richard Marles. With party feeling still red hot about the plan to allow a Labor government…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/444672015-07-12T20:24:34Z2015-07-12T20:24:34ZFactCheck: Could a whistleblower go public without fear of prosecution under the Border Force Act?<blockquote>
<p>RICHARD MARLES: … we absolutely support transparency and it is absolutely critical that doctors, nurses, lawyers, any contractor in a detention facility speak out when they see that there is something wrong. I mean, that’s fundamental. People should understand in relation to the Australian Border Force Act and, Greg, you might want to know this too, it makes it absolutely plain that the whistleblower protection, which applies across the public service, which is the basis upon which people speak out, applies in this situation as well.</p>
<p>TONY JONES: Does that mean a whistleblower can go public without threat of prosecution?</p>
<p>RICHARD MARLES: Well, that’s what the whistleblower legislation absolutely does.</p>
<p>GREG SHERIDAN: No, that’s not true Richard. That’s wrong. Protected information and a designated person cannot go public in the normal course of things under whistleblower legislation. – Shadow Immigration and Border Protection Minister Richard Marles, in <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s4250966.htm">discussion</a> with foreign affairs editor at The Australian, Greg Sheridan, and Q&A host Tony Jones, on Q&A, Monday July 6, 2015.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The new <a href="https://www.comlaw.gov.au/Series/C2015A00040">Border Force Act 2015</a>, supported by both the government and the opposition, makes it an offence for employees of the Australian Border Force to disclose “protected information”, which may include information gleaned in their work as an employee.</p>
<p>That’s drawn sharp criticism from a number of health care and humanitarian workers, who have <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/jul/01/detention-centre-staff-speak-out-in-defiance-of-new-asylum-secrecy-laws">said</a> that the secrecy provisions could be used to jail, for example, detention centre workers who report child abuse occurring in offshore refugee detention centres.</p>
<p>A number of health and humanitarian workers have penned an <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/jul/01/detention-centre-staff-speak-out-in-defiance-of-new-asylum-secrecy-laws">open letter</a> to Prime Minister Tony Abbott saying they will defy such constraints on disclosure.</p>
<p>The shadow minister for immigration and border protection, Richard Marles, argued on Q&A recently that such people would be shielded by whistleblower protection laws, known officially as the <a href="https://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2013A00133">Commonwealth Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013</a>.</p>
<p>Is he right?</p>
<h2>The letter of the law</h2>
<p>The secrecy provisions of the <a href="https://www.comlaw.gov.au/Series/C2015A00040">Border Force Act 2015</a> in Section 42 set out the offence provisions for the disclosure of protected information. </p>
<p>Subparagraph 42 (2) ( c ) states that these offence provisions do not apply if the disclosure is authorised under a Commonwealth, state, or territory statute. Therefore, the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013 does apply and a whistleblower would be protected.</p>
<p>The definition of disclosures covered by the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013 is broad enough to include the sorts of issues raised in the health care and humanitarian workers’ <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/jul/01/detention-centre-staff-speak-out-in-defiance-of-new-asylum-secrecy-laws">open letter</a>, including abuse of refugees.</p>
<p>However, there are qualifications. First, the Border Force Act applies only to officers, employees and contractors employed under the Border Force Act 2015.</p>
<p>For persons making a disclosure to be protected under the Public Interest Disclosure Act, they first have to report their concerns internally. Disclosure to outside parties must only be made after they “believe on reasonable grounds” that the investigation was inadequate (or delayed) or the response was inadequate.</p>
<p>Also, public disclosures under the Act must not be contrary to the public interest nor make public sensitive information about law enforcement.</p>
<p>Another potential impediment to a disclosure being protected is the exemption provided by paragraphs 26 (2A) and 31 (b) of the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013. These provisions exempt a disclosure being protected if the matter relates to a matter where a Minister has taken action or proposes to take action. A person cannot disclose information only on the basis that the person disagrees with the action that has been, is being, or is proposed to be taken by a Minister. This can occur where the Minister exercises authority in individual cases, for <a href="http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/bringbackasha-campaign-gathers-momentum-as-government-attempts-to-silence-doctors/story-fnq2o7dd-1227425104652">example</a>, dealing with a recommendation <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2015/s4248467.htm">to relocate a person for medical treatment</a>. In these circumstances, this exemption to protection could apply. Ministerial intervention in <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-25/maria-sevilla-and-tyrone-sevillas-deportation-stopped/6493866">immigration</a> and <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/oct/22/scott-morrison-personally-intervenes-block-claims-permanent-asylum">asylum seeker</a> cases has occurred in the past. </p>
<h2>Qualifications matter</h2>
<p>It is possible the Commonwealth could use these qualifications to dispute the validity of the protections provided under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013. Previous official <a href="https://theconversation.com/procedural-fairness-that-doesnt-apply-to-us-says-immigration-department-39167">responses</a> to allegations of abuse happening at offshore detention centres suggest the government might be willing to take a hard line.</p>
<p>However, the the new Border Force Commissioner, Roman Quaedvlieg, has <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/medical-staff-unlikely-to-be-prosecuted-under-new-border-protection-laws-says-border-force-commissioner-20150701-gi269g.html">reportedly</a> said that he “sincerely doubts” that any action would be taken against medical professionals who report abuse.</p>
<p>Notwithstanding the existence of legal rights, research has shown that public sector whistleblowers can face retaliation. </p>
<p>A 2008 research <a href="http://press.anu.edu.au/titles/australia-and-new-zealand-school-of-government-anzsog-2/whistleblowing_citation/">project</a> into public sector whistleblowing led by A.J. Brown of Griffith University found that 22% of public sector employees who make a public interest disclosure suffer some form of retaliation. </p>
<p>This retaliation can range from minor harassment through to dismissal from employment. Also, that research project indicated that the biggest risks likely to be suffered by persons making disclosures occur when the disclosure is made public. It should be noted that this finding was based on data collected before the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013 was enacted, but a risk of retaliation remains for whistleblowers.</p>
<h2>What a Border Force worker needs to know</h2>
<p>If the person has concerns that need to be raised, it is advisable that these be done formally under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013. The disclosure should be made internally at first. The person should also keep written records of the circumstances surrounding the disclosure and subsequent developments.</p>
<p>Before going to the next step of making the disclosure public, the person should seek advice from a trusted senior officer within the organisation, as well as obtaining independent legal advice.</p>
<p>The research has shown that the persons who negotiate a public interest disclosure process most successfully are those who have good professional, social and family networks that are prepared to support them in this difficult situation.</p>
<h2>Verdict</h2>
<p>Marles was correct in his statement that medical professionals employed under the Border Force Act 2015 are able to make public disclosures about their concerns. They would be protected by whistleblower laws but <em>only if</em> they disclosed in a very specific way. The disclosure process has qualifications and persons making disclosures need to be careful that they act in a way that enables them to take advantage of the protections provided by the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013. </p>
<p>Legal protections cannot guarantee absolutely that whistleblowers will be spared from retaliation. The understandable concerns of medical professionals would be eased if the government made a clear statement that the rights to act upon concerns about their clients were to be respected.</p>
<hr>
<h2>Review</h2>
<p>This is a sound legal analysis of the extent to which the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013 shields whistleblowers from retaliation.</p>
<p>As far as health professionals are concerned, <a href="https://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2015A00040/Html/Text#_Toc419973065">Section 48 of the Border Force Act</a> — which permits disclosure if an entrusted person “reasonably believes that the disclosure is necessary to prevent or lessen a serious threat to the life or health of an individual” — arguably provides greater protection than the whistleblower protections under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013. </p>
<p>However, as I have <a href="https://theconversation.com/border-force-act-entrenches-secrecy-around-australias-asylum-seeker-regime-44136">previously argued</a>, other provisions in the Border Force Act that regulate employee conduct may deter employees from relying on this exception.</p>
<p>The Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013 also includes <a href="https://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2013A00133/Html/Text#_Toc361755356">“emergency disclosure”</a> provisions that allow public disclosure on “reasonable grounds that the information concerns a substantial and imminent danger to the health or safety of one or more persons or to the environment”. But, as the author has identified, such disclosures must first be made internally (unless there are exceptional circumstances) and cannot include sensitive law enforcement information.</p>
<p>The internal hurdles that must be overcome may delay or deter important disclosures in the public interest. I agree that even where disclosures are made public, the extent to which Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013 provides protection will largely depend on how the qualifications of “sensitive law enforcement information” and information that is “contrary to the public interest” are interpreted.</p>
<p>The author is right in arguing that the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013 cannot “guarantee absolutely” that whistleblowers will be spared from retaliation. <strong>– Khanh Hoang</strong></p>
<p><em>UPDATE: This article was updated at 2pm on July 13 to add a paragraph on how the Public Interest Disclosure Act relates to cases of Ministerial intervention.</em></p>
<hr>
<p><div class="callout"> Have you ever seen a “fact” that doesn’t look quite right? The Conversation’s FactCheck asks academic experts to test claims and see how true they are. We then ask a second academic to review an anonymous copy of the article. You can request a check at checkit@theconversation.edu.au. Please include the statement you would like us to check, the date it was made, and a link if possible.</div></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/44467/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Roberts was a Chief Investigator on the Whistling While They Work research project 2005-2009 which received funding from the Australian Research Council.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tomas Fitzgerald receives funding from the WA Bar Association. He is a member of the WA Labor Party and the NTEU.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Khanh Hoang does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Despite doctors voicing fears they could be jailed for disclosing abuse of refugees, Richard Marles says whistleblower protection laws would still apply in relation to the Border Force Act. Is he right?Peter Roberts, Adjunct Senior Lecturer, Australian Graduate School of Policing and Security, Charles Sturt UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/440682015-07-03T03:03:49Z2015-07-03T03:03:49ZFactCheck: is this the greatest period of humanitarian need since WWII?<blockquote>
<p>“We acknowledge that right now the world is going through its greatest period of humanitarian need seen since the second world war. There are more people seeking refuge, more people displaced than at any other point in time … ” <strong>– Shadow Immigration and Border Protection Minister Richard Marles, <a href="http://www.richardmarles.com.au/sites/default/files/THE%20HON%20RICHARD%20MARLES%20MP_0.pdf">interview</a> with Fran Kelly on RN Breakfast, June 29, 2015.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>In the lead-up to the ALP National Conference this month, <a href="http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2015/06/30/labors-debate-boat-turnbacks-heats">reports</a> have emerged suggesting the opposition may throw its support behind the policy of turning back asylum seeker boats.</p>
<p>When questioned on the topic, Shadow Immigration Minister Richard Marles mentioned that the world is now going through its greatest period of humanitarian need since the second world war. </p>
<p>Is that correct?</p>
<h2>Rapid acceleration</h2>
<p>It is likely Marles’ comment was a reference to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) annual Global Trends Report, <a href="http://www.unhcr.org/556725e69.html">released</a> in June. The agency estimated that at the end of 2014 there was an estimated <a href="http://www.unhcr.org/558193896.html">59.5 million</a> people forcibly displaced worldwide. There has been a rapid acceleration of displacement, increasing 40% over just three years from 42.5 million in 2011. </p>
<p>From the end of 2013 to the end of 2014, there was an <a href="http://tracks.unhcr.org/2015/06/ending-the-second-exile/">increase</a> of 8.3 million displaced people from the year. That 12-month period also saw the <a href="http://www.unhcr.org/558193896.html">highest annual increase</a> in a single year.</p>
<p>The data in the report is based on figures provided by governments, non-government organisations and the UNHCR. The <a href="http://www.unhcr.org/556725e69.html">figures</a> include refugees (19.5 million), asylum seekers (1.8 million), and certain groups of internally displaced persons (38.2 million), collectively referred to as “persons of concern”.</p>
<p>The UNHCR has stated that is the highest level of displacement in the post-WWII era. Situations of conflict, persecution, generalised violence, and human rights violations have formed a “nation of the displaced” roughly equivalent of the population of the UK. UN High Commissioner for Refugees António Guterres has <a href="http://www.unhcr.org/55813f0e6.html">said</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We are witnessing a paradigm change, an unchecked slide into an era in which the scale of global forced displacement as well as the response required is now clearly dwarfing anything seen before.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>More than half of Syria’s population is displaced. It is one of the biggest refugee crises in history with around four million people leaving the country. At least <a href="http://www.unhcr.org/55813f0e6.html">7.6 million Syrians</a> are also estimated to be displaced within their country at the end of 2014. <a href="http://www.unhcr.org.uk/about-us/key-facts-and-figures.html">Children</a> constituted 51% of the refugee population in 2014, the highest figure in more than a decade.</p>
<p>The refugee crisis in Syria was certainly not the only one. Little-publicised conflicts in South Sudan, the Central African Republic, Nigeria and Burundi, have added hundreds of thousands to the long-standing refugee populations from Somalia, Ethiopia and the Democratic Republic of Congo.</p>
<p>The number of refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) in Asia <a href="http://www.unhcr.org/55813f0e6.html">grew</a> by 31% in 2014 to nine million people. Continuing displacement was also seen in and from Myanmar in 2014, including of Rohingya from Rakhine state and in the Kachin and Northern Shan regions.</p>
<p>Compounding the ongoing displacement of people, the number of refugee returns is at its <a href="http://unhcr.org/556725e69.pdf">lowest</a> point since 1983. During 2014, only <a href="http://unhcr.org/556725e69.pdf">126,800</a> refugees returned to their country of origin. Ongoing conflict and general political insecurity have contributed to the prevailing trends.</p>
<p>In an effort to escape desperate situations, refugees and migrants risk their lives – the starkest examples are those who have embarked on dangerous boat journeys in the Mediterranean from North Africa to Europe and in South East Asia. At the end of 2014, the UNHCR estimated that at least <a href="http://www.unhcr.org/5481bf796.html">348,000</a> people had attempted to reach safety by boat throughout the year.</p>
<h2>Response from the international community</h2>
<p>In response to this crisis, many destination countries (including Australia) were criticised by the UNHCR for resorting to tougher deterrence measures in an attempt to stem the rise in asylum and refugee flows. Amnesty International <a href="http://www.amnesty.org.au/resources/activist/POL4017962015ENGLISH.PDF">described</a> the international community’s response to the Syrian refugee emergency as “dismal”, saying that only 23% of the UN humanitarian appeal for that crisis funded as of June 3, 2015.</p>
<p>The UNHCR’s Guterres did not mince words, <a href="http://www.unhcr.org/558016eb6.html">saying</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>[E]ven as this tragedy unfolds, some of the countries most able to help are shutting their gates to people seeking asylum. Borders are closing, pushbacks are increasing, and hostility is rising. Avenues for legitimate escape are fading away. And humanitarian organisations like mine run on shoestring budgets, unable to meet the spiralling needs of such a massive population of victims. We have reached a moment of truth. World stability is falling apart leaving a wake of displacement on an unprecedented scale.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In the aftermath of WWII, the international community established the United Nations and the Refugee Convention to provide a framework for protection of those who were displaced due to conflict and who could not longer rely upon their own country for safety.</p>
<p>The Refugee Convention also established the principle of responsibility and burden-sharing – the idea that the international community must work together to address refugee crises so that no one country, or a small number of countries, has to cope by themselves. </p>
<p>There is a clearly disproportionate burden on a small number of countries. Around 86% of the world’s refugees are in developing countries. Turkey, Lebanon and Pakistan each host <a href="http://www.unhcr.org.uk/about-us/key-facts-and-figures.html">more than one million refugees</a>.</p>
<p>Amnesty International is one of many human rights organisations who have <a href="http://www.amnesty.org.au/resources/activist/POL4017962015ENGLISH.PDF">said</a> that the principle of international burden sharing is being ignored “with devastating consequences: the international refugee protection system is broken”. The loss of life and human misery is far higher than many armed conflicts.</p>
<p>The global refugee crisis will not be solved unless the international community recognises that it is a global problem and deals with it as such.</p>
<h2>Verdict</h2>
<p>Marles’ statement is consistent with the recent report on global displacement by the UNHCR. Those displaced by conflict and persecution are at the highest levels the UNHCR has recorded, and sadly they are continuing to grow.</p>
<hr>
<h2>Review</h2>
<p>This is a good analysis, as the recently released UNHCR report rightly draws our attention to the increasing number of refugees and displaced people around the world.</p>
<p>As the author notes, it is the “frontline” countries like Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan that are providing temporary refuge for the massive flow of refugees from Syria. Pakistan continues to be the first place for Afghans fleeing their prolonged conflict, but even Pakistan is now a source country for refugees.</p>
<p>However, other conflicts in Africa receive less attention particularly in the English language media, apart from commentary on boat people in the Mediterranean. It rightly is a global issue calling for global attention. The focus on “turn backs”, which was the main topic of the interview, does not address the need for a global approach to increased movement of people. <strong>– Kerry Murphy</strong></p>
<hr>
<p><div class="callout"> Have you ever seen a “fact” that doesn’t look quite right? The Conversation’s FactCheck asks academic experts to test claims and see how true they are. We then ask a second academic to review an anonymous copy of the article. You can request a check at checkit@theconversation.edu.au. Please include the statement you would like us to check, the date it was made, and a link if possible.</div></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/44068/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mary Anne Kenny receives sitting fees from the Department of Immigration and Border Protection. She has received grant funding from the Australian Research Council.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kerry Murphy is on the Board of the Immigration Advice and Rights Centre and the Jesuit Refugee Service. I am a partner in a specialist Immigration Law Firm.
</span></em></p>Shadow Immigration Minister Richard Marles has said that the world is now going through its greatest period of humanitarian need since WWII. Is that right?Mary Anne Kenny, Associate Professor, School of Law, Murdoch UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/334872014-10-27T12:02:23Z2014-10-27T12:02:23ZA future Labor government would almost certainly turn back boats if any were coming<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/62873/original/dtsg8b6g-1414410795.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Opposition leader Bill Shorten faces a difficult policy problem with boat turn backs.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Lukas Coch</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Bill Shorten is in a awkward place on the issue of boat turn backs.</p>
<p>Richard Marles’ <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/labor-might-turn-back-the-boats-richard-marles-20141026-11bym6.html">suggestion</a> that under certain conditions a Labor government might embrace the policy recognised reality. But the immigration spokesman’s comments were incendiary to many within Labor, and frustrating to others for taking attention off the government.</p>
<p>The official line is that the ALP’s policy hasn’t changed.</p>
<p>Marles, who lit the fire on Sunday, had the hose out on Monday. The government gloated at the apparent change and then the (well, sort of) retreat.</p>
<p>“The shadow minister … got turned back on turn backs,” Immigration Minister Scott Morrison declared, a few days after Labor was trumpeting how Morrison’s colleagues were turning back his expansionist ambitions.</p>
<p>Many in Labor are waiting for Shorten (who is close to Marles) to have something to say publicly or in Tuesday’s caucus. The left will be listening carefully for any weasel words.</p>
<p>The leader is caught between the politics and the party. He has already stretched the tolerance of quite a few of his followers by his bipartisanship on the government’s tough national security legislation, the second tranche of which is due to go through parliament this week.</p>
<p>Left-winger Melissa Parke, who was a lawyer with the United Nations, says: “For Labor to support turn backs, there would need to be a change of policy at national conference. I don’t think this would occur because it would be against our Labor values and our commitment to uphold international law and human rights”.</p>
<p>Results dictate that Labor has to recognise that turning boats back has been one factor in stopping the people smuggling trade, though secondary to Kevin Rudd’s tough pre-election declaration that all arrivals would be sent offshore with no chance of resettlement in Australia.</p>
<p>Marles, interviewed on Sky, said on Sunday that the turn back policy “has had an impact”. Labor was “open minded” about it, but had anxieties revolving around safety and how it affected relations with the Indonesians, who “hate” it.</p>
<p>“If safety and the relationship with Indonesia can be satisfied, well then this is a totally different question”, and a Labor government “might” turn back boats. But those questions hadn’t been answered. Marles pointed to remarks from new Indonesia president Joko Widodo, who in a Fairfax Media <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/joko-widodos-blunt-warning-to-prime-minister-tony-abbott-20141017-117l9i.html">interview</a> flagged a strong line on sovereignty and warned against any repeat of Navy vessels straying into Indonesian waters.</p>
<p>On Monday, Marles <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/richard-marles-talks-down-adopting-boat-turnbacks-strategy-after-labor-revolt-20141027-11cckv.html">said</a>: “We’re open-minded about anything which saves lives at sea but we retain two real concerns about the turn back policy, and in this respect, our position has not changed”.</p>
<p>Pressed on whether he would argue in the election lead up that Labor would turn back boats if it were safe and didn’t erode the Indonesian relationship, Marles said: “I’m not going to walk down the path of answering hypotheticals”.</p>
<p>Privately, he told colleagues he wished he’d put things differently on Sunday.</p>
<p>Changing a position is difficult and often painful for a party. Labor has been adamant for a long time in its opposition to turn backs. In a <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/national/how-a-boat-people-briefing-got-out-of-control-20110909-1k1vr.html">2011 background briefing</a> organised by the Gillard government, the then-head of theiImmigration department Andrew Metcalfe said that while Howard’s policy of turning back boats was effective at the time it would not work again.</p>
<p>But events have overtaken predictions and Labor’s stance.</p>
<p>What of the two conditions?</p>
<p>The Coalition’s policy has been to turn boats back “where safe to do”, although secrecy has shrouded operations. A Labor government could make its own judgements about safety.</p>
<p>The Indonesians have periodically stated concerns about encroachments on their sovereignty, now reiterated, but whether the policy will be a problem in the future remains to be seen, partly depending on whether there are boats to be turned back.</p>
<p>All things being equal, by the time of a Labor government, whenever that might be, it’s likely turn backs would not be a big thing. If they were still needed, it’s probable Labor would keep the policy, arguing satisfactory conditions could be met. It would not want to risk a repeat of the boat trade starting again.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Labor would do best to get past turn backs and give more of its attention to the plight of those asylum seekers stuck on Manus Island and Nauru.</p>
<p>There are plenty of points to pursue, questions to be asked. Papua New Guinea is still considering its attitude on resettlement for those found to be refugees. What is the Australian government doing to put pressure on it? Bad stories <a href="http://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/opinion/topic/2014/10/25/open-letter-living-the-hell-called-nauru/14141556001165">regularly emanate</a> from Nauru.</p>
<p>We are not hearing enough from Labor about the plight of the unfortunate people in these places. As time goes on, Morrison, so successful in stopping the boats, is going to have increasing difficulties on those fronts. He’s sitting on powder kegs.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/33487/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Bill Shorten is in a awkward place on the issue of boat turn backs. Richard Marles’ suggestion that under certain conditions a Labor government might embrace the policy recognised reality. But the immigration…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.