Elections where a national security threat have been a major talking point have historically played well for incumbent governments. But this time is different.
Word from The Hill: Ray Hadley’s shouty assault on Albanese; the intractable Solomons issue; and the wider play of Deves
Michelle Grattan discusses politics with politics + society editor, Amanda Dunn
Royal Australian Air Force C-130 Hercules aircraft, preparing to land at Honiara International Airport, Solomon Islands.
CPL Brandon Grey/Department of Defence
The Arctic Council was the world’s primary forum for cooperation among the eight Arctic nations and a channel for diplomacy – until Russia launched a war.
While there has been a big spend on cyber capabilities, many other aspects of defence and security have been neglected. The budget highlights the lack of a comprehensive national security policy.
Stretching back to the second world war, the term was used to encompass the well-being and safety of Australians, rather than the crude, vague threat from outsiders it implies today.
With the Coalition leaning hard on its perceived strengths on national security, Labor’s only option is to emphasise bipartisanship.
Commercial satellite companies provide views once reserved for governments, like this image of a Russian military training facility in Crimea.
Satellite image (c) 2021 Maxar Technologies via Getty Images
National security professionals and armchair sleuths alike are taking advantage of vast amounts of publicly available information and software tools to monitor geopolitical events around the world.
While it may be difficult to enact a global set of regulations on surveillance technologies, individual countries can take the lead with enhanced monitoring and stronger laws.
University of Canberra Professorial Fellow Michelle Grattan and Professor Lain Dare of the Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis at the University of Canberra discuss the week in politics.