Topics: Reopening embassy ends embarrassment; Syria; Israel-Gaza; nuclear;
07:35AMAM AEDT
20 December 2024
Sally Sara: Australian diplomats will return to Ukraine’s capital, Kyiv, nearly three years after Russia’s invasion plunged the country into conflict and forced many ambassadors to flee. The re-establishment of the embassy was confirmed by Foreign Minister Penny Wong this week, as she promised new aid, and she toured the war-torn country. The minister’s visit comes as Ukraine’s leader Volodymyr Zelensky meets with European leaders from the NATO alliance. Senator Simon Birmingham is the Shadow Foreign Minister and joins me now. Simon Birmingham, welcome back to RN breakfast.
Simon Birmingham: Good morning, Sally, it’s great to be with you.
Sally Sara: You’ve criticised the Federal government for how long it’s taken to get the embassy back up and running in Ukraine, but Ukraine’s foreign minister has rejected suggestions that it’s in any way harmed the relationship. Are you more concerned about this issue, perhaps, than the Ukrainians are?
Simon Birmingham: No, Sally. It was pretty clear to me when I visited Kyiv and Ukraine back in August that there was genuine concern and there were practical problems that come to bear from Australia’s embassy being closed far, far longer than any of our counterparts. And those practical problems were whether we were getting the best intelligence, in-person briefings, the type of information that could better have helped the Albanese Government to fully understand how this tragic war has been unfolding, and how Australia can best and most quickly and efficiently deliver support to Ukraine. When you compare the track record of Australia under the Albanese Government with virtually any other counterpart around the world, from Ireland to Indonesia, around 70 countries were able to reopen their embassies within months. And yet it’s taken Australia more than two years, even though the people we even share our embassy building with in Canada equally did so within that few month-long time frame.
Sally Sara: Canada is a NATO member and had access to all that NATO provides with briefings and some measures of protection and evacuation from Kyiv. Is it unfair to compare the two?
Simon Birmingham: Australia is a valued partner of NATO, like Japan, like South Korea, who both managed to reopen their embassies in a timely manner, as did many countries who are neither NATO members nor NATO partner nations. So, I don’t see that this argument put by the Albanese Government holds up, and indeed there are no real explanations, then, for what has changed. Australia is still not a NATO member. And so if that was the reason, that hasn’t changed, and Penny Wong seems unable to articulate any particular reason or argument as to what has changed for this decision, I think aside from the fact that the pressure had mounted, the ridiculousness of Australia being such an outlier was evident, and that it can really only have been either intransigence on the part of the government, or ineptitude on the part of the government that they were unable to find a way to reopen Australia’s embassy when Canada could do so, and when so many other, more than 70 other countries could do so and do so safely for their diplomats.
Sally Sara: On another issue, let’s take a look at Syria. Australia has had sanctions in place against Syria since 2011. Now that the Assad regime has fallen, and the new de facto leader is saying that sanctions should be dropped. Do you think they should be reviewed?
Simon Birmingham: I think obviously sanctions should be under review in terms of assessing how things unfold. I wouldn’t rush to prejudge those conclusions. Australia would wish to see in Syria a situation where all minorities, all peoples, have their rights protected and where Syria engages responsibly not only with its own population in terms of their rights, but also with its neighbours and that Syria becomes again a country where all of its peoples can enjoy safety and opportunity and as a contributor to the peace and stability of the region. And if we see strong steps in those directions, well then of course, sanctions should be removed.
Sally Sara: When we look at the situation with Israel and Gaza, we spoke earlier on the program to the director of emergency at Médecins Sans Frontieres. That’s Brice de le Vingne, who says there are undeniable signs of ethnic cleansing in Gaza. Let’s take a listen to what he had to say.
Speaker3: [EXCERPT] You know, I have more than 20 years of experience in humanitarian world. It’s pretty unique to see that level of intensity, number of displacement. You have a mask, what we call mass casualties. You have a lot of wounded coming to the hospital, and you can see that they are constantly on the fear to be attacked. And nowhere is safe basically. Then a location where nowhere is safe. You come up to the conclusion and the use of those term. [END OF EXCERPT]
Sally Sara: This report from Médecins Sans Frontieres, comes only a few weeks after a similar report from Amnesty International. In your view, Simon, Birmingham, should Australia continue to support Israel in the face of these very concerning assessments and allegations?
Simon Birmingham: Sally, there is no doubt it is an immense human tragedy all that has unfolded in Gaza. The loss of innocent life has been so tragic for all to see and of course, most horrific for those who are living through those circumstances. What Australia should continue to do is indeed support our democratic partner and ally in Israel in their right to self-defence, but also apply maximum pressure for a ceasefire to be negotiated, one that sees hostages returned, one that sees terrorist capabilities surrendered. This conflict, which started all the way back on the 7th of October last year from Hamas’s attacks, has been perpetuated by Hamas, who continue to hide amongst the Palestinian civilians in Gaza to hide hostages amongst those Palestinian civilians in Gaza, to wage attacks when they can and have resisted, as the Biden administration has made clear. Hamas have resisted signing on to terms of recent ceasefire negotiations, and we need to make sure the pressure is there for them and for Israel to sign on to a ceasefire that can bring the conflict to an end, the hostages home and take steps towards stability in the region.
Sally Sara: I’m speaking with Simon Birmingham, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs. Senator, do you regard Médecins Sans Frontieres as a credible organisation?
Simon Birmingham: Well, they are certainly a credible organisation in the provision of relief, of medical assistance of response in humanitarian crises. And I don’t doubt that, clearly different parties will add different commentary to their assessment of what’s happening on the ground. I don’t deny for a moment the realities in terms of the human suffering that is occurring and the tragedy that has occurred there. The analysis as to causes of that and how to get out of that is something that then comes down to very difficult decisions. We would all just wish to say that peace could be achieved if the fighting stopped. But peace ultimately needs to see the terrorists removed from a position where they could restart at any time their desire to see the State of Israel eliminated and their desire to restart this conflict, as they did all the way back on October 7th and getting a negotiated outcome that ensures there is a hope for longer-term security and peace and stability is what all would wish to see achieved, I’m sure.
Sally Sara: Senator Birmingham, as the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, I want to ask you about your party’s nuclear policy, which scientific experts in Australia have come out in favour of the Coalition’s nuclear plan?
Simon Birmingham: Well, Sally, I haven’t gone and compiled my own list there. I know that there have been discussions with, for example, the former CEO of the CSIRO, Larry Marshall, and many different leaders of and experts in the energy field and in nuclear energy that Ted O’Brien, the Shadow Energy Minister, has undertaken. What you’ve seen the coalition do is develop independent economic modelling that’s been released. And yes, like all economic modelling, it has people who will criticise and analyse it but it is independent economic modelling undertaken by Frontier Economics. The same people, for example, who did the independent economic modelling for the South Australian state Labor Party ahead of the last election.
Sally Sara: This isn’t just this isn’t this isn’t just about dollars and cents. We’re talking about nuclear energy. And there are some safety issues that people want to get assurances on. Are there any scientific experts in Australia that have endorsed your plan?
Simon Birmingham: Well, Sally, I’m not sure what you mean there by scientific experts. Are you asking, are there people saying that nuclear energy can be safely delivered?
Sally Sara: Is it safe and feasible? Your plan?
Simon Birmingham: Is it safe and feasible? It absolutely is. It is safe and feasible in countries right around the world. You’ve got every G20 country bar Australia either producing nuclear energy, relying on nuclear energy or with plans to have nuclear energy. So, Australia is an outlier amongst countries of economic scale and size like us. And it is our position that Australia can certainly do as one of the world’s largest producers of uranium, the same as our counterpart nations, which is to safely generate and manage nuclear energy facilities.
Sally Sara: How much waste will your nuclear plan produce?
Simon Birmingham: Well, waste will be produced. That is a function of nuclear energy, as waste will be produced from the AUKUS nuclear-powered submarines as well. And the government is committed to the fact that waste can and will be safely managed in the future. And so waste from a nuclear energy facility would equally be safely managed into the future.
Sally Sara: If voters are trying to make up their mind about this proposal, because the waste will need to go somewhere. What’s the estimate of how much waste we’re talking about.
Simon Birmingham: Sally, the scale is in a country like Australia, one that is entirely manageable. Now, what I’m pleased about in the context of the next election is that there is going to be a real policy debate in terms of competing policies on the energy front. When it comes to nuclear waste, one thing though that does disturb me is that Australia has spent far too long failing to come to a point of conclusion around where and how waste will be managed. Unfortunately, the current government walked away from a site that had community support that had been through extensive processes, hit a hurdle in terms of a legal challenge. But rather than seek to overcome that hurdle, they took us back to square one. It’s going to be important for whoever is elected at the next election to get on with the process of determining how nuclear waste in this country will be managed. Even if we don’t win, the current government is committed to the nuclear-powered submarines and to managing the waste from them in the future.
Sally Sara: But just to clarify, you don’t know. You don’t have an estimate of how much waste from your nuclear plan?
Simon Birmingham: Sally, I don’t have a piece of paper in front of me that tells you the tonnage or weight of the size of waste. I’m not denying the fact that there is waste that comes from a nuclear power plant, but it is waste that is eminently manageable and sensible for a country like Australia. With our scale, our geological stability that many other nations the world over would envy. If places like Finland can manage to do so safely and securely as part of a prosperous country. Then there is no reason why a country like Australia cannot.
Sally Sara: Senator Simon Birmingham, the Shadow Foreign Minister, and of course the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, a Senator from South Australia. Thank you very much.
Simon Birmingham: Thank you. Sally, all the best and Merry Christmas to everyone.
[ENDS]