The real question is what was Anthony Albanese thinking when he made Kevin Rudd US ambassador to begin with? | David Penberthy
The question shouldn’t really be can Kevin Rudd remain Australia’s US ambassador, it’s why he ever got the job to begin with, writes David Penberthy.
Opinion
Don't miss out on the headlines from Opinion. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Kevin Rudd has found out the hard way that life does not come with a rewind switch.
It would be handy if it did, if we could take back every intemperate or over-the-top remark we had ever made.
Especially if you happen to be a public figure, someone in politics whose utterances carry more weight.
To use what sounds like a Ruddism, attempts by the former PM to render his past thoughts on Donald Trump “non-operational” do not pass muster. Or to use an actual Ruddism, fair shake of the sauce bottle mate.
There are more than a few people for whom the only silver lining in Donald Trump’s victory has been watching the hilarious awkwardness of Mr Rudd trying to crab-walk from his thundering denunciations of the President-elect.
I have never heard a funnier or more desperate misuse of the word “misconstrued” in my life. How do you “misconstrue” the following tweet from June 2020:
“The most destructive president in history,” Rudd wrote.
“He drags America and democracy through the mud. He thrives on fomenting, not healing, division. He abuses Christianity, church and bible to justify violence. All aided and abetted by Murdoch’s FoxNews Network in America which feeds this.”
A bit like the final moments of Scorsese’s Goodfellas where mobster wife Karen Hill madly flushes the cocaine down the toilet during the police raid, Rudd was up early on Thursday frantically scouring his socials to delete the evidence.
His people released a statement saying his past comments had been made in a private capacity while head of a public policy think tank and should not be misconstrued as representative of his views as Australia’s Ambassador in Washington, nor the views of the Australian Government.
Well, nice try.
The question in all this isn’t so much what Kevin Rudd said. Mr Rudd like everyone can say whatever the hell he likes.
Indeed his punchy assessment of Donald Trump gel with what most people on the broad left of politics, and even many traditional conservatives, have to say about the man.
The real question is why Prime Minister Anthony Albanese ever appointed him Ambassador in the first place.
Imagine a situation where a former politician had come out and said, for example, that British PM Sir Keir Starmer was a jumped-up poseur and that any Labor person who insisted on a lofty title bestowed by some nonsense knighthood was a massive tosser not worthy of high office.
Ah, I see we have a vacancy in our London Embassy. You’re hired.
As if.
It has been an absurdity from the get-go and it was only made possible by the cushy jobs-for-the-boys rules which have long governed diplomatic appointments on both sides of politics.
The nepotism angle is made weirder and worse with the Rudd appointment due to the recent factional history of the ALP.
Without wanting to sound cruel, there are many people in the Australian Labor Party who would be quite happy if they never had anything to do with Kevin Rudd ever again.
For these people, the idea of Rudd being sent to Washington might have satiated their desire to be separated from Kevin Rudd by a large body of water, giving him a whole new country to annoy.
The only people remaining in the parliamentary party who have been rusted-on Rudd loyalists since the 2010 coup are Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Foreign Minister Penny Wong.
It looks like their loyalty got in the way of their judgment here as they helped out an old mate who found himself between jobs.
As I said, it’s a practice that’s happened on both sides of politics.
I am sure there are dozens of smart people in the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade who would have made a much better choice for the coveted Washington gig than former Liberal Treasurer Joe Hockey, whose most memorable moment in that role was when he was busted smoking a cigar.
So too with Rudd. Plenty of smart DFAT people could have done the job without all this drama.
The line Anthony Albanese is running is that the appointment to Washington of someone who reached the lofty height of prime minister shows the huge amount of value Australia places on its relationship with the US.
Penny Wong has also lauded Rudd’s capacity to work with both sides of American politics.
“One of the hallmarks of his tenure thus far has been his delivery of reforms and changes with the support of both Republicans and Democrats and his ability to work with both sides of the aisle in Washington,” she said.
Good luck with that. This is Donald Trump we are talking about. Trump is already on the record saying he is unimpressed by what Rudd has said about him.
In March this year Trump called Mr Rudd “a little bit nasty” and “not the brightest bulb”.
Given the swift and resolute action Trump took as president against his own staff whom he regarded as disrespectful or incompetent or merely irritating, there is nothing to suggest the returning president is going to be fuelled by a new sense of graciousness and bonhomie, especially towards a left-wing politician who bagged him so publicly and so thoroughly.
The job of ambassador is to be a door-opener. We are represented in Washington by a door closer.
And if our Prime Minister thinks that Kevin Rudd is capable of building good relationships, and is working assiduously to repair any tensions that exist with Donald Trump, surely it’s a bit of a gamble to take with our most important strategic partnership.
And given that Rudd’s removal by Caucus in 2010 was driven largely by his abrasiveness with his colleagues, it seems foolish in hindsight to have appointed someone hamstrung by a serious lack of diplomacy to our most important diplomatic role.
Originally published as The real question is what was Anthony Albanese thinking when he made Kevin Rudd US ambassador to begin with? | David Penberthy
O’Brien: Don’t let welcome ceremonies become self-serving symbols
Welcome to Country speeches should be welcome. But they should also be be short, poignant, heartfelt, non-political and non-divisive.
How Trump victory is a lesson for Labor
Labor should be worried because Australian voters have suffered a much bigger decline in real incomes than the Americans who just threw out the Democrats, writes James Campbell.