It is difficult to think of a time when Australia has been so inconsequential, so powerless, so much without influence, so incapable of affecting its own destiny or anyone else’s, as we have become under the Albanese government.
The truly astonishing performance on the question of the US strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities is a classic case.
It seems at one level eccentric, even for an Australian, to focus on the performance of the government in Canberra when the world is gripped by crisis in the Middle East and has so many other crises to be going on with.
Critical events will unfold over the next few weeks. Exactly how will Iran frame its response to the US actions? Does it really want more kinetic conflict with the US, or will its actions be more gesture and performance?
Donald Trump’s position is fascinating. A stubborn minority of his MAGA base – particularly Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon – bitterly opposes the strikes. This is unlikely to trouble Trump in the short term. Congressional Republicans will back him overwhelmingly.
But does the internal division within MAGA constrain the President in the future?
What next for Israel? When will it exhaust meaningful targets in Iran? Can Israel replenish its missile interceptor stocks quickly enough to continue to provide general safety to its citizens?
What will be the approach of Iran’s nuclear weapons possessing strategic partners, namely Russia, North Korea and China? Dimitry Medvedev, a former president of Russia and still influential in Vladimir Putin’s reign, said several nations would willingly supply nuclear weapons to Iran. He also seemed to cast off all pretence that Iran’s nuclear program was exclusively for peaceful purposes, saying the future production of nuclear weapons would be unaffected by US strikes.
It’s unlikely Russia would give nuclear warheads to Iran. Moscow has always had great concern about Islamic nukes too close to its borders. But these are strange words from Medvedev. Iran has received help on its nuclear program from Russia and China in the past.
So as all these giant issues roil the international environment, it may seem strange to focus on the follies of Canberra.
But we are Australians after all, and we have to worry deeply about our government.
There was a marvellous 1959 comedy with Peter Sellers called The Mouse That Roared, about a tiny nation that became unexpectedly powerful and didn’t have a clue what to do. Under the Albanese government, Australia has become The Mouse That Doesn’t Even Squeak, has no power at all and also doesn’t have a clue what to do.
Consider the absolute weird lameness of the government’s response to the US’s actions. They happened on Sunday morning our time and every sentient being on the planet knew about them and had a view. Not the Albanese government. It put out one of its characteristic non-statements.
In diplomacy there is a thing called a non-paper. Our government specialises in non-statements, designed to show that it’s roughly aware something is going on but doesn’t have the faintest idea what its view of it is.
Albanese has no relationship to speak of with Trump. Australia in modern times has seldom been less influential on, or less inside the thinking of, Washington. Britain was informed of the US actions in advance. Naturally, Australia was not.
We live on the capital of the goodwill of our past and the continued relevance of our geography. But Australia would be just as relevant strategically if it were a colony of penguins.
Then on Monday, through gritted teeth, came government statements saying Australia supported the US actions in Iran because it was important to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. The Albanese government got to the right position but, characteristically, only after exhausting all other alternatives.
The statement and the unbearably stilted, constipated, almost pre-AI robotic performance at the press conference were frankly a national embarrassment.
This column has noted before that Albanese has the greatest difficulty in any national security conversation moving beyond his approved talking points and sticks mechanically to whatever form of words he has been given.
Thus a questioner said: “Why did it take until Monday to form the view that we supported the American action?” Albanese replied: “We put out a statement yesterday.” But the statement on Sunday didn’t offer support. So, as with virtually all the other questions, Albanese simply refused to answer.
The ridiculous rule at PM press conferences now is that journalists can’t ask follow-up questions, so the PM just refuses to answer and moves on to the next questioner. It’s utterly embarrassing and of course an insult to the normal workings of liberal democracy.
Foreign Minister Penny Wong, who remains the only member of the national security team who can normally mount any kind of argument, was asked in that same press conference whether she regarded the US actions as legal within international law. She didn’t answer. She was asked the same question on the ABC and again didn’t answer, referring to Australia’s opposition to Iran’s nuclear program but not answering the question on the legality of US actions.
I put the same inquiry to the Foreign Minister’s office and was referred to the non-answer on the ABC. This is frankly pathetic. No one is asking the Australian government to be the final arbiter on all questions of international law. It has an absolutely unavoidable responsibility, however, to judge whether its own actions and positions comply with international law.
Presumably, the Albanese government wouldn’t support actions it regards as illegal. It supports the US action. Therefore it must regard the US action as legal.
So why on earth will it not say that? The government constantly behaves like a rabbit startled in a spotlight, unable to move forwards or backwards.
Its structural contradiction is that it wants to preserve the US alliance and all the benefits that come to Australia from that, but it is a government dominated by the Labor Left, perpetually scared of internal rebellion and terrified of losing votes to the Greens domestically. It’s a government without any apparent moral or strategic compass.
Here’s another question. If the government supports the US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, why did it not support similar Israeli strikes? Under international law, Israel has a stronger case that it has been repeatedly attacked by Iran and faces imminent danger from Iran. Principle anyone? Consistency?
Albanese was very lucky he didn’t go to NATO. Imagine trying to get an appointment with Trump so you can whine about tariffs while all this is happening. And what about the embarrassment that NATO now wants member states to spend 3.5 per cent of GDP on defence while we spend a pitiful 2 per cent?
Nobody sane could argue that the Albanese government is responding effectively to the strategic challenges we face.
Dumb luck may not guarantee our future.
More Coverage
The experts are dead. Long live the experts!
One does not need any particular expertise on the demographics or ethnic make-up of Iran to appreciate this is one of the worst regimes on the planet and must never have nuclear weapons.
Why wait for the feds? States should unite to reform GST
I’m continually amazed that the states have failed to grasp the opportunity to drive meaningful tax reform – if only they can reach unanimous agreement on common issues.