Julian Hill (Bruce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to support the resolution reaffirming the US-Australia alliance relationship and see it as an opportunity to reflect on the nature of our alliance—what underpins it and what it brings to each partner—and to share a few thoughts. We often hear talk of the strong friendship between our nations which underpins the alliance, and I believe this operates at multiple levels, as was touched on at the end of my colleague's remarks—three types of friendship, if you like.

The first is the unsentimental perception of friendship in the more realist tradition of international relations—where you have no real friends, just overlap of interests, which may be transient or which may last for decades or centuries. In this regard, our interests certainly still align. Secondly, there is the deeper level of shared values: transparency; accountability; democracy, however imperfect; a set of ideals; and equity—'a fair go', in our lingo.

Of course, we are not the same. I will say without hesitation that Australia, in my view, is a better society. Our focus on the common wealth, on the provision of the public good and universal services and so on is, to my mind, a better way of living than the focus we see at some ends of American society, on extreme individualism. But we certainly overlap enough to say we share values, although we may express them differently. And, far rarer in such relationships, we share a mutual sentimentality too, a genuine warmth, having fought and died together for a certain kind of freedom over many years, in many wars. I think it is important to have a clear-eyed view of these distinct aspects, though, lest we confuse warmth and shared history with current and future interests. That would be a dangerous sentimentality.

Reflecting then, Australia gains much beyond the important, if narrow, commitment under ANZUS to consult in the event of a threat. We have the ability to speak to the US at the highest levels when required, as a trusted ally and friend. The alliance with the US transcends individual administrations. It is difficult to overstate the value of the intelligence aspect of the alliance. Cyber is posing profound challenges to the security of nation-states. Cyber is a new vector of war in an information age. It is both an enabler of the traditional land, sea and air domains and, increasingly, a theatre in its own right. There is the capability that we get from the alliance—technology sharing, interoperability and credibility earned over many years. This capacity and our track record—people know we will fight for shared values—gain us a measure of respect in the region and elsewhere.

That said, I firmly reject any sense that we should ever just do what the US says. That is not in our national interest. It is not what a good partner does. The mess that the Howard government led us into in Iraq is the starkest modern example of that. It is important that Australia is able to articulate precisely where we stand and, as a result, cause our close friend to at least reflect and understand a different point of view, even if it is not always shared. We must pull our intellectual weight, and our views must always be an affirmation of our identity. If we are clear-eyed and direct, the US then can gain an Australian perspective, because they cannot, and can never, have our optics as a small country. In that regard, we speak from the perspective of most countries in the world—we are pragmatic and we are not overly idealistic.

Geography these days is not quite destiny. Technology has shrunk the world and moderated its previous overwhelming influence. But it is reality, and the reality of our geography—being located at the bottom of Asia while being a close ally and friend of the US—is unique. It provides much to the US that is of value. There is the geographical space for forces and assets—whether that is in Darwin or at Pine Gap or other critical infrastructure. There is the continuity of technology and interoperability. We are a high-end, tier 1 military partner in this part of the world, and that is of value. We are highly adaptable. We give credibility in international spheres—diplomatic support, if you like. Again, there is a credible critique that Prime Minister Howard effectively rented the US our flag, given he went to Iraq but then limited the rules of engagement so much, to limit real exposure. And we can be an honest friend—not 'all the way with LBJ'. Labor has a long and proud history of being a steadfast supporter of the US alliance while being better able to critique and articulate our national interest, such as coming to the table in Vietnam. This will be important in coming years.

I will close by observing that, increasingly, we have to bring an Asian understanding. Part of our optics that is of value comes from our orientation towards Asia. Our relationships with South-East Asia and the broader region are critical. We must remain curious and intelligent and learn through a growing cultural sensibility. We are Australians; we say what we think but, hopefully, with a bit of an Asian face. If geography is reality and a key determinant of our national interest, we must also remember that the alliance is but one pillar of our foreign policy—the language of 'cornerstone' somewhat worries me—and it is coupled with our commitment to multilateral institutions, a global rules based order and our connections in the region.

See this speech in context