David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) | Link to this | Hansard source

I move the motion, which I will read out:

That the Senate—

(a) notes that, over the past week, United States (US) President Donald Trump:

(i) has threatened to 'bomb the s***' out of its ally Oman,

(ii) has said he will declare the Strait of Hormuz US territory,

(iii) has put further sanctions on the International Criminal Court in an effort to dismantle the organisation and prevent it investigating Israel's attack on Gaza,

(iv) has said of the North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, 'I understand him; he understands me' while cutting back on cooperation with South Korea, and

(v) is requiring a multi-billion dollar redesign of US nuclear-powered aircraft carriers because he doesn't like the look of them as he wants the conning tower moved forward to look more like World War II designs; and

(b) calls for an urgent reconsideration of Australia's military relationship with the United States given this increasingly erratic and dangerous behaviour by the US President, including in his role as Commander-in-Chief of the US military.

We have been watching the behaviour of Donald Trump. The Australian public has been watching the behaviour of the US President, Donald Trump. We've been watching what the US military has been doing. We've been watching the actions of the US state. But it appears that, while the Greens have been watching, while the Australian public has been watching, none of you in this place—the Albanese Labor government, their comfortable mates in the coalition benches over there and their cheer squad in One Nation—have been watching.

That list I just read out of erratic, bizarre, violent, dangerous behaviour by President Donald Trump is just from the last seven days—just the last seven days. All you mob—Labor, the coalition and One Nation—pretend that it's all normal. You pretend that we can just keep going down this path, saying: 'The US is our indispensable ally. We share values with them. We're going to share our military with them. We're going to open up bases with them.' You pretend that none of this is happening. What is wrong with you all?

Let's deal with just the last week. Oman has been a long-term ally of the United States. It has US bases in it. It's been critical for the US in the US and Israel's current illegal war on Iran. It's put itself at risk. It's received attacks from Iran because it's a US ally. The US isn't protecting it from those attacks from Iran. Its economy is in a downward spiral because it is sitting there as an ally of the United States, just off the shore, just across the way from Iran, where the US and Israel are engaged in a joint illegal war.

You would think that, at a moment like that, the United States, as an ally of Oman, would be showing concern, would be doing what they could to protect it, would be saying: 'I'm sorry all those US bases that we have in your country are meaning you get attacked and bombed. I'm sorry about destroying your economy. You're an ally.' But no. Donald Trump came out—I'm sorry for the unparliamentary language, but it's the language of the US President in relation to one of the US's longstanding allies—and said that he would bomb the shit out of Oman.

It's his ally. It's a US ally. It's taking hits. He was concerned that Oman, who is facing all of that, is having some negotiation with Iran to try and prevent the chaos happening in its region and to itself. The mere fact that Oman was acting with some agency so angered the United States that the US Commander-in-Chief said, 'Now I'm going to bomb the shit out of you.' What happened in here? What happened with Defence Minister Marles over there in Russell? Nothing. They think it's normal. It's not normal. It's crazy and dangerous and erratic.

Then the same bloke—the chief of the US military, the US President, Donald Trump—came out in the same week, the last seven days, and said that he intends to declare the Strait of Hormuz US territory. He's going to declare it US territory—to just take control of it. How he's going to make that happen in reality—it's a fantasy in his head. It's an utter fantasy in his head. To make that statement, that you're going to make another part of the world, where you're engaged in a brutal, illegal war—he doesn't have control of it, but he's making this statement that he's going to turn it into some kind of overseas colony of the United States. Again, what do we hear from our defence department, from the defence minister, from the foreign affairs minister, from the opposition foreign affairs minister and from the US cheer squad in One Nation? Nothing. They think it's normal. You all think it's normal. I've got to tell you: this is not normal. This is wild, erratic, dangerous behaviour. Then, in the same week, in the last seven days, the United States has come out and put further sanctions on judges and prosecutors in the International Criminal Court, because the International Criminal Court is doing its job and investigating allegations of genocide and war crimes by Israel in Gaza. They're doing their job; they're investigating war crimes. They're investigating the most serious crimes, I think, on the planet—genocide. The United States, to try and stop the International Criminal Court doing its investigations, has ramped up new sanctions against the ICC and key members of the ICC, to try and stop them doing their job to investigate breaches of international law. What did our Foreign minister say about that? Zip, nada, nothing. What did the opposition say? They actually kind of cheered it on. So did One Nation, they thought, 'This is great.' They want this to happen. They don't like the International Criminal Court. I've got to tell you, this is not normal behaviour. This is destroying international norms, destroying international law, making it next to impossible to prosecute the obscene crime of genocide. It causes no reconsideration, not even a wrinkle of doubt in the Labor Party, the coalition or One Nation—not even a ripple of doubt.

Then, in the same week, in the last seven days, Donald Trump comes out and says of the North Korean leader, Kim Jong Un: 'I understand him. He understands me.' He radically shortens the military cooperation—the military exercises that are held annually with South Korea. He radically shortens them in order to appease North Korea. South Korea has structured its defence around some kind of guarantee of US support for it, in the event of a threatened military or nuclear attack from North Korea, which now has nuclear weapons and a massive military presence barely a dozen miles from Seoul, the capital of South Korea. Then they find out that the guarantee that they thought they had is not worth the paper they've written it on, because it turns out that Donald Trump, the commander-in-chief of the US military who is meant to be giving some protection to South Korea, has got a bromance with the leader of North Korea and that he's more interested in developing his bromance with the leader of North Korea than living up to decades-long commitments to South Korea to keep them safe. It is an extraordinary destabilising action from the United States, causing deep consternation not just in South Korea but also in Japan and in other allies. It's extraordinary. I say again: this is not normal.

Maybe you have all become desensitised to this, but it is not normal for the head of the United States military to direct that exercises with the South Korean military get curtailed because he wants to progress his bromance with the leader of North Korea, who's pointing nuclear weapons at South Korea. That is not normal. Yet what does Labor, the coalition and One Nation say? Nothing, not a ripple! They love AUKUS. You'd love more US bases here. You want to make our military interoperable with them. You pretend. This is not normal.

Then—to show the utter irrationality of the chief of the US military and the President of the United States—he then came out last week and said, to his own military, that he wants them to engage in a multibillion-dollar redesign of their Ford class nuclear aircraft carriers, these massive US$22 billion-dollar machines.

He wants them to engage in a multibillion dollar, multi-year redesign and refit of them. And do you know why? It's because he doesn't like the look of them. He thinks that they're not aesthetic. He much prefers the look of the aircraft carriers the US built in World War II, the Essex class carriers, because the conning tower was more in the middle of the aircraft carrier, not at the back. He's given a direction to his military to spend countless billions of dollars redesigning and refitting the US's nuclear aircraft carriers to meet his aesthetic feel. That is also not normal. That is wild, out there, crazy stuff. And because these aircraft carriers are nuclear powered, that work—the redesign and refitting to meet the aesthetics of Donald Trump—is going to throw even more work into the shipyards, which are there to pump out other nuclear powered boats and ships in the US, including Virginia class submarines. It's going to push that work back even more and make the AUKUS submarine project even more of a fantasy project—all because that bloke over there doesn't like the look of them. Again, that is not normal behaviour. That is not the behaviour of a standard ally. Yet Labor, the coalition and One Nation just pretend that nothing is happening.

We need to radically revisit our relationship with the United States. Labor is in the process of destroying any kind of sovereign independence for our military. They want to make it a little subunit of the US military. That's what the AUKUS submarines are for. That's what they're doing by inviting even more US military bases. That's why Labor is building the United States an $8 billion nuclear submarine base off Fremantle at Australian taxpayers' expense. That's why they have allowed the US to extend RAAF Base Tindal in the Northern Territory, to have nuclear capable B-52 bombers there. That's why they're allowing the US to station thousands of marines in Darwin. That's why they're expanding Pine Gap and North West Cape. That's why they're proposing to build the United States another nuclear submarine base on the east coast. That's why they're storing US military equipment in northern and north-regional Victoria. And that's why they're proposing the US have all of these storage depots for remote air facilities all across northern Australia.

And do you know what Labor is doing with all of that? They are inviting the front line of the next war the United States has to be right across Australia. You're inviting the front line and a war to the shores and the centre of our continent. I don't know how to describe that other than deep, deep betrayal. We live in perhaps one of the most geopolitically secure parts of the world, down here in the bottom part of South-East Asia, and war will only come to our shores if we invite it—like those who have US bases in the gulf, who have invited wars to their shores. Having US bases here—being tied to an erratic, bizarre ally like this—is one of the most dangerous things we can do. You're pretending this makes us safe, you're selling out our sovereignty, you're denying our ability to defend ourselves, and you're making the worst bed in history. That's why we want to end AUKUS.

Penny Allman-Payne (Queensland, Australian Greens) | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to begin by acknowledging the work of my colleague Senator Shoebridge on this issue. Nobody is more across their brief and nobody understands this issue more than him in this place. His concerns reflect the concerns that so many Australians have with this AUKUS deal that is tying us ever closer to the United States and is, in fact, making us less safe. It's not only that but a staggering waste of public wealth and fundamentally betrays Australia's interests.

There is a stultifying consensus in this parliament, and amongst DFAT and Defence—and much of the Australian media, I might add—on our defence and foreign policies. This hinges on an unquestioning belief that the United States is our indispensable ally, that we share values and interests and that US bases and AUKUS make us safer. I want to put on the record, along with Senator Shoebridge, that the Greens do not share these beliefs. While that might make us lonely in this place, we know that we are increasingly joined by supporters across the community.

The community is watching how the world works. They are seeing US aggression, lawlessness and wars, and they are asking questions—that are never answered—about what that means for our alliance with the United States. We need to ask ourselves: Why did the United States actually sign the AUKUS deal? What are their interests here in Australia? The United States has lost its hegemony in the western Pacific. Its string of bases, from South Korea through Japan, to Okinawa, to the Philippines and out to Pacific islands such as Guam, are increasingly vulnerable in any major conflict with China.

Because of this vulnerability, the United States has decided to locate a far more significant portion of its military assets and military forces here in Australia. That's what's behind Labor's decision to spend $8 billion to build the United States a nuclear submarine base at HMAS Stirling, off Perth, and its plans for another base on the east coast. It explains the location of those thousands of marines in Darwin, the expansion of Pine Gap and North West Cape's spying communications stations, the nuclear capable B-52 bombers being stationed at RAAF Tindal in the NT and the prepositioning of US weapons stockpiles in regional Victoria. This expansion in Australia is not a sign of US strength. It's actually the clearest statement of declining US power and increased US vulnerability. And who is paying the price for that? Australians are. We're in a housing crisis right now. We need a massive build of public housing, but, instead of spending money on public houses for Australians, the first thing the government did when they came back after the election was to pass a bill to spend hundreds of millions of dollars building houses for US military personnel. That's not looking after Australians.

The billions of dollars that are going to AUKUS that, as my colleague Senator Shoebridge has pointed out, are not going to make us safer are, in fact, going to make us less safe. Every dollar of that money that goes to AUKUS is a dollar that doesn't get spent to reduce the aged-care waiting list, to lift the people in this country on welfare out of poverty, to increase the pension or JobSeeker, to provide the money that we need to encourage the states to implement rent caps, or to get dental into Medicare. I'm certain that everyone out there in the community knows what they would rather spend that money on than sending billions of dollars to the United States.

People have watched, on their phones, ICE agents dragging people out of their homes. People have watched, on their phones, what US support for Israel has done in Gaza. People have watched, on their phones, the fallout of the US starting a war with Iran—a war that we did not need to have. People see on their phones every day the unhinged comments and statements that the Commander in Chief of the US makes every single day. This is the president who, upon coming back to power, pardoned every single person involved in trying to stage a coup on the US government. This is a president who repeatedly implies that he might like to seek a third term, even though it's not in the US constitution. This is a president who has gutted virtually every public service department in the capital and installed sycophants. If any of you have spent any time watching any of the hearings that take place when the people that he has installed in security and defence come before congress and senate committees, surely you can see that they are all unhinged and that they don't respect the rule of law. They definitely don't respect international law. A president and a government that respect international law do not put sanctions on judges in the International Criminal Court.

This is the government that our government and the coalition and One Nation want to join us to at the hip. For the privilege of that, we get to give them over $300 billion. What a crock! It'd be farcical if it weren't so serious. Senator Shoebridge, in great detail and very clearly, has set out in this debate why we should all be concerned about this. You talk to anyone in the community about AUKUS, and it doesn't have a lot of friends. The people who are championing AUKUS are the government and the coalition and One Nation in this place. But out there, out in the community, people can see it for what it is. Prime Minister Morrison got sold a pup, and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese signed up to the same pup.

A prime minister and a government that had the courage to stand up to bullies would have turned around and taken the opportunity, when they came to government, to reassess this whole deal, but instead they are blindly continuing down a path that makes this country less safe. It's the same pattern we see when they won't stand up to the gambling industry or the fossil fuel industry. It's cowardly. And the people who will pay the price for this cowardice are Australian citizens. You can't come into this place and genuinely and legitimately stand here and say that a government's highest duty to the public is to keep them safe and continue down the path of AUKUS.

I want to thank Senator Shoebridge for bringing this motion into this place. I'm not surprised that members of the government and the coalition and One Nation aren't here to speak to it.

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) | Link to this | Hansard source

They're in hiding.

Penny Allman-Payne (Queensland, Australian Greens) | Link to this | Hansard source

They're in hiding because they have signed up to a dud deal that takes money out of the pocket of every single Australian and stops them from getting the things that they really need—cost-of-living relief, secure housing, fully funded schools, well-funded health and hospitals, timely aged care and not getting chucked off the NDIS. Every one of those decisions is a government decision to make a saving while billions of dollars go out the door for a dud deal that makes Australians less safe.

Jess Walsh (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Early Childhood Education) | Link to this | Hansard source

The Greens political party's endless condemnation would not get Australia very far. The Greens have long wanted Australia to end the alliance with the US; that is what this motion is about. Labor knows that, as a middle power, Australia is more secure with as many robust relationships as possible. Australia approaches today's global challenges with more resilience and more options because, since we came to office in 2022, the Albanese government has been doing the hard work of building common ground in more diversified relationships. Australia will continue to invest in these diversified partnerships, especially in our region, at the same time as we continue to engage with traditional partners like the United Kingdom and the United States.

We have always understood that President Trump envisages a different role for the United States in the world. Nevertheless, the United States remains the world's largest economic and military power, with daily influence over international events that have consequences for Australia. This reinforces why being active in shaping our alliance is in Australia's national interest. The United States is our closest ally and principal strategic partner, and our alliance with the United States is fundamental to Australia's national security, expanding our strategic options and enabling Australia to pursue our national security interests beyond what we could achieve alone.

Australians know we don't always agree with other countries, and they expect their government to engage and manage disagreements in a mature, calm and respectful way. If it were up to the Greens, we would cut ties with most of the world and we wouldn't have a functioning Defence Force.

Richard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the motion moved by Senator Shoebridge be agreed to. A division is required. It being after 4.30 pm, the matter will be adjourned until the next day of sitting.