Source: Australia Government Statements 2
Acknowledgements
Thank Professor Zelinsky.
I’d like to acknowledge the Awabakal and Worimi peoples as the traditional owners of the local area and pay my respects to elders past, present and emerging.
It’s a pleasure to be here at the University of Newcastle.
And it’s great to see so many people with an interest in the Pacific.
I know that Gareth Evans and Kevin Rudd have delivered this lecture in previous years. It’s an honour to be in such great company.
Thanks to the University of Newcastle and the Newcastle Institute for organizing this event and inviting me to speak.
As the Vice Chancellor mentioned, I’m a Minister with two portfolios – Defence Industry and Pacific Island Affairs.
And although they are very different – there one place where our defence and foreign affairs interests converge – the Pacific.
I’ll share insights from both sides of my portfolios today.
I’ll start with the broader strategic context.
Despite its challenges, we’re fortunate to live in this era.
When I visit the Pacific, I’m often reminded of the legacy of the Second World War – the abandoned dug-outs, rusting warships and tanks that can still be seen in the forests and reefs of Solomon Islands; the unexploded ordnance that continues to scar the landscape, and lives, in Pacific countries – the iconic Kokoda track, that our Prime Minister walked with Prime Minister Marape last year – these are all tangible reminders of where Australia was most directly involved.
After the Second World War, nations came together to set out the UN Charter – a new order underpinned by international law, by rules and norms to govern the behaviour of all states. To end an era where the most powerful countries could exert their will over others.
This post-war order underwrote nearly eight decades of relative peace and prosperity.
Where Australia, and Pacific countries, could depend on norms like freedom of navigation to underpin international trade in the waters through which most of our imports and exports flow.
But we are now facing a more dangerous and turbulent time.
A different and perhaps less predictable world.
The rules and norms that governed behaviour after the Second World War are under strain.
And a range of factors make it difficult to agree on international approaches.
This makes the global security environment so much more complex and multidimensional.
We are seeing activities in the grey zone, below active conflict, threatening state sovereignty
Things like the flouting of maritime zone rules, and use of aggressive maritime militias – disinformation, cyber attacks and interference.
As we know – this is in addition to active conflicts in Ukraine, Gaza and Sudan.
In the Pacific, we are also seeing threats from non-state actors – for example, “narco-subs’ washing up in Solomon Islands this year.
And the impacts on Pacific communities are devastating – with HIV outbreaks in Fiji, PNG and Solomon Islands.
But above all, the biggest threat to security in the Pacific is climate change.
For Pacific nations, the threat is existential.
The climate is changing faster than our combined efforts to stop it, and Pacific countries are at the front line.
I have seen the impacts first-hand.
For example, I’ve seen efforts in Solomon Islands, Fiji and PNG to build climate-resilient schools.
And efforts in low-lying atoll communities to secure water supplies in the face of rising sea levels.
Climate change it is often the number one thing Pacific leaders raise with me.
I’ll speak more about that later.
With all of this in mind, essentially the challenge for Australia is how do we navigate today’s increasingly tough strategic environment in the Pacific in a way that protects our national interests, supports our neighbours, builds a resilient region and acknowledges the existential threat they face from climate change?
This is what I’d like to talk about today.
At the outset, I want to be very clear –
After a decade of neglect under the Liberals and Nationals, the Albanese Government has made the Pacific a priority.
Our first term made that clear, and our hard work continues.
We have a coherent and reliable approach that uses all tools of statecraft to meet the challenges we face.
Things may not go Australia’s way every time, but we are going to patiently and persistently press our national interest in the region every day.
We want to see a region that’s peaceful where no country dominates, and no country is dominated.
Where all states, large and small, can pursue their aspirations free from coercion.
To achieve this, we’re using all levers of national power – beyond foreign policy, defence or aid alone:
We’re working with the private sector, and sporting bodies;
And we’re acting on climate;
Australian police and border security agencies are doing more to help Pacific partners;
We’re working with local and state governments and church groups to support Pacific workers;
And we’re building stronger people to people links.
We’re backing Pacific-led solutions and initiatives.
I’m passionate about the Pacific as you’d expect. It’s our immediate region. Pacific countries look to us first.
And our proximity means our security and our futures are intertwined.
So in explaining what it means to use all levers of national power, I’d like to speak –
Firstly about recent agreements with Tuvalu, Nauru and Papua New Guinea.
Secondly about our efforts to foster a Pacific region that’s more integrated.
And third, drawing on my Defence Industry responsibilities, I’d like to reflect on how we’re building deterrence, with the objective of avoiding conflict.
Our approach is to turn up, listen and act on the priorities of Pacific countries.
The Albanese Government has brought new levels of ambition to this task.
I’m proud of the transformational partnerships we’ve entered into.
Partnerships that are shaping the architecture of the region.
Firstly with Tuvalu.
Then Prime Minister Kausea Natano approached us in 2023, seeking to safeguard the sovereignty of Tuvalu’s people in the face of sea level rise.
To give you a sense of what this nation is facing – Tuvalu is building an online digital copy of the country, as a way to protect its geography, knowledge and culture for Tuvaluans.
Justice Minister Simon Kofe has said “our land, our ocean, our culture are the most precious assets of our people – to keep them safe from harm, no matter what happens in the physical world, we’ll move them to the cloud.’
Take a moment to think about this.
What a step to have to take: uploading a copy of your country to the cloud to preserve it in the face of climate change.
It’s a poignant reminder of what many Pacific nations are facing.
Make no mistake, the Falepili Union into which we have now entered with Tuvalu is groundbreaking. It is a world first.
The treaty provides mobility with dignity as climate impacts worsen.
This gives Tuvaluans the choice to stay, or to pursue new opportunities in Australia.
Many Tuvaluans want to remain on the land of their ancestors.
To that end we are supporting Tuvalu with land reclamation, and also with digital connectivity.
The first Tuvaluan family arrived in Australia under this mobility pathway just last month, and we look forward to welcoming many more in the coming months and years.
The treaty also recognises that Tuvalu’s statehood and sovereignty will continue, regardless of the impacts of climate-related sea level rise.
The treaty also includes a commitment by Australia to support Tuvalu in the event of a pandemic, natural disaster or military aggression.
And in return, Tuvalu will mutually agree with Australia any third country security or critical infrastructure support.
So the agreement shows that if we listen to the Pacific, and act on their priorities, we can unlock deeper cooperation.
The second agreement I’d like to talk about is the Nauru-Australia treaty.
When Nauru’s only banking service was due to withdraw, access to banking services became a top priority for Nauruans.
Imagine what life would be like if you had no access at all to any banking services, and if Australia was on the verge of becoming detached from the global banking network.
Under the Nauru Australia treaty, Australia will ensure Nauruans can get to a bank.
The Commonwealth Bank commenced operations in Nauru in August. And I thank the Commonwealth Bank for supporting the national interest.
Now I’ll turn to PNG, our geographically closest neighbour.
To give you a sense of just how close we are, it’s just under 4 kilometres from where we are right now here in the Newcastle Conservatorium down to the Merewether Surfhouse.
That’s the distance between Australia’s Saibai Island in the Torres Strait and the coast of PNG. You could swim from Australia to PNG if you weren’t worried about crocodiles.
A quick scan of the layers of effort we have built on over the past few years reveals the significance of our relationship.
To begin, we agreed a Bilateral Security Agreement with PNG.
Under this agreement we committed to stepping up support for PNG’s internal law and order challenges – a top priority for Prime Minister Marape.
Building on this existing relationship, we responded to PNG’s longstanding desire to have a PNG NRL team.
In PNG, NRL is akin to a national religion.
The NRL team is also based on a high strategic trust between our two nations.
Reflecting this strategic trust, we’ve just last month signed a Mutual Defence Treaty with PNG, known as the Pukpuk Treaty.
PNG proposed this alliance and we readily agreed.
This reflects our longstanding partnership, forged on the Kokoda track, and continuing over decades since.
The treaty recognises that an armed attack on Australia or PNG would be a danger to the peace and security of both countries.
Importantly, this is our first new alliance in more than 70 years, and our third alliance ever. It’s PNG’s first alliance.
Each of these partnerships is unique and responds to the different priorities of Tuvalu, Nauru and PNG.
But they all seek to build Pacific-led responses to peace and security, agreed by PIF Leaders in Blue Pacific Ocean of Peace’ declaration in September. And they contribute to our collective agency, because we’re stronger when we work together.
We know there is strength in numbers and in unity.
We want to contribute to a region that’s more integrated, more joined up and interlinked.
In fact, many of our initiatives are underpinned by this principal.
There are benefits for both Pacific nations and Australia in regional approaches on issues such as trade, mobility and security.
This starts with building people-to-people links. To share our stories, cultures and common passions.
The rich heritage of First Nations Australians has opened a new channel for dialogue with our Pacific partners, with synergies in traditional and cultural heritage and a deep connection to land and sea.
The Albanese government has placed a high priority on opening pathways to live, work and study in Australia.
But the efforts go the other way too—we want to see Australians becoming more familiar with the region around us too. This is why we are supporting air connectivity with the Pacific, and why I also hope the NRL deal will see thousands more Australians visit PNG when the Chiefs enter the competition.
In the end, it’s the relationships, families and community values that underpin the relationships between countries.
I’m delighted to see Pasifika students in the audience tonight, and to see the University of Newcastle’s partnerships with the region and work on areas like climate and energy, plastic pollution, and health.
The Pasifika diaspora make a great contribution Australia – and it should be celebrated.
The Pacific Australia Labour Mobility scheme has also been a great success, and we have now have tens of thousands of men and women from across the Pacific filling gaps in our labour market.
They are earning remittances that support home families and communities.
They are developing skills and experience which are helping them to set up their own businesses and employ others when they return home.
And I’m also struck by the way that church groups have been integral to welcoming Pacific workers to Australia.
We’ve also introduced a new Pacific Engagement Visa.
This establishes, for the first time in Australia’s history, a dedicated permanent migration pathway for the Pacific.
It is a substantive expression of what it means to be a Pacific family, and responds to long-held calls by the region. It’s about encouraging greater cultural, business and educational exchange. Delivering education, skills and economic dividends for the region and linking us more closely together.
We are beginning with a quota of 3,000 visas per year and I’ve been excited by the high levels of interest.
We also want to make it easier for people and business to connect, and for trade and investment to flow across the Pacific.
By supporting the building blocks.
As I just mentioned, we’re supporting aviation across the region like the Palau Paradise Express, because this underpins tourism and business.
We’re delivering internet connectivity and security, including the first undersea cables that some of Pacific partners have ever had – connecting them to the digital economy. We’re doing this in partnership with companies like Google, and with contributions from the US and Japan.
We recognise that a successful economy is underpinned by a skilled workforce.
That’s why we have funded a $229.5 million package to support Pacific skills development.
This is about investing in the future of the Pacific through its young people. It’s important that we equip tomorrow’s leaders with the right skills and pathways to thrive. To support productivity, economic growth, and build positive futures.
Before I move on to speak about defence in the Pacific, I would like to return to the number one issue facing our Pacific neighbours – climate change.
It’s been a decade since Peter Dutton was caught on a hot mic joking about the Pacific – saying that “time doesn’t mean anything when you’re about to have water lapping at your door.’
Ten years since that happened.
With the Coalition ditching their commitment to Net Zero – and walking away from the Paris agreement, it feels a bit like groundhog day.
This is an admission that the Coalition doesn’t take climate change seriously.
The Pacific’s number one issue.
They just don’t care.
And it’s about so much more than the environment.
In this region, our position on climate change is inextricably linked to our national security credibility.
You can’t engage effectively with the Pacific unless you’re serious about climate.
They just won’t take you seriously – and with good reason.
In my view, this is the biggest surrender in national security credibility by conservative parties since Menzies advocated for doing a peace deal with Hitler ten days after he invaded Poland.[i]
Or when Menzies opposed the expansion of the Australian army before World War II.[ii]
In taking this decision, the hairy chested conservatives marching to the tune of Sky News want to make our nation less safe.
Unlike them – I applaud the students of Vanuatu, and the Vanuatu government for galvanising the world to achieve the landmark International Court of Justice advisory opinion on climate change.
In seeking this opinion, the Pacific has spoken with the moral authority and weight of lived experience.
And Australia is responding. We’re investing $100 million in the establishment of the Pacific Resilience Facility. A climate finance mechanism designed by the Pacific, to meet the needs of the Pacific.
And as a proud member of the Pacific family, we have been working to ensure Pacific voices are heard on the global stage at COP31.
While there are still some discussions to be finalised, under the model we put forward, Turkiye will host COP31 but there would be a pre-COP leaders meeting to be hosted in the Pacific.
There would also be a major fundraising round for the Pacific Resilience Facility.
This is a good result. From the outset our motivation to host COP31 was to elevate the interests of Pacific Islands nations, which while being among the lowest emitters in the world, are bearing the brunt of climate change.
Obviously, we were bidding to host COP31 here in Australia. But through consensus and compromise, we are ensuring that the issues confronting this region will be front and centre at COP31.
What we won’t compromise on is taking responsible action on climate change, unlike our political opponents, who have simply vacated the field.
But while we are working to keep the Blue Pacific an Ocean of Peace, we recognise that we are living through a significant arms build-up in our region, without the level of strategic reassurance or transparency we want.
We are engaging throughout the region to prevent conflict, preserve peace and maintain the agency of all countries in our region.
Through the Pacific Maritime Security Program, Australia is delivering a comprehensive package of capability, infrastructure, surveillance and training to 15 Pacific partner nations.
We have delivered 22 Guardian class patrol boats and three landing craft to partner nations, providing Pacific countries with sovereign assets that give them the capability to patrol their own waters and build self-reliance.
It hasn’t quite made headlines, but the Pacific Response Group, or PRG, is a really notable initiative that’s from the Pacific—and for the Pacific.
The PRG was set up as a regional initiative to help better coordinate Pacific militaries in response to disasters and the provision of humanitarian assistance. It’s a smaller group—but a group that includes all the militaries of the region: Australia, Tonga, PNG, France, Fiji and New Zealand.
We know that the Pacific is one of the world’s most disaster-prone regions, which will continue to be even more exacerbated into the future due to climate change.
The PRG was set up for the region to work together to respond to the region’s own needs.
And within the year it was set up, the PRG was most visibly activated to support Vanuatu after the devastating earthquake of December 2024.
All of this demonstrates how Australia is working closer with the Pacific to ensure we respond collectively to the security challenges in our shared region.
And Australia is playing its part to keep the Blue Pacific an Ocean of Peace.
As many of you know – I wear another hat as Minister for Defence Industry. While some people question the need to spend so much on defence, and others say we should spend more.
The fact is delivering these defence capabilities contributes to deterrence in the oceans around us and preserves free and open trade routes that is critical to our region’s economic security.
I set out today to tell you about how we are using all tools of statecraft to address the challenging geo-strategic environment we face in the Pacific.
Our commitment to the Pacific is unwavering, and this government has brought new levels of ambition and energy. It’s a whole-of-nation endeavour that no single person, organisation or industry can tackle.
We want to see a region that’s peaceful, prosperous and unified. The connections between the First Peoples of our lands and waters and the peoples of the Blue Pacific stretch back through time. We share an ocean and a future, and we are all custodians of the vast Blue Pacific continent.
The students in this room are our future leaders. I’m excited to hear your ideas about how we can do more and do better.
I look forward to a conversation with Robert, after that I’d be very pleased to take your questions from the audience.
[i] On 11 September 1939, PM Menzies wrote a personal letter to Australia’s High Commissioner to the UK, Stanley Bruce, canvassing proposals to secure an early peace, including allowing Hitler to keep Danzig and the Polish Corridor. Menzies also canvassed seeking a broader international settlement with the British Empire’s rivals Japan, Italy and Germany with each to be offered significant concessions including leaving Japan as the dominant power in East Asia, making further concessions to Italy in colonial Africa, and ” a resettlement of the whole map of Europe …”
(Christopher Waters, Australia and Appeasement: Imperial Foreign Policy and the Origins of World War II, I.B. Tauris, London, 2012, pp 2-3).
[ii] A month before the start of WW2, PM Menzies opposed establishing a regular Australian Army.
(E.M. Andrews, Isolationism & Appeasement in Australia: Reactions to the European Crises, 1935-1939, ANU Press, 1979, p 210).
Menzies persuaded Cabinet “not to raise the pitifully small force of 1,571 regular soldiers which Lyons’ government had authorized in March 1939 as a nucleus of a regular army. The reasons Menzies gave were economy, but – more revealing – also the difficulty of readjustments when the war danger had passed!’
(E.M. Andrews, Isolationism & Appeasement in Australia: Reactions to the European Crises, 1935-1939, ANU Press, 1979, p 178).
In late 1938, the Army comprised a small permanent force supplemented by around 43,000 voluntary citizen militia. The Inspector-General of the Army, Major-General Squires, presented a report on the development of the Army to Government and subsequently to Parliament in March 1939. This report proposed a regular force with two brigades, with a peace-time establishment of 7,500. The Lyons Ministry approved this in principle in March 1939 and announced that the first quota would comprise 1,571 men. In August 1939 PM Menzies announced that the Government had decided not to raise even this force, citing the cost and the “inevitable future period of readjustments when the dangers of war have passed …’
(Gavin Long, Australia in the War of 1939-1945, Series One – Army, Volume 1 – To Benghazi, Australian War Memorial, Canberra, 1952 (1961 reprint), pp 26-9).