When it comes to international law, we can talk the talk, but can we walk the walk?
Australia is once again pushing for a non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council, alongside Finland and Mongolia, because "a safer world is one governed by rules, not power and force alone". While Australia consistently talks the talk on supporting the international rules-based order, it only walks the walk occasionally.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Login or signup to continue reading
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese made the pitch for the Security Council with a simple vision: " We listen with respect, we partner as equals and we protect what matters most."
The trouble is, on many issues the Australian government appears to hear, but not listen to its allies and neighbours. And when it comes to protecting what matters most, the Australian government appears to stand up for international law selectively, not consistently, when it comes to two issues in particular: climate change and US military interventions.
Australia has been a vocal supporter of the Pacific on climate change, with the Prime Minister promising 'our Pacific family...will not face the climate crisis alone'. This is often paired with funding support for climate finance and resilience programs. Yet back home, the Albanese government keeps approving new polluting gas and coal projects. And its so-called Safeguard Mechanism, which is supposed to limit pollution, allows big polluters the ultimate get-out-of-jail free card, unlimited access to carbon offsets. With each new carbon offset method the government approves, the cheaper it will be pollute! That's right, while your cost-of-living is going up, the government is reducing the cost of polluting for fossil fuel companies. On climate, the government's practical domestic actions do not match its soaring international rhetoric.
It's the same when it comes to international law and conflict. Back when the United States President George W. Bush attacked Iraq, using the obvious fiction of 'weapons of mass destruction', Labor was in Opposition. When John Howard decided to send in Australian troops and Labor took the principled stand to oppose the illegal Iraq war as wrong, reckless and unnecessary. Then Opposition Leader Simon........
