Australian FM Julie Bishop: Ties with U.S.

Founded in March 2011, the Alliance 21 is a three year project geared towards identifying and creating plans to address the problems and possibilities that the US-Australian alliance does and may face. Alliance 21 is led by the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney and composed of “50 of the best strategic thinkers on both sides of the Pacific” who examine and advise on various pertinent topics. On January 22, 2014, the Alliance 21 conference on “Emerging Asia” was held. The foreign minister for Australia, Julie Bishop, gave the keynote address, which garnered the attention of the press due to her defense of intelligence gathering and sharp criticism of Edward Snowden.   

…[The US-Australian alliance] is an alliance based on trust. An alliance that is both dependable and dynamic. We're true friends who share common values, whose interests overwhelmingly align.

In this year, a century on from the commencement of the Great War of 1914-1918, we can reflect on the fact that over those 100 years the US and Australia have fought side-by-side in every major conflict in which either of us have been engaged.

Today I want to discuss why our Alliance remains vital – why it's vital for both our nations – how together our nations continue to create a brighter, more secure, free and prosperous future for our people and for our region.

The Alliance 21 project is conceiving of new ways that our alliance can build on our shared history to identify the challenges and opportunities that are ahead and to devise joint strategies to create our shared future…

And this project is part of that future-creating process.

The formal ANZUS alliance was signed in 1951 but its origins lie deeper in the past with the establishment of diplomatic relations between our two countries just months after the outbreak of the Second World War…

Now what I want to draw from this historic perspective is that seventy-five years or so ago, while much of the rest of the world was focused on the darkening clouds in Europe, we were focusing ourselves on the potential for a clash in the Asia-Pacific.

Today, we still walk that geopolitical line.

And 63 years on, the Australia – US alliance remains the cornerstone of our national security.

Of course, the relationship is now as broad as it is long-standing. For example, the United States remains our single most important economic partner. When you combine two-way trade and investment, it stands at over $1 trillion.

Australia and the United States remain the closest of partners in the Asia-Pacific, each of us making our own distinctive contribution, each with our own relationships with other countries in the region.

And since the Second World War, the US presence has been the essential stabilizer for regional security.

Vitally, it has underpinned the transformation in countries across the broader Indo-Pacific – from Japan, to Korea, to China.

But not just in Northeast Asia, across Southeast Asia – Indonesia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia.

And while our region is now more free, more secure and more prosperous than at any time in recent history, it faces new and difficult challenges.

Our alliance, born in war, must unquestionably be an alliance for peace.

And we should never be backward in protecting and promoting the regional benefits of this alliance.

In very contemporary terms, I want to focus on a couple of issues which are of vital, but by no means exclusive, importance in our relationship.

First, the Korean Peninsula and proliferation; Second, how features of our mutual engagement deepen our individual efforts in the region; Third, the continuing critical character of our intelligence collection; Fourth, our mutual struggle with the terrorist threat wherever it emerges;
And, finally, Afghanistan. I suggest that in respect of each it will be incumbent on us to use our collective ingenuity to develop alliance strategies. We must be adaptable and nimble in fashioning our responses.

North Korea has been a regional threat since the 1950s Korean War.

But Pyongyang's insistence on continuing tests over the years – nuclear and long-range rockets – and its active proliferation of sensitive technologies and equipment has seen North Korea emerge as a global threat to peace and security and the subject of seven United Nations Security Council resolutions.

Last February, North Korea conducted its third nuclear test. By the end of the year we learned that the 31 year old leader, Kim Jong-un, had disposed of his uncle by firing squad – underlining the brutality of life in the Hermit Kingdom, but further emphasizing the unpredictability of this nuclear armed state.

Now as for Iran, the United States, with Secretary Kerry's strong advocacy, has made progress on the issue of Iran's nuclear ambitions, although Iran still has much to do to convince the world that it is no longer seeking to develop nuclear weapons.

In the case of Iran, it is more a point of "hope, but verify".

Amid the perennial challenges of the Middle East, including the ongoing struggle to find a resolution in the peace process, this progress in Iran is important.

But as a global community we didn't make headway on North Korea in 2013, and it remains no less dangerous and no less idiosyncratic.

The internal power struggle and the increased instability within the regime means it is even less likely that the Six Party Talks will recommence any time soon.

We cannot ignore North Korea, for we share deep concerns on the threat posed by nuclear proliferation and we must remain steadfast in our counter-proliferation efforts.

Together we must work hard to establish stronger global norms against nuclear proliferation, build stronger regional counter-proliferation capabilities, including through regular bilateral dialogue, and through the Asia-Pacific Safeguards Network, which Australia chairs, and support for the International Atomic Energy Agency.

We need to not just maintain but step up the strength of our counter-proliferation efforts…

My second point on engagement in our region – the growing complexities of the power dynamics of North Asia were well and truly in play by late last year. In November China unilaterally declared an Air Defence Identification Zone over areas in the East China Sea. In December Japanese Prime Minister Abe visited the Yasukuni Shrine, bringing to the fore the unresolved tensions between China, Japan and South Korea. Such events escalate the already tense regional environment.

It is fair to say that our region, indeed the world, continues to feel the reverberation of China's rise.

Much of this, of course, is positive.

Australia, like the United States and other regional countries, has a great stake in China's growing prosperity and its ever-closer integration into the global economy.

Australia has a vital interest in this part of the world – a vital national interest – 40 percent of our two-way trade is with the 3 North Asia giants, 60 percent of our merchandise exports pass through the South China Sea to our key North Asian markets.

We recognise that regional prosperity and peace and security depend on constructive relations between China, Japan and South Korea.

And it's particularly important that our friends in Japan and South Korea, both, like Australia, allies of the United States, should overcome the current strains in their relationship.

Together we must encourage better relations between them, for a shared sense of strategic purpose between North Asia's leading democracies will be vital to the region's success in facing many of its challenges, particularly North Korea's belligerence.

We must also continue to build the regional architecture, and to strengthen the international rules-based order…

…it's vital that all major powers – the United States and Australia and China and Japan, South Korea and others engage actively and constructively in and through the East Asia Summit, which promotes a peaceful rules-based regional order.

The rebalance of United States foreign policy into the region is timely and we will play our part…

As a partner of the rebalance, we encourage the United States to continue to enhance its partnerships with Indonesia, Malaysia, India, Singapore, Vietnam, New Zealand and others.

Already, we've seen greater cooperation between the US Marine Corps, Indonesia and Australia…

Intelligence.

Ladies and gentlemen, in June, a grave new challenge to our irreplaceable intelligence efforts arose from the actions of one Edward Snowden, who continues to shamefully betray his nation while skulking in Russia. This represents unprecedented treachery – he is no hero.

Snowden claims his actions were driven by a desire for transparency, but in fact they strike at the heart of the collaboration between those nations in world affairs that stand at the forefront of protecting human freedom.

It was an attempt to destroy the trust between those who are most supportive of and sympathetic to the security and influence of the United States in maintaining global peace and freedom – Australia has not been spared. And we are seeking to manage the impact on our relationships and with others targeted by the Snowden allegations as sensitively and sensibly as possible.

We welcome President Obama's speech last Friday on your signals intelligence reviews.

Our Prime Minister Tony Abbott has said that he remains satisfied with the robust oversight and collection management arrangements that apply to Australia's intelligence services.

We believe that Australian intelligence agencies operate in a well-established oversight regime, which includes monitoring by the independent Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, and accountability to the Joint Parliamentary Standing Committee on Intelligence and Security.

I am confident that intelligence cooperation will remain one of the core elements of our alliance in the 21st century.

But we must be prepared to make the public case for the importance of this work, because the safety and security of our citizens depends on it. As President Obama said last week:

"For our intelligence community to be effective over the long haul, we must maintain the trust of the American people, and people around the world."

For decades our agencies have provided intelligence to our Government that has helped us protect not only Australia's national interest, but also fulfill a critical component of our alliance – sharing intelligence on threats to national security.

One of the most important responsibilities of any government is protecting the safety and security of its people…

The collection of intelligence by responsible, democratic governments is not discretionary; it is an imperative in discharging this fundamental duty to protect the safety of their people. In short, it saves lives.

Of course intelligence agencies must be carefully monitored with appropriate oversight to ensure that the privacy and freedoms of citizens are protected.

And this leads to another joint challenge we face.

Early last year, al Qaeda emerged in Iraq and Syria reminding us that global terrorism, and the next generation of those who caused us to invoke the ANZUS Treaty for the first and only time on September 14 2001, remain a clear and present threat.

Obviously, the United States leads the global effort. Australia is a vigorous supporter of international counter-terrorism cooperation, as well as playing our part in specific regional action in Southeast Asia and elsewhere.

We particularly appreciate the critical role of the United States in galvanizing world-wide action against terrorism through the Global Counter-Terrorism Forum, where Australia has been active as one of the Working Group co-chairs.

The fact remains that global terrorism is not receding. Thanks mainly to vigorous action by the United States, the central structure of al Qaeda has been heavily degraded – but this hasn't prevented various subsidiary and similarly-minded groups from pursuing al Qaeda's extremist and violent ideology in different parts of the world.

We are witnessing a particularly virulent form of this at present in the Middle East, where al Qaeda affiliates are waging an especially hateful form of violence against their perceived enemies across the region – in the Arabian Peninsula, in Somalia, and across North Africa – where they all pose continuing threats to citizens of their own countries and to resident foreigners alike.

It will be a long-term task of the whole international community to overcome these latest forms of violent extremism.

From counter-terrorism to counter-proliferation – Australia will work with the United States, as we are doing in Syria – supporting the elimination of its chemical weapons stockpiles, funding the humanitarian efforts with over 100 million Australian dollars in aid and attending Geneva II to help work on a political solution…

Finally, there's Afghanistan.

For Australia, our presence in Uruzgan concluded successfully last year, including winding up the Provincial Reconstruction Team, which consisted of US and Australian military and civilians working together under Australian leadership, another example of our effective bilateral cooperation.

Last year we also saw the first fighting season with the Afghan National Security Forces in the lead for security across the country – that was a significant step forward, after years of mentoring by the United States and Australian and other forces.

There is much to be done to prepare for the conclusion of the ISAF mission at the end of this year, including finalizing the post-2014 framework. This is an issue on which Australia has the lead in the United Nations Security Council and represents another example of vital US-Australian cooperation.

Certainty around the US-Afghanistan Bilateral Security Agreement remains fundamental to laying the groundwork for the international community's post-2014 engagement – we have urged the Afghan Government to conclude this agreement as it will also set the parameters for our own engagement beyond the end of this year. I make it clear that provided there is an appropriate agreement in place, the Australian Government will continue with ongoing support.

By year's end our mutual and broadly-based commitment to the people of Afghanistan will move into a new phase. That will be a critical moment.

The Afghan people deserve a chance to secure their own peace, but we must be assured that this territory will never again be used to launch terrorist attacks…

In concluding…

Our longstanding Alliance, borne out of our joint sacrifices in the Pacific theatre of the Second World War, has faced its share of challenges.

And there will be no shortage of difficulties and uncertainties over the coming decades.

But we have:

our shared history, our common interests and values, our shared capability and adaptability to develop strategies, and we have the will and the resolve to make our alliance an indispensable instrument for regional stability, peace and prosperity.

Long may it remain.

Thank you.

Julie Bishop, Foreign Minister of Australia, “US-Australia: The Alliance in an Emerging Asia,” Alliance 21 Conference, Washington, D.C., 22 January 2014.  

--Alex Obregon

Julie Bishop: Tough Decisions on Australian Aid

Minister of Foreign Affairs, Julie Bishop, gave a speech on February 14, 2014 regarding Australasian aid and international development policies. Bishop has been the minister since September 2013 and is currently the only woman in the cabinet and the third woman in Australian history to hold the title of Deputy Leader of the Opposition. Additionally, she has been a Member for Curtin in the House of Representatives since 1998 and was a minster in the Howard Government until 2007 (Juliebisop.com.au). Bishop’s speech primarily focuses on instituting a more effective and efficient aid program to produce economic growth and alleviate poverty. To keep peace and prosperity, Bishop will focus on Australia’s “neighborhoods,” the Indian Ocean Asia Pacific, and will strive to continue to be the most responsive humanitarian donor:

* * *

“I am really pleased to be at this workshop because I hope that we can all share the same goals. We want to find ways to make Australia’s aid program work more effectively, to help improve people’s lives. We want to find the very best ways to alleviate poverty and improve economic outcomes and build stability and prosperity, particularly in our region the Indian Ocean, the Asia Pacific…

To the conference participants, your research gives us insights on changing landscapes of development assistance. And there is no doubt that it is changing. I take issue with those who focus on quantity not quality. There are many examples in domestic policies where billions of dollars have been poured into programs only to find that standards have gone backwards. So, what we need to do is focus on new ways of achieving better outcomes in the area of overseas development assistance and aid.

Official development assistance now provides a relatively small share of total finance for development. Economically sustainable communities and economies are the key to the alleviation of poverty and increasing living standards. It has been called the new aid paradigm. Our aid program can succeed in this new paradigm because when we get it right we can make a real difference and in doing this, focus on our region.

Now we have not always got it right. I find it utterly distressing to continue to see aid programs in Papua New Guinea, for example, that are not having the desired outcome. I find it distressing to know that despite the fact that Australia invests about half a billion dollars each and every year into Papua New Guinea, it will not meet one of its millennium development goals, in fact it is going backwards. It is not on track to meet one of the seven millennium development goals. And I am not just focusing on PNG, this is an issue across our region.

We need a more effective and efficient aid program. We need an aid program with a strong culture of accountability and performance and the new Government is committed to a new strategic direction for Australia’s aid program which will enhance the work we are already doing in the region and will focus on the region.

So let me be clear from the outset. It is in Australia’s national interest to deliver a responsible, affordable and sustainable aid program. A program that will promote economic growth and reduce poverty. Now we have had to make some pretty tough decisions this year. We inherited a deteriorating budget from the previous government - cumulative deficits of $123 billion. Now that means ladies and gentlemen that $123 billion more than incoming revenue has been spent. The previous government was on trajectory for government debt to reach $667 billion. So the government was borrowing from overseas to pay our bills and our aid program – borrow overseas to send overseas.

So we have to get our budget under control, and this means that the aid program, like every other government program, had to be put on sustainable footing. Our domestic budget outlook meant that I had little choice but to reduce this year’s aid budget and I did so by reducing it by about $100 million over last year. That means the tough decisions had to be made but we are still one of the most generous donor countries in the world. We remain among the world’s top 10 despite being the 12th largest economy and just 53rd in the world for population – so per capita we are still among the world’s top donors. But what I have done is stabilized the budget at $5 billion per annum. It will increase in line with inflation, so it will go up by CPI. This will provide certainty, predictability of funding for our partners, for the recipients and will put the aid budget on sustainable financial footing…

We are refocusing our efforts, placing our aid program more clearly in the context of Australia’s national interest. And that is why the aid program is now part of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. We have integrated the separate aid agency – AusAid – into the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. We have created a single department with responsibility for advancing Australia’s interest in diplomatic trade and development context.

It is in Australia’s national interest for there to be peace and prosperity in our region -it is part of our national interest. So that is why we are consolidating our efforts on our neighborhood – the Indian Ocean Asia Pacific – where we can make the biggest difference. This is where we have a responsibility to foster peace and prosperity…

Aid for Trade will be fundamental to our policy approach. For every single dollar invested in Aid for Trade, an estimated $8 in additional exports will be created in developing countries. That is a good return on our investment so the program will have a much stronger focus on promoting economic growth than it has in the past years. This means using more of our aid to create jobs, to build schools and investing in productivity enhancing infrastructure and spending in our region…

We recognize that one of the best ways to promote economic growth in our region is to empower women and girls. And that’s why we have appointed former Senator Natasha Stott-Despoja as our Ambassador for Women and Girls. Her role will be to visit our region, to represent Australia in regional and global forum, to promote the empowerment of women and girls. When women are able to actively participate in the economy, the formal labor markets, than everyone prospers. So we are going to support women starting businesses, building their skills, and stepping up to leadership roles.

We will invest in health – particularly health systems – so that men and women and children can access basic health services and live healthy and productive lives. I made it clear to the PNG Government that we will move away from direct service delivery because that is the responsibility of a mature sovereign government…

We are committed to playing a strong role in responding to disease threats in the region – Malaria, TB, HIV/AIDS – which can create huge economic burdens to developing countries. We are also working with governments in our region to ensure [inaudible] and growth is inclusive of the poorest and most disadvantaged, making sure particular consideration is given to improve people with disabilities, those living in remote and rural communities and ethnic minorities.

And as I said, we will continue our humanitarian work across the globe. I think Australia will continue to be the most effective, and responsive humanitarian donors – certainly in our region – and we demonstrated this in recent times in our response to natural disasters in the Philippines, Tonga and Vanuatu.

In fact, I visited the Philippines just after the impact of Typhoon Haiyan. We provided $40 million in financial assistance, in money, but our contribution went much further than that. We had 550 military personnel on the ground in the Philippines, we had aircraft – C-130s – to bring supplies and enable the aid workers to travel around the Philippines. Yet none of that counted in the assessment of our aid contribution to the Philippines – this is something else we are going to change.

When other countries include in their aid program assessment the amount of say military or private sector funding and Australia doesn’t, we only count the actual dollars we provide, we are comparing apples with oranges. I was surprised to find that Australia was listed as the fourth largest donor to the Philippines typhoon effort.  Given that there was $40 million dollars, 550 personnel, ships, planes and I thought “Gee, other countries must have done an extraordinary job”, but when I looked at their contribution, it was their military contribution. Well, if I added Australia’s military contribution we would be by far the largest donor. Now, this isn’t a question of who is the largest donor, but let’s compare apples with apples before people start criticizing the Australian Government for not responding. Have a look at what we have actually provided and compare it with those who are said to be number one or two and their contribution was their military contribution – fantastic – but let’s compare like with like.

The private sector is already involved in development assistance and I want the Australian Government to work more effectively with the private sector, recognizing that private enterprise is engine of growth. So we are going to explore innovative models for private sector partnerships for development, moving away from the old way of doing things, the more traditional aid program approaches. One example is the $20 million that Australia is contributing to the Philippines Public Private Partnership Centre. Our aid dollar is helping prepare tenders to award 26 public-private partnership infrastructure projects that are valued at about $7 billion. So the work will now inform a similar pilot scheme in Indonesia, as part of the project to tackle infrastructure shortfalls in the APEC region…It has been estimated that $8 trillion worth of infrastructure is needed in the APEC region along by 2020.

So we are funding such infrastructure such as the Cao Lahn bridge in Vietnam - that is going to transform local economies. It will enable people to travel more easily, to access education, employment and markets for their trade. We are supporting programs like the Pacific Business Fund that I recently launched in the Solomon Islands to foster business growth in developing countries. The fund will be managed by the Asia Development Bank – it will deliver capital and mentoring to local businesses who are seeking to export and expand. Our contribution of $15 million will allow the fund to work with at least 100 high potential companies to expand and diversify their operations, leverage $15 million in finance from commercial institutions, and ultimately it is estimated create up to a thousand jobs…

A great example in our region is our partnership with Carnival Cruises to provide increased economic opportunity through the tourism industry. The Pacific is a magnificent tourism magnet and cruising is big business. Carnival brings over a quarter of a million tourists to the Pacific each year. But we need to bring local industries to Carnival and that is what we are doing through this partnership to increase local earnings. So Carnival for example has agreed to source the bottled water from a Vanuatu supplier and is in discussions to source local coffee. This might seem obvious but it wasn’t happening. So the opportunities are going to stretch much further than just sales – taxi drivers and coffee shops and local tourism operators, fruit and vegetable growers on a lot of the islands all have the potential to benefit when connected to the tourism supply chain. And that is what we need to do to get local businesses into regional and global supply chains. Carnival is working to hire Ni-Vanuatu crew – they have over 100 ships visiting the Pacific annually and up to 200 crew on board these ships – the potential for job opportunities is huge…

While we are in the process of finalizing our benchmarks, I will share my thinking on some of the broad parameters.

We will be assessing performance across all levels of the aid program. At the strategic level, we will assess the entire aid programs progress against key goals and priorities – a small number of high level targets. We will use performance benchmarks at the level of individual programs to assess the relative effectiveness of our portfolio of investments, and these assessments will determine how the aid level are allocated. Then at an individual assessment level, we will ensure funding is directed to those programs, those investments that are making the most difference and that poor-performing projects or poor-performing deliverers are either improved or the funds are redirected.

We will also review the way we assess the performance of our delivery partners – multi-lateral organizations, NGOs and contractors – to ensure there is a stronger link between performance and funding and I am really pleased to report that the initial consultations indicate there has been broad agreement among our partners across the sector to this approach.

We will also be working with partner governments to ensure the millions of dollars spent each year on programs are used responsibly in those countries and effectively. That is why we are looking to introduce mutual obligations between ourselves and our partner countries, so both partners are held accountable for outcomes.

I have mentioned Papua New Guinea, it is a country for which I have very deep affection. It is a vital partner to Australia and the region, but PNG is a good example of how our relationship is maturing from the aid-donor-aid-recipient to a much more sophisticated economic partnership and our aid program should reflect that. So we are currently undertaking a review of the Papua New Guinea aid program in conjunction with the PNG Government to reflect that change. Both our governments recognize that aid investments need to target areas where Australian expertise can have a real impact on sustainable and inclusive economic growth. A more prosperous Papua New Guinea will improve the quality of life of its own people and have economic and security benefits for the whole region. This is an example of aligning Australia’s foreign policy interests with our development assistance goals.

Our aid program needs to respond to a radically changing international environment. Over a billion people have been lifted out of extreme poverty over the last 20 years. There are a number of key countries in our region – including Indonesia and Sri Lanka and Vietnam – that are experiencing strong economic growth with ODA now representing a tiny fraction of their GDP. But over the years ahead our aid dollar will continue to shrink relative to domestic budgets in our partner countries in Asia, and that is how it should be. We should be seeking to do ourselves out of a job! At the same time, many of our neighbors in the Pacific do remain fragile. There has been stagnated growth and very unclear long-term prospects…

Take China for example, China’s aid budget is now around the same size of Australia’s. We should be engaging China for not only is it a growing presence in our region, but we should be doing what we can to capitalize on our respective strengths, using our combined weight to bear overcoming some of the development challenges of the Pacific. Through a development cooperation partnership with China we have taken the first steps towards working together, importantly to our areas like health and water management.

For example, we have this tri-lateral cooperation arrangement with Australia, China and PNG that can draw together the different strengths of the countries. Australia is a trusted and effective donor, China is a newly developed economy and PNG’s  economy is going through a transition. And we have begun a collaboration to target malaria in PNG. Australia and China have technical expertise to offer PNG in combating this disease and the region of course in the long run will benefit if we continue to control Malaria. This is a positive concrete example of China’s active engagement in international development and Australia’s responses to the realities of the global economy. It is my hope that we can continue to engage with our traditional donors, with the emerging donors, in programs that we can make a difference.

For those of you who work in international development, we can see the hardship, the despair, the poverty and despite our best efforts, too many nations will fail to meet the millennium development goals. But I do remain optimistic because I do know that Australia’s work overseas does change lives. I am sure we can do better and that we can make a much bigger difference. We will remain committed to our overseas aid program but we want to see value for money – “effectiveness” is the watchword. And we will support the organizations and those who deliver continued success and we will focus where we can have the biggest impact in our region.

Aid is a powerful tool in our statecraft. It is ultimately designed to protect and project Australia’s broader interests and that is to ensure greater prosperity, sustainable growth and opportunities to lift the standards of living of everybody in our region. This is how we are going to make a significant impact in the Indian-Ocean Asia-Pacific and I hope that you will join with the Australian Government on this journey.”

Julie Bishop, Minister of Foreign Affairs, “Opening Address-2014 Australasian Aid and International Development Policy Workshop,” The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Australia, February 14, 2014.  www.foreignminister.gov.au. 

--Sam Saccomanno