Television interview, ABC 7:30

SUBJECT/S: Cyclone Alfred; US relationship; Defence spending; Ukraine.

HOST, SARAH FERGUSON: And Defence Minister Richard Marles, meanwhile, has been dealing with the turbulence emanating from Washington over recent weeks and what it means for Australia. He joined me earlier. Richard Marles, welcome to 7:30.

MARLES: Great to be here, Sarah.

FERGUSON: Good to have you here in person. What help is the ADF supplying in the cyclone prone areas?

MARLES: Well, there's a lot of preparation going on right now. The focus has been on sandbags over the last couple of days. So, more than 300,000 sandbags have been supplied to the community to enable them to prepare for the event. But one of the advantages we have here is that Brisbane is quite a large defence city. So, the 7th Brigade is based in Brisbane at Gallipoli Barracks. Amberley is one of our two big Air Force bases. So, together, these are two of the biggest defence force bases we have in the country. It actually means that there are thousands of people across those two bases, but also that can be an operation to provide support. So, there's door knocking vehicles which can go across all terrain. We're imagining an airlift capacity that's going to be required. Defence is working closely with National Emergency Management Australia to make sure that we are absolutely ready to respond to what it clearly is going to be a profound event.

FERGUSON: I want to talk to you about some of the events in Washington over the last few days. Now, incoming US defense official, Elbridge Colby said Australia should raise its defence spending by a huge margin, effectively. I think, as I understand it, about $50 billion more. Should Australia lift its defence spending to that level?

MARLES: Well, firstly, I can understand why America is asking its friends and allies to spend more on defence. And it's been a consistent theme of the first Trump administration and now this Trump administration. We are increasing defence spending and we are-

FERGUSON: But not at the level that Bridge Colby was calling for.

MARLES: Yeah, I mean, the extent to which we have increased Defence spending is $50 billion over the course of the next decade. That's as big in peacetime in defence spending as we've seen in Australia since the end of the Second World War.

FERGUSON: Are you prepared to say to the administration you won't go as far as they're asking?

MARLES: Well, in the conversations I had with Secretary Pete Hegseth a few weeks ago in Washington, I obviously pointed out the extent to which we are increasing our defence spending now. And that was very much acknowledged by them. I mean, we will continue to have the conversation with the United States as we go forward.

FERGUSON: But, you know, one thing we know about people in confirmation hearings, they pick their words extremely carefully because they're going to stay with them throughout their career. So, Elbridge Colby, he's going to be influential. He clearly means to send Australia a message.

MARLES: And we will continue to talk with the United States about how we move forward in terms of our defence spending. I mean, one of the points I've made is that whilst we have definitely increased our defence spending, in a rational world, defence spending should be a function of strategic threat and complexity. And we face strategically threatening, and complex environment- 

FERGUSON: That he was making, facing a bigger threat than the Europeans, in his words.

MARLES: And so we will continue to talk with the United States going forward about where our defence spending is at-

FERGUSON: But just to be clear, are you ruling out a lift of that, of that quantity?

MARLES: Well, we'll continue to have a conversation with the United States about where we take defence spending. But I'd want to point out what we have seen already in the last three years is as big an increase in Australian defence spending as we have seen in Australia's peacetime history. And that is something which Secretary Pete Hegseth absolutely acknowledged and welcomed.

FERGUSON: Why is it in Australia's national interests to send armed peacekeepers to police a ceasefire in Ukraine- armed Australian peacekeepers?

MARLES: Well, the conflict in Ukraine resolves on Ukraine's terms is very much in Australia's interest. You know, the moment that we saw a no limits agreement signed between China and Russia on the eve of Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine was the moment that this conflict had enormous relevance to us.

FERGUSON: And that, in your mind, justifies sending Australians to Ukraine to keep the peace?

MARLES: Well, firstly, we need to see what request actually comes through, and we haven't had a request yet. And the only point we're making is that we will give due consideration to that request as we have to, to any. So, we're certainly not ruling out meeting the request. But a point I'd also make is that we've got Australian personnel right now in Britain who are doing training for the Ukrainian armed forces-

FERGUSON: Yes, indeed. But this, of course, is a completely different proposition because it's talking about sending Australian peacekeepers to Ukraine. Would you still send Australians to Ukraine to police a piece if the US was not providing security guarantees?

MARLES: Well, again, I'm not going to go down the path of speculating what requests might come through, other than- 

FERGUSON: I’m trying to get an understanding of what you see and what the Prime Minister sees, because he's the one that opened the door to this. And once a request comes, it's possible that it all moves very fast. I think it's a fair question to understand what's in your mind.

MARLES: Sure. What's in our mind is that we have sought to work with the requests that we've received from- 

FERGUSON: Just if I may, just bring you back to that question, would you still consider sending Australian troops if there were no US security guarantees to a potential peacekeeping force?

MARLES: Well, again, when we get into that detail, it really does depend on the nature-

FERGUSON: It's a fundamental detail.

MARLES: Sure. But it depends on the nature of the request that we receive. And we haven't received a request yet. We need to really see the form in which it comes before we start answering those sort of questions in that sort of way.

FERGUSON: But at the same time, we all understand that a peacekeeping force in Ukraine could be a tripwire for a future conflict with Russia. We've seen Russia breach ceasefires in the past. Could Australia therefore get dragged into such a war?

MARLES: Well, again, it really does depend on the context in which this comes, and we want to understand that fully. And we'll go through any request that we receive in respect of this. What we're trying to flag, if you like, in the answers that the Prime Minister and myself have been giving is that we come to this with an open mind. We're certainly not ruling it out. We want to, you know, provide whatever assistance we possibly can. And we will have a conversation, as we have had at every point along this journey, about how we can best make that contribution.

FERGUSON: Does it give you pause to see the US insulting, threatening its allies, and in the case of Ukraine, actually cutting off military aid and crucial intelligence during an existential war?

MARLES: I think, you know, I'm reluctant to get into a commentary about what the President of the United States is saying. I think what in moments like this, it's just clear. It provides a moment for us to be clear about what our objective is and where we stand. And where we stand is in supporting Ukraine. And we've been consistently doing that from the moment that this invasion took place. And we will continue to stand with Ukraine until they are able to resolve this conflict on their terms, because Russia is the aggressor.

FERGUSON: How do you know that Donald Trump wouldn't abandon Australia at a moment of critical need, given what we've seen?

MARLES: Well, we've- well, then we're talking about a question of our alliance with the United States and our alliance with the United States has existed over many decades. And-

FERGUSON: But I'm asking you to reflect on what we've seen recently from Donald Trump. Yes, we know about the history of the alliance, but what we're seeing is something new, different and shocking.

MARLES: Well, you're asking me about the basis on which we go about our relationship with the United States, and we do so with our history in mind. A history which I might include includes a term of President Trump himself-

FERGUSON: It's a different President Trump this time around.

MARLES: Well, what I would say about the Trump administration this time around is they have shown a real focus on the Indo Pacific- that is very positive. The meeting that I had with Secretary Hegseth really couldn't have gone better. There are very positive comments that Secretary Hegseth made about AUKUS and indeed, Elbridge Colby and his testimony to which you've referred also spoke positively about AUKUS, as did Secretary Rubio-w

FERGUSON: Let me just ask you about that AUKUS, the AUKUS point, because what Elbridge Colby said during the hearings, or I think in his letters accompanying the hearings, were that while the US wants to deliver those submarines to Australia, it could be the US could be in a position to have to make, quote, ‘an awful choice’. Is that a signal for Australia to prepare for those submarines not being delivered?

MARLES: I think he's referring to the challenge of increasing the production rate of Virginia class submarines, which was a challenge that we understood when we announced the optimal pathway with the Biden administration back in March of 2023. And it's precisely because of that that we're making contributions into the American industrial base, both in terms of the construction and the sustainment of Virginia class submarines. And as Secretary Hegseth and I spoke about this really, is that there is an improved rate of- or availability of Virginia class submarines to the United States is in both the US’ interest and in Australia's interest.

FERGUSON: Yes. And clearly.

MARLES: And we- and this, this is a joint task and what we are working to achieving that.

FERGUSON: Clearly, that's what he was saying. But again, I come back to the fact that we know people pick their words very carefully in these moments. He said if there was a conflict with China over Taiwan, it would be essential for us to have as many Virginia's- Virginia class submarines as possible. Again, is this a signal to prepare for a different timetable in relation to AUKUS submarines?

MARLES: I don't think it is. I genuinely think he's reflecting a challenge that we've all understood and which has really given rise to the very unique circumstance, a circumstance that the Trump administration absolutely recognises as unique where Australia is not only purchasing Virginia class submarines from America, but in addition contributing to the American industrial base so that American itself can have a greater availability of Virginia class submarines. And really it is in that that this deal is clearly in Australia’s interests but it is very much in the United States interest as well. 

FERGUSON: Richard Marles, thank you indeed. 

MARLES: Thanks Sarah.

ENDS