TV interview, Sky News

SUBJECTS: Exercise Alon; China; Middle East conflict; Australia-Israel relationship

KIERAN GILBERT, HOST: Let’s go live now to the Philippines. The Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles joins me, of course the Defence Minister as well. Deputy Prime Minister, thanks for your time. You’ve been meeting and, well, you are about to meet with your counterpart there in Manila. It’s an interesting relationship, this one with the Philippines. We are, second to the United States, the only nation to have an active Visiting Forces Agreement with the Philippines – and there’s going to be a major exercise over the coming days. Can you give our viewers a sense of what this is all about?

RICHARD MARLES, DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER: Thanks, Kieran. You’re right, it is a really important and growing relationship, and it’s really blossomed over the last few years and transformed a relationship which obviously has had very strong people-to-people connections over a long period of time, that now has a very clear and strong strategic dimension to it. Over the coming days we are seeing Exercise Alon. This is the biggest exercise that the Australian Defence Force will be participating in outside of Australia this year. There’s about 3,500 who will be participating in it – 1600 Australians. We have HMAS Brisbane, one of our air warfare destroyers, which is here. There are a number of aircraft from Growlers to F18s to KC-30s, which are the aircraft refuellers, to the C-17s which are the big lift aircraft. We have an infantry component. So it’s all three services – land, sea, and air – as well as cyber participating here. So it’s a very complex exercise, and it speaks to the significance of where we see this relationship as now being. You know, both the Philippines and Australia, we share values. We are democracies, we seek the rule of law. But what we are about is maintaining the rules-based order around the world, but particularly in the region in which we live. And we’re doing so in a region where the rules-based order is under pressure. And a lot of what the Royal Australian Navy does now, as well as the rest of our Defence Force, is to operate asserting the rules-based order in this part of the world.

(TECHNICAL INTERPUTION)

GILBERT: We just had a bit of a technical hiccup. We’re right, we’re back with Richard Marles, the Deputy Prime Minister. My apologies for that technical glitch. But just to pick up where we were, because when we talk about the rules of the road and the rules-based order, we saw an example of this – the tensions were on show just last week. A Chinese naval vessel clashing, in fact colliding, with a Chinese coast guard vessel. But the thing is, they were trying to push out a Philippines watercraft. Are you concerned about that sort of episode and, given where this exercise is over the coming days, do you expect any pushback from the Chinese over this?

MARLES: Well, in answer to the last question, we don’t. I mean, this is about exercising our capabilities with the Philippines. Both the United States and Canada are also involved in this exercise in a smaller way. But this is fundamentally about the way in which we are operating with the Philippines. In terms of the first part of the question, we are concerned about incidents of this kind. I mean, we understand that there are going to be interactions between defence forces when we are asserting the rules-based order. But what’s really important is that those interactions are safe and that they are professional. And that’s what we seek in terms of the way in which we engage when we are engaging lawfully and in accordance with international law. And obviously we are concerned with what we saw a week or two ago here. And I know the Filipinos are very concerned about that. And I think it does illustrate the challenges that are involved in doing the work which our Defence Force is doing.

GILBERT: Yes. And it is near the south – well, right near these areas of the South China Sea that are contested, that this exercise is going to take place. And you’d be aware that the Chinese authorities have criticised US exercises with the Philippines, saying that they’re militarising the area and they’re ganging up on China with their allies. That sort of rhetoric. What do you make of it, and should we expect that?

MARLES: What it’s about is actually asserting the rules-based order. It’s precisely the opposite of giving this a military character, not doing any of this gratuitously. I mean, it’s worth understanding that the bulk of Australia’s seaborne trade goes through the South China Sea. I mean, this is a really important sea line of communication in terms of the Australian economy, in terms of Australian prosperity. And it’s really important that the rules of the road – the rules of the sea, in this case – apply. And that’s all we are seeking to do. And when we do work with America, or in this instance when we’re doing work with the Philippines, in terms of asserting that, all we are doing is working with another country which sees its interests lie in the existence of a rules-based order upon which we can rely. And again, I think another point to make is that for a country of our size, and very much for a country of the Philippines’ size, the rules-based order is ultimately what gives us agency. You know, we want to be living in a world where issues are determined by reference to law and by reference to rules, not by reference to power and might. And all we are doing is making sure that the rules-based order is what applies in our region. And it is a very important part of what our Defence Force does. It’s a very important part of the cooperation that we now engage in with the Philippines.

GILBERT: Have we dropped the rules-based order though, when it comes to the Middle East? I want to turn our attention to the comments by Benjamin Netanyahu, because it is the only democracy in the region, Israel. He says that Australia, France, the UK are repeating the errors of World War II, that these nations tried to appease Islamist extremists, and that in fact we are trying to essentially appease something that will eventually reach our shores if we keep on this approach. Are we trying to appease terrorists with the recognition of Palestine?

MARLES: Well, absolutely not. And I mean, there’s a few things to say. I mean, firstly, the last thing I want to do is get into a back and forth with the Israeli Prime Minister. We seek to be friends with Israel. We always have from the very moment that Israel was created. And we do very much acknowledge that Israel is a liberal democracy. But from the outset, Kieran, we have condemned the actions of Hamas, we couldn’t have been clearer in condemning the actions of Hamas as a terrorist organisation. That was literally in the immediate aftermath of October 7, what our government was saying, as governments were around the world. And since then we’ve acknowledged Israel’s right to defend itself. And importantly, we’ve been consistently calling for the return of hostages to Israel and to their families. And in the context of a recognition of Palestine, we’ve made it clear that Hamas can have no role in a future Palestinian government. And we’ve also reiterated the importance of seeing a return of the hostages. But in the same breath, we have for a long period of time supported a two-state solution. And when I say we, I don’t just mean this government, I mean successive governments throughout Australia’s history. And to have that position is therefore to acknowledge the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people to statehood. And all we have done is follow through in relation to that. And we’ve done it in concert with like-minded countries around the world, countries like the United Kingdom, like Canada, like France.

GILBERT: So I guess the fundamental problem here is the disarmament of Hamas. You said again that that’s a key part of it. They can’t be part of any solution. But if it’s not the IDF that gets rid of and demilitarises Hamas, who’s going to do it? The Arab League don’t put boots on the ground, they can’t do it. The Israeli IDF has to do it, doesn’t it? So, to get to that core point, you say the government says Hamas can’t be a part of it, but it’s the IDF that’s got to deliver that, doesn’t it? So aren’t the two points you’re making contradictory?

MALRES: No. And we’ve always acknowledged Israel’s right to defend itself. And we have, as I say from the very outset of this, been completely critical of Hamas, which I might say is a criticism that is shared by the Arab League and by the Palestinian Authority itself. But we have made it really clear that Israel does have a right to defend itself. We have also made it clear that the way in which Israel defends itself matters, that international law has to be at the heart of this. And, you know, go to the way in which you framed this question at the beginning. The rules-based order is absolutely central to the way in which we think about how we exercise our international voice in respect of this issue. International law has to matter here in terms of the way in which Israel engages in its own defence. And what we are seeing play out in Gaza is a humanitarian catastrophe. I don’t think there can be any denying that. And what we need to see is an end to those hostilities. And again, we have consistently been calling for that so that we see an end to the loss of innocent lives, we do see humanitarian aid flow to Gaza, and we see a return of hostages to their families in Israel. Now we’ve been saying all of those points.

GILBERT: I want to put to you, though, the argument made by Benjamin Netanyahu quoting Churchill. He says it’s like feeding the crocodile, an appeaser trying to feed the crocodile so it will eat him last, and saying that we’re essentially feeding the crocodile of militant extremist Islam by the approach when it comes to Palestine, and that it will eventually reach our shores as well, unless we support his democracy, his efforts to obliterate Hamas.

MALRES: Well, we have been really clear about our position in respect of Hamas. We condemn Hamas, we condemn Hamas as an organisation, and we condemn Hamas for the actions that it undertook on October 7th. But what we also need to acknowledge here is that we have supported a two-state solution for a very long period of time. We do that because it is our view that there is no enduring peace in the Middle East unless there are two states. That is our position, and it has been the position of successive governments in this country – conservative Coalition governments as well. And if you have that position, then you have to acknowledge the legitimate aspiration of the Palestinian people to statehood. That’s what it is to say that you believe or support a two-state solution. Now, in terms of the timing of recognition, we’ve also said that it has to happen in a context, with raising issues that we have in terms of there not being roles for Hamas, in terms of the return of hostages, the end of hostilities and the like. But we wanted to do it at a point where there is maximum impact in terms of progressing issues in the Middle East. And so we have done this in concert with like-minded countries, countries like Canada, countries like the United Kingdom, countries like France. And, you know, what we are doing is entirely consistent with the line of policy which has been held by governments of both persuasions in this country over a long period of time. And it’s a position which is entirely consistent with wanting to see international law upheld. And it’s entirely consistent with an utter condemnation of Hamas.

GILBERT: Just finally, I know you don’t want to get into it, you said you don’t want to get into a sort of tit-for-tat with Benjamin Netanyahu. But he says the Prime Minister’s legacy will be tarnished by this, that history will see him as a weak leader because of his position on this. And he says you’re rewarding terrorism. Specifically on those claims, can I get your response?

MALRES: Yeah, well, obviously I completely disagree with that. I think the positions that we have taken as a government, and positions that have been very much led by our Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, have been ones that have been very principled in what has been a very, very difficult issue to navigate. It’s been difficult for Australia, but it’s been difficult for countries around the world, because the issues that we see playing out in the Middle East are very complex. But I think when history judges the way in which we have navigated it, you will see that underlying every decision that we’ve made is a position of principle, a deep ethical position which is consistent with a long-held position of successive Australian governments in this country. We do condemn terrorism, we do condemn terrorist organisations such as Hamas. We do, though, acknowledge the legitimate aspiration of the Palestinian people to statehood, just as successive governments have in the past. And we are exercising our voice at a moment in time entirely consistent with like-minded friends and allies such as the UK, Canada, and France.

GILBERT: Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles, live from Manila, thank you for your time, appreciate it.

MARLES: Thanks, Kieran.

ENDS