Radio Interview, ABC Radio National Breakfast

SUBJECTS: Middle East Conflict; Fuel Supply. 

MELISSA CLARKE, HOST: The US and Iran are preparing for peace talks in Pakistan this weekend as a two week ceasefire deal for the Middle East appears to be largely holding, so far. That's despite conflicted accounts as to whether the Lebanon was included in the truce, with Israeli strikes earlier this week killing more than 300 people, according to the Lebanese Health Ministry. Meanwhile, there's been no sign Iran has lifted its effective blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, with Israel's ongoing attacks on Lebanon cited as a key sticking point. Richard Marles is the Acting Prime Minister and Minister for Defence. Richard Marles, welcome back to Radio National Breakfast.

RICHARD MARLES, DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER: Good morning, Melissa, how are you?

CLARKE: Good, thank you. Minister, do you consider the Strait of Hormuz to be open to international shipping at this point?

MARLES: Well, I think we can see that what's happening with the Strait of Hormuz, and there's not the flow of ships and oil through the Straits of Hormuz that we would want. But ultimately we need to see the Straits of Hormuz open. We need to see the disruption of the global fuel supply chain stop. And we very much need to see this fragile, temporary ceasefire become permanent, which makes the conversations on the weekend in Pakistan incredibly important.

CLARKE: Do you consider Iran to pose less or more of a danger to the world than it did before this conflict started?

MARLES: I mean, that's ultimately a question that needs to be assessed by the US. But what we support is the strategic objective of denying Iran a deployable nuclear weapon. Obviously, Iran having that capability would be a catastrophe. And based on what has been publicly stated by the United States, that objective seems to have been largely achieved. And so that is good, but obviously in the context of that, it's– 

CLARKE: So, you think its capacity, its nuclear capacity or potential to develop a nuclear arsenal has been significantly degraded from this conflict, not the prior strikes?

MARLES: Yes, well again, I'm relying on what has been publicly stated by the United States in respect of that question. And based on what has been publicly stated, that objective seems to have been largely achieved. And given that, and given the impact on the global economy of this conflict, it's really important now that we see the conflict come to an end, which is why it's very important that this ceasefire, temporary as it is right now, becomes permanent.

CLARKE: Yet we see that Iran's appetite for possessing a nuclear weapon seems to remain strong, and there's discussion of it continuing to be able to have enrichment under the terms that are being discussed at this ceasefire at the weekend. So, are we really further away from their nuclear potential following the last couple of weeks?

MARLES: Well again, all I can do is go on what has been publicly stated by the United States in saying that the objective of degrading Iran's capability to acquire a deployable nuclear weapon has been significantly achieved over the last couple of weeks. But obviously, that is very much in the interests of Australia, but it's in the interests of the world that Iran be denied this capability.

CLARKE: Do you think the Iranian people have more or less freedom than they did before this conflict started?

MARLES: Well again, that's difficult to assess from outside of Iran. But what we can absolutely say is that this is an authoritarian regime which has killed thousands of its own citizens just this year. And so the Iranian people do not live in a state of freedom. And we've been very clear about our position in condemning Iran for the way in which it has treated its own citizens during the course of this year alone, but obviously throughout the tenure of this regime.

CLARKE: Richard Marles, the Strait of Hormuz is in a worse condition in terms of what can be extended to the global community, in terms of access to energy, than at the start of this conflict. 

MARLES: That’s true. 

CLARKE: When it comes to the threat that Iran poses to the world, the best you can say is that, well, what threat it poses needs to be assessed. Some improvement, you seem to think, when it comes to Iran's nuclear position, but no difference to the people on the ground living in Iran. So, on the whole, has there been any success from this effort by the US and Israel to attack Iran? Has it left the world in a better position overall, or not?

MARLES: Well firstly, I mean, this was a decision that was taken by the United States and by Israel. This is not a conflict of which Australia has been a part. So, I want to make that point.

CLARKE: No, but you can adjudge whether it has been successful or not.

MARLES: Well, we have some visibility, not complete visibility of this. And in terms of the strategic objective that we supported, which was denying Iran the capability of having a deployable nuclear weapon, it appears as though there has been some success. The point that you are making about the Straits of Hormuz is obviously true. And it is also obviously true that the impact, therefore, on the global economy has been profound. And it's why what we need to see, however we judge it moving forward, is for this ceasefire to become permanent and for the Straits of Hormuz to be reopened and the global fuel supply chain to be returned to normal. I mean, that's clearly where the global national interest lies. It's very much where Australia's national interest lies. And that's our focus.

CLARKE: You're listening to Radio National Breakfast, where Richard Marles is my guest. He's the Acting Prime Minister at the moment while Anthony Albanese is in Singapore. He's also the Minister for Defence. When it comes to the talks that Australia has been participating in around what steps could be taken to ensure the Strait does remain open to ships in the future. Do you have any updates for us on those efforts by countries outside of the immediate participants of the conflict, about what is being done and what Australia's role in that might be?

MARLES: Well, talks are ongoing is the first thing, and there is a lot of conversation about what potential scenarios might be and obviously from there, you know, what might be put together in terms of the combined effort of these countries. But there also remain massive question marks. And the fundamental point here is, what actually is the situation on the ground that persists in terms of this ceasefire? All of these conversations with the UK, with France, and those countries are predicated on putting in place an effort when conditions allow. That's really talking about when there is a ceasefire that is permanent, and we don't have that in place now, and obviously what the terms of such a ceasefire would be in terms of a permanent ceasefire. And based on that, you know, scenarios are worked through, and we obviously seek to be constructive in terms of what contribution Australia could make. I'm not going to speculate about the specifics of that because it's impossible to do that without those conversations being fully had. And those conversations can't be fully had without knowing what the outcome of this ceasefire is.

CLARKE: When it comes to that question of Australia's contribution, I appreciate you won't want to go into exactly what Australia might do when there is such a degree of uncertainty, but we've had your shadow counterpart, the Shadow Defence Minister, James Patterson, suggest that part of the ambiguity here is because Australia has resources, in particularly frigates that have not been upgraded sufficiently to be able to protect against missile attacks. Can you give us an update as to whether or not those frigates have had sufficient updates to be able to be deployed to the Gulf in this kind of scenario, if that is something that we would want to do down the track?

MARLES: I mean, obviously that's an unhelpful contribution from the Shadow Minister and it's not correct in terms of reflecting what Australia's capability is. And the Chief of the Defence Force I think was very clear about that. I mean, we have capability and that's not the issue. The question is what we can usefully contribute in the context of all the other pressures that exist. And we still have significant roles to play in the Indo‑Pacific, which is where the bulk of our naval effort goes right now. All of those issues don't go away and we work very closely with the United States in respect of all of that. And of course the United States share responsibilities in respect to the Indo‑Pacific as well as what's happening in the Middle East. So, you know, what we do is ultimately not about capability. We have capability. It is a function of the conversations that we have with the United States about the roles that we play within the Indo‑Pacific and then it's a function of what we could usefully contribute based on the conversations we're having with the UK, France and other countries in that coalition.

CLARKE: And Minister, just while we have you, I know there's been a lot of discussions from you, Penny Wong, the Prime Minister, with Southeast Asian counterparts about ensuring fuel security. There are different views amongst our fuel partners about whether or not to pay tolls to secure crude oil through the Strait or not, for them to refine and then us to purchase. For example, Malaysia has, Singapore has not. Australia buys refined fuels from both. Does it matter to the Australian government where countries source their crude oil that we then subsequently buy?

MARLES: Look, we are working with our partners in East Asia around securing Australia's fuel supply. That's the first point to make. And the Prime Minister's visit to Singapore is very much in that effort. Singapore specifically is a very significant contributor of liquid fuels to Australia and we are a very significant contributor of gas to Singapore. And I think one of the issues as we talk with the countries of the region where we are well placed is this is not one way. We genuinely have energy partnerships with the countries of East Asia, with those countries where we take a lot of fuel suppliers.

CLARKE: Indeed. But can I just get to that specific point? Does it matter to Australia whether or not the countries we buy refined fuel from have paid tolls to the IRGC in purchasing the initial crude oil material?

MARLES: Well look, I think what I would say in relation to that is we are a country which supports the global rules‑based order. We are a country which therefore supports the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and Freedom of Navigation. And that's how we would see the Straits of Hormuz and that's what we need to be working to as a global community, is to have the Straits of Hormuz open and where there is freedom of navigation through the Straits of Hormuz and where the rules‑based order applies. And that's really the position of Australia. Now, in the here and now we are working with our partner countries in East Asia that supply us with liquid fuels to make sure that Australia is supplied with fuel during this contingency and that’s really important in terms of, as we look to the future and what we seek to have happen here, we want the global rules‑based order to reply and that means freedom of navigation.

CLARKE: Richard Marles, thank you very much for speaking to me on Radio National Breakfast this morning.

MARLES: Thanks, Melissa.

ENDS