Paul Keating has launched another attack on the national security policies of the Albanese Labor government, saying it should be “celebrating the rise” of China rather than turning Australia into “an American protectorate”.
The former prime minister began his brutal assessment of Labor’s defence policy in an interview on the ABC’s 7.30 program on Thursday, where he said the government’s acceptance of the AUKUS nuclear submarine deal would “probably make Australia the 51st state of the United States”.
“This is a party that has adopted the defence and foreign policies of the Morrison Liberal government. This is a betrayal,” Keating said.
But Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was unmoved by the views of Keating, 80, who was removed from office 28 years ago.
“Paul was a great prime minister; that ended in 1996,” Albanese told reporters in Perth on Friday.
‘Paul has his opinions. They are well known.
‘The world has changed between 1996 and 2024. My government is doing what we need to do today, and everyone will have the opportunity to do it.’
Keating, who has been a vocal critic of the tripartite agreement between Australia, the UK and the US since it was announced in 2021 when Scott Morrison was prime minister, took another swipe at Albanese on Friday night.
Paul Keating has launched another attack on the national security policies of the Albanese Labor government, saying it should be “celebrating the rise” of China rather than turning Australia into “an American protectorate”.
Mr Keating said Mr Albanese had set Australia on a path to becoming an “American protectorate” in Asia when the nation should be “celebrating the rise of China”.
“The fact is that the Albanian government is returning to the Anglosphere to ensure Australia’s security,” Keating said in a statement.
‘In effect, the Albanese government is doing exactly what I have staunchly opposed all my life and, in the post-war years, the Labour Party has opposed.
“And that is, finding our security from Asia, rather than our security in Asia.”
Mr Keating said the Albanian government’s decision to expand the US military presence in Australia with more troop movements would leave the nation as a “continental extension of American power”.
“Such an outcome is likely to render the Australian government, in terms of defence and security, simply the national administrator of what in Asia would be widely seen as a US protectorate,” he said.
Mr Keating said the government had chosen to view Beijing as a “looming threat” rather than “recognising and celebrating China’s rise… and addressing it diplomatically”.
Responding to Mr Keating’s comments on AUKUS, Defence Minister Richard Marles said he was entitled to his views but said Australia was facing “the most complex strategic circumstances we have had to deal with since the end of the Second World War”.
“To characterize our relationship with the United States in that way is neither right nor fair,” Marles said from Canada.
Meanwhile, Albanese and Marles have defended the AUKUS deal after US President Joe Biden briefed Congress.
Biden on Thursday sent a letter to the US Congress updating the agreement that would allow the transfer of nuclear material to Australia.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was unfazed by the views of Mr Keating, 80, who was removed from office 28 years ago.
Mr Marles said this did not mean nuclear waste would end up in Australia.
“That’s the agreement we reached with the UK and the US in March last year, and all we’re doing is providing the legal basis for it,” he told ABC radio.
‘To be absolutely clear, there is no circumstance under which we will receive waste from any other country.
‘We made it clear in March last year that we will be responsible for our own nuclear waste and that will include the disposal of used nuclear reactors.’
Mr Albanese said the updated AUKUS agreement would not involve the transfer of nuclear waste.
“There will be no nuclear transfer from either the United States or the United Kingdom. That’s the detail. That’s very clear and it’s not part of the agreement,” Albanese said.
“We have agreed to have nuclear-powered submarines. That is what we agreed on and the transfer of technology related to that.”
