Kerry Nettle (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ask that general business notice of motion No. 128 standing in my name for today, relating to tensions between the US, Israel and Iran, be taken as a formal motion.

Natasha Stott Despoja (SA, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—On behalf of the Democrats, I would like to say that our support for this motion is predicated on the fact that we believe the notion of a unilateral military strike is implicit in this motion. Our support for the motion is based on that notion; otherwise, we will not be supporting the motion.

Alan Ferguson (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am afraid I cannot help you there. All I am going to do is ask: is there any objection to it being taken as formal? There being no objection, I call Senator Nettle.

Kerry Nettle (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate—

(a)

notes:

(i)

the growing tension between the United States of America (US), Israel and Iran, including recent military exercises by Israel,

(ii)

the recent statement by Israel’s Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz that Israel would attack Iran if it continued with its nuclear program, and

(iii)

that US intelligence bases in Australia are likely to be used in any US military strike on Iran; and

(b)

calls on the Government to:

(i)

support a diplomatic resolution to the crisis, and

(ii)

rule out Australian support for a military strike on Iran.

Question put.

John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I will briefly outline the reasons for the government voting against Senator Nettle’s motion. The government could not support the motion, which has just been voted against, given the form that it was in. I would like to place on the record, as I have so many times before, our objection to dealing with complex international relations matters such as this one by the use of formal motions. I will not bore the Senate by repeating the comments that I have made on so many occasions about such motions being blunt instruments, but I do commend the Senate to consider, after the change in the Senate’s composition on 1 July, looking again at the fact that we are all forced into black-and-white choices on these motions to support or oppose. They do not lend themselves to the nuances which are so critically necessary to many areas of policy, none more important than in relation to foreign affairs policy. Furthermore, as I have said on many occasions, I think they are far too easily misinterpreted by some audiences as statements of policy by a national government.

In relation to the specific issue that was the subject of the motion, I can say that of course Australia supports diplomatic efforts to resolve the issue of Iran’s uranium enrichment activities. Australia implements, in full, all decisions of the United Nations Security Council in resolutions which impose sanctions on Iran’s nuclear program. These resolutions prohibit the provision to Iran of goods and technology which could contribute to Iran’s uranium enrichment, heavy water related and reprocessing activities, or the development of nuclear weapon delivery systems, as well as of any assistance related to these goods.

Australia supports further measures by the international community that would bring greater pressure to bear on Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment program and other proliferation sensitive nuclear activities prohibited by the UNSC. We welcome news that the European Union agreed on 23 June to new financial sanctions aimed at pressuring Iran to halt uranium enrichment. The government is considering what additional measures Australia, together with the international community, could take.

The International Atomic Energy Agency report of 26 May confirms that Iran is continuing with its uranium enrichment activities in violation of binding UNSC resolutions. According to the report, Iran has again refused to answer questions about possible nuclear weapon related activity and the involvement of military related entities in its nuclear program. Without answers the IAEA concluded it could not verify the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program. We would say that Iran should act now to remove all doubt about its intentions by immediately suspending its uranium enrichment and reprocessing activities, as required by successive UN Security Council resolutions, by cooperating fully with the IAEA on all outstanding matters, especially those pertaining to possible weapons research, and by implementing the IAEA’s additional protocol and providing early information on new nuclear facilities, without which the IAEA cannot provide credible assurances about the nature of Iran’s nuclear program. I commend the government’s approach on this matter.

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I appreciate Senator Faulkner’s statement. It is informative. Senator Nettle’s motion has come forward at a time in which there is international alarm about a possible pre-emptive strike on Iran to destroy its nuclear facilities. I might state here that the IAEA head, Mohamed ElBaradei, has said he would resign because that would effectively turn the Middle East into an incendiary. The matter is hugely important and it ought to be debated. I asked the question: how do the Greens or other concerned citizens raise this matter in here if it is not by motion? And how do we ask the government to seek information or to take action, if not through motion in this Senate? This does not ask some other government to do anything. It asks this government to take action and to state its position. Senator Faulkner did that in every way except whether Australia would support a strike or not.

I might note here that this government has decided to allow the export of Australian uranium to Russia, which has provided technology to Iran. It is a complex matter, but the government is directly and indirectly involved in international matters and ought to be restraining Israel, which last week held a mock exercise for an attack on Iran over the Mediterranean ocean. It is an extremely grave matter that is being debated here, and Senator Nettle had not only every right but also great responsibility to bring this motion before the Senate.