PM urged to hedge bets by boosting defence spending
Anthony Albanese is digging his heels in on lifting defence spending as the US heaps more pressure on its allies to increase their share.
NATO members agreed to spend five per cent of their economic output on defence and security, after calls by US President Donald Trump.
The boost has led to more pressure on Washington's Indo-Pacific allies to do the same, with White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt saying countries such as Australia should follow suit.
"If our allies in Europe and our NATO allies can do that, I think our allies and our friends in the Asia-Pacific region can do it as well," she said.
Analyst Andrew Carr said defence spending was a "hedge against a potential future" that could result in money being wasted or a nation harmed without the extra resources during wartime.
"Given where we are now in the kind of worsening strategic environment, including in our region, there's probably a good reason for increasing spending faster even than it was proposed in 2023," the ANU Strategic and Defence Studies Centre senior lecturer said.
The defence strategic review, released two years ago, found more funding will be required and must match the strategic circumstances Australia faces.
Dr Carr said Australia had made a significant investment over the past 14 years in defence that amounted to a "near doubling" of spending in real terms.
NATO nations will be expected to spend 3.5 per cent of their gross domestic product on core defence and a further 1.5 per cent on broader security.
This includes adapting infrastructure for military use and protecting energy sources.
Australia's defence spending is set to rise from two per cent of GDP now to 2.3 per cent by 2033/34.
Appearing frustrated by repeated questions on whether Australia should increase its defence budget, the prime minster said the plan - which was taken to the federal election - will be followed through.
"What we're doing is making sure that Australia has the capability that we need. That's what we're investing in," he told reporters in Sydney on Friday.
"We've increased it by $57 billion over the medium term and by more than $10 billion in the short term as well."
Spain objected to the spending pledge and flagged it did not intend to meet the five per cent target.
Mr Trump warned the European nation its exports could be slapped with fresh tariffs by the US if it did no commit to the alliance's commitment on defence spending.
Asked if he was concerned Australia could face a similar threat from the US president, Mr Albanese played down the prospect.
"I'm not going to comment on things between Spain and the United States. What my job is is to look after Australia's national interest, that includes our defence and security interests," he said.
Foreign Minister Penny Wong is preparing to fly to the US for talks with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
The meeting with Mr Rubio will be part of discussions between the foreign ministers of Quad alliance nations, which includes Japan and India.
Quad foreign ministers previously met in January, with the alliance focusing on issues in the Indo-Pacific.
Opposition defence spokesman Angus Taylor said boosting spending levels was not about doing what the US wanted.
"This is not about being bullied," he said.
"This is about being doing the right thing for our great country, and that's what we want to see."
Anthony Albanese is digging his heels in on lifting defence spending as the US heaps more pressure on its allies to increase their share.
NATO members agreed to spend five per cent of their economic output on defence and security, after calls by US President Donald Trump.
The boost has led to more pressure on Washington's Indo-Pacific allies to do the same, with White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt saying countries such as Australia should follow suit.
"If our allies in Europe and our NATO allies can do that, I think our allies and our friends in the Asia-Pacific region can do it as well," she said.
Analyst Andrew Carr said defence spending was a "hedge against a potential future" that could result in money being wasted or a nation harmed without the extra resources during wartime.
"Given where we are now in the kind of worsening strategic environment, including in our region, there's probably a good reason for increasing spending faster even than it was proposed in 2023," the ANU Strategic and Defence Studies Centre senior lecturer said.
The defence strategic review, released two years ago, found more funding will be required and must match the strategic circumstances Australia faces.
Dr Carr said Australia had made a significant investment over the past 14 years in defence that amounted to a "near doubling" of spending in real terms.
NATO nations will be expected to spend 3.5 per cent of their gross domestic product on core defence and a further 1.5 per cent on broader security.
This includes adapting infrastructure for military use and protecting energy sources.
Australia's defence spending is set to rise from two per cent of GDP now to 2.3 per cent by 2033/34.
Appearing frustrated by repeated questions on whether Australia should increase its defence budget, the prime minster said the plan - which was taken to the federal election - will be followed through.
"What we're doing is making sure that Australia has the capability that we need. That's what we're investing in," he told reporters in Sydney on Friday.
"We've increased it by $57 billion over the medium term and by more than $10 billion in the short term as well."
Spain objected to the spending pledge and flagged it did not intend to meet the five per cent target.
Mr Trump warned the European nation its exports could be slapped with fresh tariffs by the US if it did no commit to the alliance's commitment on defence spending.
Asked if he was concerned Australia could face a similar threat from the US president, Mr Albanese played down the prospect.
"I'm not going to comment on things between Spain and the United States. What my job is is to look after Australia's national interest, that includes our defence and security interests," he said.
Foreign Minister Penny Wong is preparing to fly to the US for talks with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
The meeting with Mr Rubio will be part of discussions between the foreign ministers of Quad alliance nations, which includes Japan and India.
Quad foreign ministers previously met in January, with the alliance focusing on issues in the Indo-Pacific.
Opposition defence spokesman Angus Taylor said boosting spending levels was not about doing what the US wanted.
"This is not about being bullied," he said.
"This is about being doing the right thing for our great country, and that's what we want to see."
Anthony Albanese is digging his heels in on lifting defence spending as the US heaps more pressure on its allies to increase their share.
NATO members agreed to spend five per cent of their economic output on defence and security, after calls by US President Donald Trump.
The boost has led to more pressure on Washington's Indo-Pacific allies to do the same, with White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt saying countries such as Australia should follow suit.
"If our allies in Europe and our NATO allies can do that, I think our allies and our friends in the Asia-Pacific region can do it as well," she said.
Analyst Andrew Carr said defence spending was a "hedge against a potential future" that could result in money being wasted or a nation harmed without the extra resources during wartime.
"Given where we are now in the kind of worsening strategic environment, including in our region, there's probably a good reason for increasing spending faster even than it was proposed in 2023," the ANU Strategic and Defence Studies Centre senior lecturer said.
The defence strategic review, released two years ago, found more funding will be required and must match the strategic circumstances Australia faces.
Dr Carr said Australia had made a significant investment over the past 14 years in defence that amounted to a "near doubling" of spending in real terms.
NATO nations will be expected to spend 3.5 per cent of their gross domestic product on core defence and a further 1.5 per cent on broader security.
This includes adapting infrastructure for military use and protecting energy sources.
Australia's defence spending is set to rise from two per cent of GDP now to 2.3 per cent by 2033/34.
Appearing frustrated by repeated questions on whether Australia should increase its defence budget, the prime minster said the plan - which was taken to the federal election - will be followed through.
"What we're doing is making sure that Australia has the capability that we need. That's what we're investing in," he told reporters in Sydney on Friday.
"We've increased it by $57 billion over the medium term and by more than $10 billion in the short term as well."
Spain objected to the spending pledge and flagged it did not intend to meet the five per cent target.
Mr Trump warned the European nation its exports could be slapped with fresh tariffs by the US if it did no commit to the alliance's commitment on defence spending.
Asked if he was concerned Australia could face a similar threat from the US president, Mr Albanese played down the prospect.
"I'm not going to comment on things between Spain and the United States. What my job is is to look after Australia's national interest, that includes our defence and security interests," he said.
Foreign Minister Penny Wong is preparing to fly to the US for talks with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
The meeting with Mr Rubio will be part of discussions between the foreign ministers of Quad alliance nations, which includes Japan and India.
Quad foreign ministers previously met in January, with the alliance focusing on issues in the Indo-Pacific.
Opposition defence spokesman Angus Taylor said boosting spending levels was not about doing what the US wanted.
"This is not about being bullied," he said.
"This is about being doing the right thing for our great country, and that's what we want to see."
Anthony Albanese is digging his heels in on lifting defence spending as the US heaps more pressure on its allies to increase their share.
NATO members agreed to spend five per cent of their economic output on defence and security, after calls by US President Donald Trump.
The boost has led to more pressure on Washington's Indo-Pacific allies to do the same, with White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt saying countries such as Australia should follow suit.
"If our allies in Europe and our NATO allies can do that, I think our allies and our friends in the Asia-Pacific region can do it as well," she said.
Analyst Andrew Carr said defence spending was a "hedge against a potential future" that could result in money being wasted or a nation harmed without the extra resources during wartime.
"Given where we are now in the kind of worsening strategic environment, including in our region, there's probably a good reason for increasing spending faster even than it was proposed in 2023," the ANU Strategic and Defence Studies Centre senior lecturer said.
The defence strategic review, released two years ago, found more funding will be required and must match the strategic circumstances Australia faces.
Dr Carr said Australia had made a significant investment over the past 14 years in defence that amounted to a "near doubling" of spending in real terms.
NATO nations will be expected to spend 3.5 per cent of their gross domestic product on core defence and a further 1.5 per cent on broader security.
This includes adapting infrastructure for military use and protecting energy sources.
Australia's defence spending is set to rise from two per cent of GDP now to 2.3 per cent by 2033/34.
Appearing frustrated by repeated questions on whether Australia should increase its defence budget, the prime minster said the plan - which was taken to the federal election - will be followed through.
"What we're doing is making sure that Australia has the capability that we need. That's what we're investing in," he told reporters in Sydney on Friday.
"We've increased it by $57 billion over the medium term and by more than $10 billion in the short term as well."
Spain objected to the spending pledge and flagged it did not intend to meet the five per cent target.
Mr Trump warned the European nation its exports could be slapped with fresh tariffs by the US if it did no commit to the alliance's commitment on defence spending.
Asked if he was concerned Australia could face a similar threat from the US president, Mr Albanese played down the prospect.
"I'm not going to comment on things between Spain and the United States. What my job is is to look after Australia's national interest, that includes our defence and security interests," he said.
Foreign Minister Penny Wong is preparing to fly to the US for talks with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
The meeting with Mr Rubio will be part of discussions between the foreign ministers of Quad alliance nations, which includes Japan and India.
Quad foreign ministers previously met in January, with the alliance focusing on issues in the Indo-Pacific.
Opposition defence spokesman Angus Taylor said boosting spending levels was not about doing what the US wanted.
"This is not about being bullied," he said.
"This is about being doing the right thing for our great country, and that's what we want to see."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
13 minutes ago
- The Age
Trump handed ‘giant win' as Supreme Court curbs judges' power to block his orders
Washington: The United States Supreme Court has delivered a major victory for President Donald Trump, ruling that lower courts cannot grant universal injunctions to block government policy, and allowing his administration to move forward with a raft of controversial policies temporarily held up by litigation. In a 6-3 decision split along ideological lines, the nation's highest court found that 'universal injunctions likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts', and partially stayed injunctions blocking Trump's executive order to end automatic citizenship for anyone born in the US. The ruling, which came on the court's final day to issue opinions before the summer break, is highly significant because large swaths of Trump's agenda have been temporarily blocked while legal challenges are brought by Democratic states, activist groups and affected individuals. Trump, who has raged at the judges issuing such injunctions, accusing them of overstepping their authority and usurping his power, scheduled an impromptu press conference on Friday (early Saturday AEST) to celebrate the Supreme Court ruling. 'This was a big decision - amazing decision one that we're very happy about,' Trump said. 'The Supreme Court has delivered a monumental victory for the constitution, the separation of powers and the rule of law ... there are people elated all over the country.' Trump said a handful of 'radical left judges' could no longer overrule the rightful powers of the president and 'dictate the law for the entire nation', which he called a grave threat to democracy. He said his administration had been hit with more nationwide injunctions than were issued in the 20th century. He also indicated his government would now move forward with ending birthright citizenship, 'which now comes to the fore', along with several other controversial policies that had been temporarily blocked by the courts, such as suspending refugee resettlement and stopping federal funding for transgender surgeries. 'It's a giant [ruling],' Trump said. In a separate social media post, he heralded the 'giant win'.
Sydney Morning Herald
16 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Trump handed ‘giant win' as Supreme Court curbs judges' power to block his orders
Washington: The United States Supreme Court has delivered a major victory for President Donald Trump, ruling that lower courts cannot grant universal injunctions to block government policy, and allowing his administration to move forward with a raft of controversial policies temporarily held up by litigation. In a 6-3 decision split along ideological lines, the nation's highest court found that 'universal injunctions likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts', and partially stayed injunctions blocking Trump's executive order to end automatic citizenship for anyone born in the US. The ruling, which came on the court's final day to issue opinions before the summer break, is highly significant because large swaths of Trump's agenda have been temporarily blocked while legal challenges are brought by Democratic states, activist groups and affected individuals. Trump, who has raged at the judges issuing such injunctions, accusing them of overstepping their authority and usurping his power, scheduled an impromptu press conference on Friday (early Saturday AEST) to celebrate the Supreme Court ruling. 'This was a big decision - amazing decision one that we're very happy about,' Trump said. 'The Supreme Court has delivered a monumental victory for the constitution, the separation of powers and the rule of law ... there are people elated all over the country.' Trump said a handful of 'radical left judges' could no longer overrule the rightful powers of the president and 'dictate the law for the entire nation', which he called a grave threat to democracy. He said his administration had been hit with more nationwide injunctions than were issued in the 20th century. He also indicated his government would now move forward with ending birthright citizenship, 'which now comes to the fore', along with several other controversial policies that had been temporarily blocked by the courts, such as suspending refugee resettlement and stopping federal funding for transgender surgeries. 'It's a giant [ruling],' Trump said. In a separate social media post, he heralded the 'giant win'.
News.com.au
18 minutes ago
- News.com.au
US Supreme Court curtails power of individual judges to block Trump
A divided US Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump a major victory on Friday by curbing the power of lone federal judges to block executive actions. In a 6-3 ruling stemming from Trump's bid to end birthright citizenship, the court said nationwide injunctions issued by district court judges "likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has granted to federal courts." The top court did not rule on the constitutionality of Trump's executive order seeking to end automatic citizenship for children born on American soil. But the broader decision on the scope of judicial rulings removes a big roadblock to Trump's often highly controversial policy agenda and has far-reaching ramifications for the ability of the judiciary to rein in Trump or future American presidents. Trump celebrated by telling reporters he had "a whole list" of policies he could now proceed on without opposition in the courts. Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship is just one of a number of his moves that have been blocked by judges around the country -- both Democratic and Republican appointees – since he took office in January. Courts have, for example, blocked or slowed down his hardline immigration crackdown, firing of federal employees, efforts to end diversity programs and punitive actions against law firms and universities. Past presidents have also complained about national injunctions shackling their agenda, but such orders have sharply risen under Trump, who saw more in his first two months than Democrat Joe Biden did during his first three years in office. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee who authored the majority opinion joined by the other five conservative justices, said "the universal injunction was conspicuously nonexistent for most of our Nation's history." "Federal courts do not exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch," Barrett wrote. "When a court concludes that the Executive Branch has acted unlawfully, the answer is not for the court to exceed its power, too," she said. The three liberal justices dissented with Justice Sonia Sotomayor saying "no right is safe in the new legal regime the Court creates." "The Court's decision is nothing less than an open invitation for the Government to bypass the Constitution," Sotomayor said. "The Executive Branch can now enforce policies that flout settled law and violate countless individuals' constitutional rights, and the federal courts will be hamstrung to stop its actions fully," she said. - 'GIANT WIN' - Trump, in a post on Truth Social, welcomed the ruling as a "GIANT WIN." The case was ostensibly about Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship, which was deemed unconstitutional by courts in Maryland, Massachusetts and Washington state. But it actually focused on whether a single federal district court judge has the right to issue a nationwide block to a presidential decree with a universal injunction. The issue has become a rallying cry for Trump and his Republican allies, who accuse the judiciary of impeding his agenda against the will of voters. Steven Schwinn, a law professor at the University of Illinois Chicago, said the court's ruling "sharply undermines the power of federal courts to rein-in lawless actions by the government." "The ruling will likely create a patchwork of birthright citizenship rights," Schwinn told AFP, where it is recognized in some locations for people who have successfully sued and not recognized for people who have not sued. "This patchwork approach to individual rights is inconsistent with our history and tradition of federal rights in the United States and is inconsistent with the rule of law," he said. The Trump administration had asked the Supreme Court to restrict the application of a district court's injunction solely to the parties who brought the case and the district where the judge presides. Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship decrees that children born to parents in the United States illegally or on temporary visas would not automatically become citizens. The three lower courts ruled that to be a violation of the 14th Amendment, which states: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States."
