Australian leader visits Indonesia seeking deeper economic and defense ties
Albanese arrived in the capital, Jakarta, on Wednesday evening, a day after his new government was sworn in, to promote the importance of building stronger ties with Southeast Asia's largest economy.
'That is … a signal to our region of the importance that we place on this region. We will be in the fastest growing region of the world in human history,' Albanese said in an interview last week with the Australian Broadcasting Corp.
He described Subianto as a 'good friend of mine" and hailed the two countries' close relations.
Albanese's center-left Labor Party won a second three-year term in an emphatic election victory May 3.
He was welcomed by Subianto in a ceremony at Merdeka Palace in Jakarta where he was escorted by dozens of motorized troops and cavalry while about 3,200 schoolchildren waved the flags of both countries along the streets, according to Indonesia's presidential office.
The two leaders' talks are expected to 'produce several concrete agreements that could bring direct benefits to the people of both countries," the office said.
Albanese's two-day visit is an indication of the countries' strategic closeness. Their discussions will also include food security, energy, trade and other bilateral priorities, Indonesia's Foreign Affairs Ministry said in a statement.
Newly elected Australian prime ministers typically make their first bilateral visit to Asia, usually Indonesia.
In his first visit to Indonesia after his inauguration in 2022, Albanese also visited Makassar, the capital of South Sulawesi province with close ties to Indigenous Australians.
Albanese's second visit to Jakarta comes amid global economic upheaval sparked by U.S. President Donald Trump's 'reciprocal tariff' trade policy.
Australia was hit during its election campaign with a global-minimum 10% tariff on exports to the U.S. despite trading with its bilateral free trade partner at a deficit for decades, while Indonesia is subject to 32%. The two countries have for the past month negotiated with Washington for a better trade deal.
Media reports said last month that Russia told Jakarta it wants to base long-range warplanes in Papua, the most eastern Indonesian province, a plan that was raised as a security issue during the Australian election campaign. Indonesia has told Australia that no such Russian base would be allowed.
Given their geographical proximity, Indonesia and Australia have traditionally maintained close ties with each other, including in matters of security and defense, despite the fact that each country has chosen to respond differently to the rivalry between the U.S. and China in the region.
The two neighbors last year signed a historic Defense Cooperation Agreement that will allow more complex joint activities and exercises. Canberra hailed the agreement as the 'deepest and most significant' defense deal in the two countries' bilateral ties.
Albanese will head on to Rome on Friday morning to attend the inauguration of Pope Leo XIV on Sunday.
___
Associated Press writer Rod McGuirk in Melbourne contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
7 minutes ago
- The Independent
Thousands displaced as gunboats deployed in Thailand Cambodia border conflict
The border conflict between Thailand and Cambodia has entered its third day, with the death toll rising to 33 fatalities. Over 81,000 civilians have been displaced, with more than 58,000 Thais and 23,000 Cambodians fleeing to temporary shelters. The UN Security Council held an emergency meeting, urging both nations to de-escalate, show restraint, and resolve the dispute peacefully, also calling on ASEAN to mediate. Thailand accused Cambodia of potential war crimes due to civilian deaths and hospital damage, while Cambodia denied attacking Thailand and accused Thai forces of targeting civilian areas. The latest flare-up in the long-running dispute began after a landmine explosion wounded Thai soldiers, leading to intense clashes involving heavy artillery.
Daily Mail
38 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Major update on Aussie state's bid to BAN Welcome to Country ceremonies and Aboriginal flags
Members of the Liberals in Western Australia have voted to support the scaling back of Welcome to Country ceremonies. Delegates at the state council, the WA branch of the party, backed the motion for fewer ceremonies during a closed-door meeting in Canning, southeastern Perth, on Saturday. It was introduced alongside a proposal to remove the Indigenous and Torres Strait Islander flags from behind the Prime Minister at press conferences. Both motions reportedly passed without the need for a formal vote, with one attendee describing the support as 'overwhelming'. Attendees also reignited internal divisions between state and federal Coalition members by voting to abandon the commitment to reaching net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. Canning federal MP Andrew Hastie, who represents one of only four Liberal-held seats in WA, said the vote was intended to send a 'clear signal' to Australians. 'We stand for something, we are willing to fight for our values and convictions,' he told The Australian, doubling down on the stance on carbon emissions. 'Energy underlies everything in the economy, energy security is national security.' 'If we're not getting cheap, reliable, affordable power then we're not going to be competitive as a nation,' he said. The policy shift has exposed a widening rift between state and federal branches of the party, with ongoing internal debate in the opposition over whether net-zero targets should be dumped. One senior Liberal source criticised the WA division's stance as out of touch with the rest of the country on the issue. 'It is evident that WA Liberals refuse to listen to modern Australia,' they told Daily Mail Australia on Saturday. But Mr Hastie has rejected claims, saying: 'Well I got the biggest swing in WA, 5.5 per cent, pretty sure I got a strong endorsement.' He also argued that attacking Labor's climate credentials could be a winning strategy. 'We export a lot of our coal and gas to India and China, both their emissions are growing... and yet we deny coal and gas to the Australian people,' he said. Nationals Party Senator Matt Canavan took to social media to welcome the move by sharing an applause emoji. The WA Liberals were nearly wiped out during the state election in 2021, reduced to just two seats in the lower house. They improved their position slightly in 2024, winning seven seats, but Labor continues to dominate with 46. The motions by WA Liberals follow a renewed national debate on Welcome to Country ceremonies, reignited by One Nation leader Pauline Hanson. On the first sitting day of Parliament earlier this week, Hanson and her colleagues turned their backs during the ceremony, which drew widespread attention. Defending the action, Senator Hanson claimed the practice had lost its meaning and become 'divisive' and 'increasingly forced.' 'We took this stand because we're listening to Australians, hardworking, decent people who are sick of being lectured to in their own country,' she said. A Welcome to Country is a traditional Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander ceremony in which the local custodians formally welcome visitors to their ancestral lands. While widely seen as a gesture of respect, its growing presence in official settings has become a flashpoint in Australia's culture wars.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Nuclear submarines are to conventional ones as machine-guns are to muskets
So, we and the Australians have reaffirmed our commitment to the Aukus pact, the central element of which is that Australia will get a force of nuclear powered but conventionally armed submarines. Down the road, the plan is that there will be a jointly developed Australian-British submarine class, which will follow on from the current British Astute class boats. But Britain must first – with very great urgency – finish building the Astutes and then get cracking on our replacement nuclear deterrent submarines. Our current Trident subs are now so old, and their support infrastructure so messed up, that getting the next one ready to take over from the one setting out on patrol can take six months – putting an intolerable burden on our submariners. We don't have the industrial base or the funding to build two classes of submarine at once, so the Brit-Aussie subs will have to wait, probably for quite a long time. Thus, under the Aukus plan, the first few boats for Australia will be US made Virginia class subs. Unfortunately that part of the plan was always a little problematic, as the US industrial base is also creaking. The US Navy has the money to buy two new attack submarines a year, which assuming a 30-year lifespan would sustain a fleet of 60. But US yards have only managed to produce an average of 1.2 Virginia s per year in recent times: the American attack-boat fleet is shrinking, and is now down to 53. While this seems like a huge number to a former Royal Navy man like me, and I would suggest that the USN can easily spare a few hulls for the land Down Under, to Americans the prospect of having a measly 50 attack boats in service – or even fewer – is a horrifying one. Now President Trump has launched a review of the Aukus deal, which could see the US pull out. That might torpedo the whole plan, as Australia cannot afford to wait decades to get some new submarines. Before the Aukus plan was announced, it had been thought that the Aussies might buy conventionally-powered boats from France, and the Aukus plan has never lacked for opponents in the US, the UK, Australia – and France, of course. But there are a few things that enemies of Aukus might consider. The first is the absolutely enormous difference between conventionally-powered and nuclear-powered submarines. They are both called 'submarines' but that is hugely misleading. It's a bit like saying that a musket and a machine-gun are both firearms. The standard form of conventional sub has diesel-electric propulsion. It's essentially a somewhat modernised version of the German U-boats of World War Two (and One). Diesel engines need air to run, so when the boat is submerged it has to use electric motors fed by a bank of batteries. It cannot move fast like this except very briefly, nor can it go very far even at a crawl. It has to put up a 'snort' air-intake mast at regular intervals for long periods of time to recharge its batteries if it is to go a long way, and if it wants to go that long way at any reasonable speed it has to surface completely. Doing either means it is easily found using radar. A conventional submarine is therefore unlikely to last long under the footprint of hostile radar-equipped aircraft – as indeed the U-boats did not, back in the day. By contrast a nuclear boat can stay fully down for months on end, going at any speed it chooses the entire time. Only a complex system of specialist assets – seabed sensors, enemy nuclear subs, specially equipped anti-submarine warships and aircraft, all working together – has any chance of locating and tracking it. Its heavyweight torpedoes can sink any ship: its cruise missiles can strike targets ashore from a thousand miles away. It's a game-changing weapon, and a nation with nuclear subs is a hugely more dangerous opponent than one without. It's true, there are various so-called 'air independent' enhancements which can be added to conventional boats. These involve using tanks of oxygen to run various different kinds of auxiliary propulsion while submerged. The mainstream method is hydrogen fuel cells, but some nations prefer Stirling-cycle engines as these can be run on the boat's ordinary diesel fuel while the oxygen lasts. France, uniquely, has developed the 'Module d'Energie Sous-Marine Autonome' (MESMA) system, which is an ethanol-powered steam turbine. It's considerably more powerful than the other air-independent options, but it apparently lacks endurance and makes a lot of noise. The only nation which actually uses MESMA is Pakistan: France doesn't, of course, as it has proper nuclear boats. All the air-independent options are always installed alongside conventional diesels, which gives a good handy hint as to just how useful they are. None of them come anywhere close to the capability of a nuclear boat, and they require recharging with oxygen and usually one or another kind of exotic fuel as well: they can't do this at sea, or even in most harbours or naval bases. A nuclear boat, by contrast, runs for many years without refuelling and makes its own air and water: all it needs is supplies of food for the crew every few months. If Australia and its friends are going to tip the Pacific balance of power in their favour, it's nuclear submarines that are needed, not any kind of conventional ones. That means Aukus. The second factor in favour of Aukus is basing. When it comes to facing down China a submarine based at Perth in Western Australia has a lot more effect than one based on the US West Coast, and enormously more than one based in the Atlantic. The first element of the Aukus plan – before even the transfer of Virginia s to Australia – is the basing of a British Astute and some USN boats at Perth. This is planned for this decade, and will appreciably change the parameters of wargames modelling a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Elbridge Colby, the man in charge of Trump's Aukus review, is a known China hawk. If he's serious about that he'll realise that the Perth base is a good thing on its own. Getting that base is well worth leasing a few Virginia s to the Aussies, especially as it brings a British Astute into the Pacific in the near future, and a new friendly fleet of UK-Australian boats further off. From the American point of view, Aukus is a rare case of some Western allies actually pulling their weight on defence – something President Trump and Secretary of Defence Hegseth are vocally in favour of. As Tom Sharpe of this parish has put it: ' The free world needs a fleet of nuclear submarines based in Australia '. Aukus must succeed.
