'Can't sit around at Royal Lodge forever': Prince Andrew likely to dust off his passport and hit the skies after FBI drops Epstein probe
The 64-year-old Duke of York, once dubbed "Air Miles Andy" for his lavish overseas travel while serving as a working royal, has kept a low profile at Royal Lodge in Windsor for the past six years, largely avoiding international trips for fear of legal trouble abroad.
But that may be about to change.
According to the memo, obtained by Axios, the FBI and the US Justice Department under President Donald Trump found no evidence to suggest Epstein had blackmailed powerful figures or kept a so-called "client list".
The memo states no further charges will be laid in connection with the Epstein case, apart from those already brought against the disgraced financier's former associate Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year sentence for child sex trafficking and related offences.
As part of its findings, the Department of Justice also released hours of CCTV footage from Epstein's 2019 death in a Manhattan jail cell, concluding the disgraced financier died by suicide, despite the conspiracy theories that have swirled in the years since.
For Prince Andrew, the memo brings a potential reprieve, as a close friend revealed on Tuesday that he had been "very nervous" about travelling abroad due to fears of arrest or civil lawsuits.
"He has been abroad once since the scandal erupted," the source told The Sun, referencing a 2022 private jet trip to Bahrain.
"He has always been very nervous about going abroad and felt he'd always be looking over his shoulder as he could be subject to civil action or at worst, being arrested.
"Hopefully with this out of the way it means he can at least leave the country."
They added: "What's he supposed to do with the rest of his life? He hasn't been convicted of any crime and can't sit around doing nothing at Royal Lodge forever."
The Duke of York's fall from grace began more than a decade ago with his questionable ties to Epstein, but intensified in 2019 after he was accused by the late Virginia Giuffre of sexual misconduct when she was just 17.
Giuffre, who claimed Epstein trafficked her to Andrew on three occasions, filed a civil suit against him in 2021.
Andrew has always denied the allegations but reached a reported multi-million-dollar settlement with the American-Australian in 2022.
Following the scandal, the late Queen Elizabeth II stripped her second-eldest son of his HRH style and military titles.
Since then, the father of two has been largely sidelined from royal life and has been absent from high-profile events, most recently the Royal Box at Wimbledon and the Royal Procession at Royal Ascot.
Tensions are also understood to be simmering between Andrew and King Charles III, over the Duke's refusal to vacate Royal Lodge, his long-time residence shared with ex-wife Sarah, Duchess of York, which has reportedly fallen into disrepair.
Once celebrated for his decorated naval career, including service in the Falklands War, Andrew's public image later took a hit as criticism mounted over his extravagant travel habits and expenses as a royal.
He was dubbed "Air Miles Andy" after reportedly racking up enormous costs while serving as a UK trade envoy, including a £100,000 (about AUD$200,000) private jet trip to the US in 2008 and a £30,000 (AUD$60,000) taxpayer-funded visit to China and the Far East that same year.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
37 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
After PNG, Australia's soft power game with China extends to Solomons
Somewhere in a remote mountain village, or perhaps on the dusty streets of Honiara, a youngster is kicking a football and dreaming big – and could soon be caught up in the Pacific's great geopolitical battle of our time. Australia's regional rivalry with China was a key driver of the federal government's $600 million decade-long commitment to Papua New Guinea's NRL team. That same contest is at play in neighbouring Solomon Islands, an impoverished nation where the World Game reigns supreme, and where a new fully professional soccer club is taking shape. Solomon Kings FC, a joint venture between the Solomon Islands Football Federation and Brisbane club Wynnum Wolves, is a near-certainty to be an inaugural member of the FIFA-backed Oceania Professional League. The club's moniker is a nod to King Solomon, the biblical figure after whom the nation was named. 'Informally, we have been given the guarantee that we will be in,' SIFF president Donald Marahare told this masthead. 'It's just the formalities – we have to make sure that we take all the boxes and there should be certainty in terms of getting us participating Pro League.' Solomon Islands Prime Minister Jeremiah Manele has thrown his weight behind the club, and discussions have been held with the Australian High Commission in Honiara about Australian government support. While an interview request with Australian High Commissioner Rod Hilton was denied, a Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade spokeswoman said the Commonwealth actively engaged with Pacific nations through sport. 'The Australian government's partnership with Football Australia provides increased opportunities for Pacific men's and women's national teams to train and compete with Australian teams, in Australia and across our region,' she said. 'Australia is Solomon Islands' largest development partner.' But on the ground in Solomon Islands, China's influence still looms large. The new national stadium, which the Solomon Kings will call home, was funded by the Chinese government to host the 2023 Pacific Games. In response to China's growing influence, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese signed a $190 million security deal with Solomon Islands last year. That came two years after a similar deal was reached between China and Solomon Islands, which caused alarm in Australian defence circles. 'In terms of their influence, they [China] have entered or intruded into every aspect here in the Solomons,' Marahare said. 'At one stage, probably two years ago, they were prepared to provide support the football federation, in terms of equipment and staff. 'They insisted on us signing a paper to promote the One China policy, to actually sign a public document, which we had reservations to do.' But that might not always be the case. 'The Solomon Kings FC will definitely need financial, budgetary support and we will not hesitate to call on or to actually approach the Chinese government if there's a need,' Marahare said. 'Certainly this will not go down well with the Australian government, but this is something that we will need to talk about or discuss in the near future.' One of the club's driving forces, Wolves chairman and former North Queensland Cowboys chief executive Rabieh Krayem, said the Kings' potential for Australian sports-led, soft-power diplomacy could rival the NRL team in PNG. Loading 'From the Australian government perspective, it's a no-brainer, to be quite honest,' he said. 'I mean, you saw the prime minister in China talking to Kevin Muscat – well, I've got to tell you, football in the Solomon Islands will do more for diplomacy than anything else. 'In PNG, rugby league's the No.1 sport, but they also have football. In the Solomons, it's football No.1, 2 and 3 – the best way I can describe it is it's like being in Brazil.' Though based in Honiara, Solomon Kings will have a secondary training base at the Wolves' Carmichael Park in bayside Brisbane. Initially, OPL rounds will be held in one location – similar to the NRL's Magic Round – with the hope of eventually evolving to a home-and-away competition. And with the Queensland government teasing an upgrade to Perry Park, Krayem said the Bowen Hills venue could serve as the Kings' second home ground. 'You're bringing eight teams from eight different locations into Brisbane to play here for 10 days,' he said. 'From an economic perspective, it's a massive economic boost for Queensland.' Krayem's journey with Solomon Kings started about two years ago, when he met with Oceania Football Confederation president Lambert Maltock. Having failed to get the Brisbane United joint venture for the second-tier Australian Championship over the line, Krayem considered a solo Wolves entry to the new OPL, which would allow a maximum of one Australian side to join. 'At that point of time, airfares and accommodation were to be funded by FIFA, and to the most consistent team over a four-year period qualifies for the [FIFA Club World Cup],' he said. Oceania representative Auckland City took home more than $AU7 million for competing at this year's tournament. 'That's huge. I said, why wouldn't we do that?' Krayem said. But when it became clear Australian clubs would have to fund their own airfares and be denied entry to the lucrative Club World Cup, due to Australia's membership of the Asian Football Confederation, Krayem took a different approach and teamed up with the SIFF. He said it was an obvious partnership for a club with a connection to the Solomon Islands that started a quarter-century ago, when the club took a team over to play exhibition matches. Several Solomon Islander internationals have played in Wynnum's black and white kit – colours it shares with German powerhouse Borussia Dortmund, with which it has established formal links, and the new Solomon Kings FC. Loading Krayem said 65 per cent of Solomon Islanders in Australia lived in south-east Queensland, which had the only direct route by air to their homeland. 'There's already that sort of connection,' he added. 'A lot of Australian businesses operate out of Brisbane straight into Honiara and I think they want to grow their tourism.' The Kings have lined up a chief executive with English Premier League experience, and have already agreed terms with a high-profile head coach. But as important as success on the field would be for the club financially, it was the transformational effect on the community that excited the Kings' backers. 'As soon as it's dark, kids get out when no one's on the road and they're kicking a ball. I think the impact that we could have, what Australia could do for them, through football is huge,' Krayem said. The International Monetary Fund estimates the Solomon Islands' per capita GDP is just $US2380 (Australia's, by comparison, is $US65,550). For this Pacific island nation, the potential benefits of this new venture could be invaluable. 'It is an opportunity for the kids and the youth to have something to look forward to,' Marahare said. 'One thing for certain is that you go anywhere in the villages, all the villages in the provinces, it's very difficult to see clinics and hospitals, but you will be able to see soccer pitches, soccer fields everywhere. 'And this is a testament of how people, both in the urban and in the rural areas, love football.' And with Brisbane set to host the 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games, engagement with Pacific nations through sport would only get more important. Brisbane 2032 president Andrew Liveris said while he was unaware of the Solomon Kings until informed by this masthead, the diplomatic potential of sport to solidify links with the Pacific was central to Games planning. 'They really feel that these are their Games as well, and there is definitely a geopolitical positive to that,' he said. 'In other words, Oceania – a vast amount of territory, small population, small islands, strategically important to Australia – is not lost on us, nor the Prime Minister, nor DFAT.'
The Age
37 minutes ago
- The Age
After PNG, Australia's soft power game with China extends to Solomons
Somewhere in a remote mountain village, or perhaps on the dusty streets of Honiara, a youngster is kicking a football and dreaming big – and could soon be caught up in the Pacific's great geopolitical battle of our time. Australia's regional rivalry with China was a key driver of the federal government's $600 million decade-long commitment to Papua New Guinea's NRL team. That same contest is at play in neighbouring Solomon Islands, an impoverished nation where the World Game reigns supreme, and where a new fully professional soccer club is taking shape. Solomon Kings FC, a joint venture between the Solomon Islands Football Federation and Brisbane club Wynnum Wolves, is a near-certainty to be an inaugural member of the FIFA-backed Oceania Professional League. The club's moniker is a nod to King Solomon, the biblical figure after whom the nation was named. 'Informally, we have been given the guarantee that we will be in,' SIFF president Donald Marahare told this masthead. 'It's just the formalities – we have to make sure that we take all the boxes and there should be certainty in terms of getting us participating Pro League.' Solomon Islands Prime Minister Jeremiah Manele has thrown his weight behind the club, and discussions have been held with the Australian High Commission in Honiara about Australian government support. While an interview request with Australian High Commissioner Rod Hilton was denied, a Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade spokeswoman said the Commonwealth actively engaged with Pacific nations through sport. 'The Australian government's partnership with Football Australia provides increased opportunities for Pacific men's and women's national teams to train and compete with Australian teams, in Australia and across our region,' she said. 'Australia is Solomon Islands' largest development partner.' But on the ground in Solomon Islands, China's influence still looms large. The new national stadium, which the Solomon Kings will call home, was funded by the Chinese government to host the 2023 Pacific Games. In response to China's growing influence, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese signed a $190 million security deal with Solomon Islands last year. That came two years after a similar deal was reached between China and Solomon Islands, which caused alarm in Australian defence circles. 'In terms of their influence, they [China] have entered or intruded into every aspect here in the Solomons,' Marahare said. 'At one stage, probably two years ago, they were prepared to provide support the football federation, in terms of equipment and staff. 'They insisted on us signing a paper to promote the One China policy, to actually sign a public document, which we had reservations to do.' But that might not always be the case. 'The Solomon Kings FC will definitely need financial, budgetary support and we will not hesitate to call on or to actually approach the Chinese government if there's a need,' Marahare said. 'Certainly this will not go down well with the Australian government, but this is something that we will need to talk about or discuss in the near future.' One of the club's driving forces, Wolves chairman and former North Queensland Cowboys chief executive Rabieh Krayem, said the Kings' potential for Australian sports-led, soft-power diplomacy could rival the NRL team in PNG. Loading 'From the Australian government perspective, it's a no-brainer, to be quite honest,' he said. 'I mean, you saw the prime minister in China talking to Kevin Muscat – well, I've got to tell you, football in the Solomon Islands will do more for diplomacy than anything else. 'In PNG, rugby league's the No.1 sport, but they also have football. In the Solomons, it's football No.1, 2 and 3 – the best way I can describe it is it's like being in Brazil.' Though based in Honiara, Solomon Kings will have a secondary training base at the Wolves' Carmichael Park in bayside Brisbane. Initially, OPL rounds will be held in one location – similar to the NRL's Magic Round – with the hope of eventually evolving to a home-and-away competition. And with the Queensland government teasing an upgrade to Perry Park, Krayem said the Bowen Hills venue could serve as the Kings' second home ground. 'You're bringing eight teams from eight different locations into Brisbane to play here for 10 days,' he said. 'From an economic perspective, it's a massive economic boost for Queensland.' Krayem's journey with Solomon Kings started about two years ago, when he met with Oceania Football Confederation president Lambert Maltock. Having failed to get the Brisbane United joint venture for the second-tier Australian Championship over the line, Krayem considered a solo Wolves entry to the new OPL, which would allow a maximum of one Australian side to join. 'At that point of time, airfares and accommodation were to be funded by FIFA, and to the most consistent team over a four-year period qualifies for the [FIFA Club World Cup],' he said. Oceania representative Auckland City took home more than $AU7 million for competing at this year's tournament. 'That's huge. I said, why wouldn't we do that?' Krayem said. But when it became clear Australian clubs would have to fund their own airfares and be denied entry to the lucrative Club World Cup, due to Australia's membership of the Asian Football Confederation, Krayem took a different approach and teamed up with the SIFF. He said it was an obvious partnership for a club with a connection to the Solomon Islands that started a quarter-century ago, when the club took a team over to play exhibition matches. Several Solomon Islander internationals have played in Wynnum's black and white kit – colours it shares with German powerhouse Borussia Dortmund, with which it has established formal links, and the new Solomon Kings FC. Loading Krayem said 65 per cent of Solomon Islanders in Australia lived in south-east Queensland, which had the only direct route by air to their homeland. 'There's already that sort of connection,' he added. 'A lot of Australian businesses operate out of Brisbane straight into Honiara and I think they want to grow their tourism.' The Kings have lined up a chief executive with English Premier League experience, and have already agreed terms with a high-profile head coach. But as important as success on the field would be for the club financially, it was the transformational effect on the community that excited the Kings' backers. 'As soon as it's dark, kids get out when no one's on the road and they're kicking a ball. I think the impact that we could have, what Australia could do for them, through football is huge,' Krayem said. The International Monetary Fund estimates the Solomon Islands' per capita GDP is just $US2380 (Australia's, by comparison, is $US65,550). For this Pacific island nation, the potential benefits of this new venture could be invaluable. 'It is an opportunity for the kids and the youth to have something to look forward to,' Marahare said. 'One thing for certain is that you go anywhere in the villages, all the villages in the provinces, it's very difficult to see clinics and hospitals, but you will be able to see soccer pitches, soccer fields everywhere. 'And this is a testament of how people, both in the urban and in the rural areas, love football.' And with Brisbane set to host the 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games, engagement with Pacific nations through sport would only get more important. Brisbane 2032 president Andrew Liveris said while he was unaware of the Solomon Kings until informed by this masthead, the diplomatic potential of sport to solidify links with the Pacific was central to Games planning. 'They really feel that these are their Games as well, and there is definitely a geopolitical positive to that,' he said. 'In other words, Oceania – a vast amount of territory, small population, small islands, strategically important to Australia – is not lost on us, nor the Prime Minister, nor DFAT.'
The Advertiser
an hour ago
- The Advertiser
The US has changed. Australia hasn't. It's time to talk about where the relationship goes from here
Seven months after Donald Trump was inaugurated for a second term as US president, we are facing the most important moment in Australia's foreign policy since the Iraq war. Australia needs to have a national conversation on the future of its alliance with the United States. The alliance was on the line with Trump's tariff decisions on August 1. The consensus was Australia dodged a bullet, and life goes on. But this was no flesh wound. By dictating and unilaterally imposing the terms of trade between the US and Australia - affirming the "reciprocal tariffs" of 10 per cent imposed on Australia, plus the tariffs of 50 per cent on both steel and aluminium - Trump has trashed the historic US-Australia Free Trade Agreement. Trump has not provided a good answer to the question of what he is doing to one of the US's strongest and most consistent allies. And there is more to come. The president will also place a tariff on US imports of Australian pharmaceuticals. There is also far more to come on the future of the US-Australia alliance. Media have been full of opinions on what the relationship between the two countries ought to look like. These interventions have assayed the crucial importance of Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese meeting personally with Trump; whether Washington was rattled by Albanese's visit to China, whether Australia should "fortify northern Australia into an allied military stronghold for the region"; and whether the relationship is being mismanaged. The best model for this conversation would be the economic roundtable Treasurer Jim Chalmers will host in Canberra this month. Its purpose, Albanese said, is to "build the broadest possible base of support for further economic reform". Why not apply the same process to the future of our foreign policy and alliance with the US? A similar roundtable, convened by the foreign minister and bringing together the smartest and most experienced people from across the political and foreign policy spectrum to discuss all these issues, would provide the best and most sincere guidance for the country. There are three bedrock truths that are unimpeachably clear since Trump reassumed power in the US. First, Australia has not changed; the US has changed. Albanese and his government has not changed its posture towards the US. Trump has profoundly changed America's posture towards Australia. Second, the US is no longer the leader of the free world, because the free world is no longer following America. The democracies with which the US has been allied since the end of the Second World War are no longer acting in concert with the US, but in reaction to what Trump is doing across the global landscape - from the Americas, to the Atlantic, Russia, the Middle East, China, the Indo-Pacific and Australia. Third, Trump has destroyed the economic and trading architecture erected after the Second World War to promote growth and prosperity. Nations engaging economically with the US are no longer trading partners but trading victims. The "deals" Trump boasts about are involuntary. Trump's imposition of tariffs even on countries with a trade deficit with the US shows that his trade policy is, at heart, the unilateral exercise of US political power to force concessions to US domination. What is under profound challenge today - 84 years after prime minister John Curtin turned to the US and 73 years after the ANZUS treaty came into effect - is whether the US under Trump is still aligned with the vision the two countries have shared for decades. Australians have serious doubts about the relationship. The latest polling by Resolve Political Monitor documented "a strong desire for the country to assert more independence from the United States amid Donald Trump's turbulent presidency". Fewer than 20 per cent of Australian voters believe Trump's election victory was good for Australia. Nearly half of voters believe it would be "a good thing" for Australia to act more independently of the US. Pew Research reported in July that only 35 per cent of Australians believe the US is a top ally. Trump is driving away US allies. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said after winning office, "Our old relationship with the United States, a relationship based on steadily increasing integration, is over." When the leaders of Japan and South Korea received Trump's insulting letters of demarche on trade, they each said the correspondence was "deeply regrettable", with Japan's prime minister adding, "extremely disrespectful". Trump has also precipitated a trade war with India. How effective can the Quad - established by the US, Japan, India and Australia to serve as a counterweight to China - be if three of its four members are victims of Trump's tariffs? Australia has also broken with Trump on recognition of Palestine - issues of the highest importance to the president. Moreover, if the terms of whatever Trump is conjuring up with Putin to end the war with Ukraine are unacceptable to Ukraine and Europe, and Trump sides with Putin, a further sharp break by Australia with Trump is likely. The "soft power" wielded by Australia is also involved here. From the UN's inception, Australia has supported the architecture required to help secure peace, security, stability and the health and welfare of all peoples. But Trump has now withdrawn the US from UNESCO, the World Health Organisation, the World Trade Organisation, the Paris climate accords, the UN Human Rights Commission and others. He has terminated the USAID programs that delivered crucial health care and crisis relief. Medical studies project that millions of people will die as a result in the coming years. Australia uses that architecture to help change the world for the better. Trump is making that work much harder. Trump is repealing all US programs that combat global warming - the most important environmental issue of our times and the number-one existential security issue for Asia-Pacific nations. Australia shares their urgency. Since Trump's inauguration, AUKUS has consistently been viewed as a bellwether for the relationship. Australia's need for a modern submarine fleet is an existential issue for the country's defence capability. Will Trump, during the Pentagon's review of AUKUS, change its terms to be more favourable to the US? Is Australia spending enough on defence? Will the pace of submarine construction ensure Australia receives the subs in the 2030s? If not, are there better solutions than AUKUS? But the most important question is the most known unknown. What does Trump want from China? Trump has never outlined his endgame with President Xi Jinping. Yes, of course, the trade deal of the century. But at what price, particularly with respect to Taiwan? What are the consequences of all the scenarios and what does Australia need to do to be prepared? Trump is president and will continue to act with power and drama. Albanese will respond on behalf of Australia. That would be business as usual. But without the benefit of a considered national conversation about the future of the Australian-US alliance and what is in Australia's national interest, the current state of play does not rise to the challenges posed by Trump to Australia. US baseball legend Yogi Berra once said, "When you come to a fork in the road, take it." That's where we are. Let's talk about it. Seven months after Donald Trump was inaugurated for a second term as US president, we are facing the most important moment in Australia's foreign policy since the Iraq war. Australia needs to have a national conversation on the future of its alliance with the United States. The alliance was on the line with Trump's tariff decisions on August 1. The consensus was Australia dodged a bullet, and life goes on. But this was no flesh wound. By dictating and unilaterally imposing the terms of trade between the US and Australia - affirming the "reciprocal tariffs" of 10 per cent imposed on Australia, plus the tariffs of 50 per cent on both steel and aluminium - Trump has trashed the historic US-Australia Free Trade Agreement. Trump has not provided a good answer to the question of what he is doing to one of the US's strongest and most consistent allies. And there is more to come. The president will also place a tariff on US imports of Australian pharmaceuticals. There is also far more to come on the future of the US-Australia alliance. Media have been full of opinions on what the relationship between the two countries ought to look like. These interventions have assayed the crucial importance of Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese meeting personally with Trump; whether Washington was rattled by Albanese's visit to China, whether Australia should "fortify northern Australia into an allied military stronghold for the region"; and whether the relationship is being mismanaged. The best model for this conversation would be the economic roundtable Treasurer Jim Chalmers will host in Canberra this month. Its purpose, Albanese said, is to "build the broadest possible base of support for further economic reform". Why not apply the same process to the future of our foreign policy and alliance with the US? A similar roundtable, convened by the foreign minister and bringing together the smartest and most experienced people from across the political and foreign policy spectrum to discuss all these issues, would provide the best and most sincere guidance for the country. There are three bedrock truths that are unimpeachably clear since Trump reassumed power in the US. First, Australia has not changed; the US has changed. Albanese and his government has not changed its posture towards the US. Trump has profoundly changed America's posture towards Australia. Second, the US is no longer the leader of the free world, because the free world is no longer following America. The democracies with which the US has been allied since the end of the Second World War are no longer acting in concert with the US, but in reaction to what Trump is doing across the global landscape - from the Americas, to the Atlantic, Russia, the Middle East, China, the Indo-Pacific and Australia. Third, Trump has destroyed the economic and trading architecture erected after the Second World War to promote growth and prosperity. Nations engaging economically with the US are no longer trading partners but trading victims. The "deals" Trump boasts about are involuntary. Trump's imposition of tariffs even on countries with a trade deficit with the US shows that his trade policy is, at heart, the unilateral exercise of US political power to force concessions to US domination. What is under profound challenge today - 84 years after prime minister John Curtin turned to the US and 73 years after the ANZUS treaty came into effect - is whether the US under Trump is still aligned with the vision the two countries have shared for decades. Australians have serious doubts about the relationship. The latest polling by Resolve Political Monitor documented "a strong desire for the country to assert more independence from the United States amid Donald Trump's turbulent presidency". Fewer than 20 per cent of Australian voters believe Trump's election victory was good for Australia. Nearly half of voters believe it would be "a good thing" for Australia to act more independently of the US. Pew Research reported in July that only 35 per cent of Australians believe the US is a top ally. Trump is driving away US allies. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said after winning office, "Our old relationship with the United States, a relationship based on steadily increasing integration, is over." When the leaders of Japan and South Korea received Trump's insulting letters of demarche on trade, they each said the correspondence was "deeply regrettable", with Japan's prime minister adding, "extremely disrespectful". Trump has also precipitated a trade war with India. How effective can the Quad - established by the US, Japan, India and Australia to serve as a counterweight to China - be if three of its four members are victims of Trump's tariffs? Australia has also broken with Trump on recognition of Palestine - issues of the highest importance to the president. Moreover, if the terms of whatever Trump is conjuring up with Putin to end the war with Ukraine are unacceptable to Ukraine and Europe, and Trump sides with Putin, a further sharp break by Australia with Trump is likely. The "soft power" wielded by Australia is also involved here. From the UN's inception, Australia has supported the architecture required to help secure peace, security, stability and the health and welfare of all peoples. But Trump has now withdrawn the US from UNESCO, the World Health Organisation, the World Trade Organisation, the Paris climate accords, the UN Human Rights Commission and others. He has terminated the USAID programs that delivered crucial health care and crisis relief. Medical studies project that millions of people will die as a result in the coming years. Australia uses that architecture to help change the world for the better. Trump is making that work much harder. Trump is repealing all US programs that combat global warming - the most important environmental issue of our times and the number-one existential security issue for Asia-Pacific nations. Australia shares their urgency. Since Trump's inauguration, AUKUS has consistently been viewed as a bellwether for the relationship. Australia's need for a modern submarine fleet is an existential issue for the country's defence capability. Will Trump, during the Pentagon's review of AUKUS, change its terms to be more favourable to the US? Is Australia spending enough on defence? Will the pace of submarine construction ensure Australia receives the subs in the 2030s? If not, are there better solutions than AUKUS? But the most important question is the most known unknown. What does Trump want from China? Trump has never outlined his endgame with President Xi Jinping. Yes, of course, the trade deal of the century. But at what price, particularly with respect to Taiwan? What are the consequences of all the scenarios and what does Australia need to do to be prepared? Trump is president and will continue to act with power and drama. Albanese will respond on behalf of Australia. That would be business as usual. But without the benefit of a considered national conversation about the future of the Australian-US alliance and what is in Australia's national interest, the current state of play does not rise to the challenges posed by Trump to Australia. US baseball legend Yogi Berra once said, "When you come to a fork in the road, take it." That's where we are. Let's talk about it. Seven months after Donald Trump was inaugurated for a second term as US president, we are facing the most important moment in Australia's foreign policy since the Iraq war. Australia needs to have a national conversation on the future of its alliance with the United States. The alliance was on the line with Trump's tariff decisions on August 1. The consensus was Australia dodged a bullet, and life goes on. But this was no flesh wound. By dictating and unilaterally imposing the terms of trade between the US and Australia - affirming the "reciprocal tariffs" of 10 per cent imposed on Australia, plus the tariffs of 50 per cent on both steel and aluminium - Trump has trashed the historic US-Australia Free Trade Agreement. Trump has not provided a good answer to the question of what he is doing to one of the US's strongest and most consistent allies. And there is more to come. The president will also place a tariff on US imports of Australian pharmaceuticals. There is also far more to come on the future of the US-Australia alliance. Media have been full of opinions on what the relationship between the two countries ought to look like. These interventions have assayed the crucial importance of Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese meeting personally with Trump; whether Washington was rattled by Albanese's visit to China, whether Australia should "fortify northern Australia into an allied military stronghold for the region"; and whether the relationship is being mismanaged. The best model for this conversation would be the economic roundtable Treasurer Jim Chalmers will host in Canberra this month. Its purpose, Albanese said, is to "build the broadest possible base of support for further economic reform". Why not apply the same process to the future of our foreign policy and alliance with the US? A similar roundtable, convened by the foreign minister and bringing together the smartest and most experienced people from across the political and foreign policy spectrum to discuss all these issues, would provide the best and most sincere guidance for the country. There are three bedrock truths that are unimpeachably clear since Trump reassumed power in the US. First, Australia has not changed; the US has changed. Albanese and his government has not changed its posture towards the US. Trump has profoundly changed America's posture towards Australia. Second, the US is no longer the leader of the free world, because the free world is no longer following America. The democracies with which the US has been allied since the end of the Second World War are no longer acting in concert with the US, but in reaction to what Trump is doing across the global landscape - from the Americas, to the Atlantic, Russia, the Middle East, China, the Indo-Pacific and Australia. Third, Trump has destroyed the economic and trading architecture erected after the Second World War to promote growth and prosperity. Nations engaging economically with the US are no longer trading partners but trading victims. The "deals" Trump boasts about are involuntary. Trump's imposition of tariffs even on countries with a trade deficit with the US shows that his trade policy is, at heart, the unilateral exercise of US political power to force concessions to US domination. What is under profound challenge today - 84 years after prime minister John Curtin turned to the US and 73 years after the ANZUS treaty came into effect - is whether the US under Trump is still aligned with the vision the two countries have shared for decades. Australians have serious doubts about the relationship. The latest polling by Resolve Political Monitor documented "a strong desire for the country to assert more independence from the United States amid Donald Trump's turbulent presidency". Fewer than 20 per cent of Australian voters believe Trump's election victory was good for Australia. Nearly half of voters believe it would be "a good thing" for Australia to act more independently of the US. Pew Research reported in July that only 35 per cent of Australians believe the US is a top ally. Trump is driving away US allies. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said after winning office, "Our old relationship with the United States, a relationship based on steadily increasing integration, is over." When the leaders of Japan and South Korea received Trump's insulting letters of demarche on trade, they each said the correspondence was "deeply regrettable", with Japan's prime minister adding, "extremely disrespectful". Trump has also precipitated a trade war with India. How effective can the Quad - established by the US, Japan, India and Australia to serve as a counterweight to China - be if three of its four members are victims of Trump's tariffs? Australia has also broken with Trump on recognition of Palestine - issues of the highest importance to the president. Moreover, if the terms of whatever Trump is conjuring up with Putin to end the war with Ukraine are unacceptable to Ukraine and Europe, and Trump sides with Putin, a further sharp break by Australia with Trump is likely. The "soft power" wielded by Australia is also involved here. From the UN's inception, Australia has supported the architecture required to help secure peace, security, stability and the health and welfare of all peoples. But Trump has now withdrawn the US from UNESCO, the World Health Organisation, the World Trade Organisation, the Paris climate accords, the UN Human Rights Commission and others. He has terminated the USAID programs that delivered crucial health care and crisis relief. Medical studies project that millions of people will die as a result in the coming years. Australia uses that architecture to help change the world for the better. Trump is making that work much harder. Trump is repealing all US programs that combat global warming - the most important environmental issue of our times and the number-one existential security issue for Asia-Pacific nations. Australia shares their urgency. Since Trump's inauguration, AUKUS has consistently been viewed as a bellwether for the relationship. Australia's need for a modern submarine fleet is an existential issue for the country's defence capability. Will Trump, during the Pentagon's review of AUKUS, change its terms to be more favourable to the US? Is Australia spending enough on defence? Will the pace of submarine construction ensure Australia receives the subs in the 2030s? If not, are there better solutions than AUKUS? But the most important question is the most known unknown. What does Trump want from China? Trump has never outlined his endgame with President Xi Jinping. Yes, of course, the trade deal of the century. But at what price, particularly with respect to Taiwan? What are the consequences of all the scenarios and what does Australia need to do to be prepared? Trump is president and will continue to act with power and drama. Albanese will respond on behalf of Australia. That would be business as usual. But without the benefit of a considered national conversation about the future of the Australian-US alliance and what is in Australia's national interest, the current state of play does not rise to the challenges posed by Trump to Australia. US baseball legend Yogi Berra once said, "When you come to a fork in the road, take it." That's where we are. Let's talk about it. Seven months after Donald Trump was inaugurated for a second term as US president, we are facing the most important moment in Australia's foreign policy since the Iraq war. Australia needs to have a national conversation on the future of its alliance with the United States. The alliance was on the line with Trump's tariff decisions on August 1. The consensus was Australia dodged a bullet, and life goes on. But this was no flesh wound. By dictating and unilaterally imposing the terms of trade between the US and Australia - affirming the "reciprocal tariffs" of 10 per cent imposed on Australia, plus the tariffs of 50 per cent on both steel and aluminium - Trump has trashed the historic US-Australia Free Trade Agreement. Trump has not provided a good answer to the question of what he is doing to one of the US's strongest and most consistent allies. And there is more to come. The president will also place a tariff on US imports of Australian pharmaceuticals. There is also far more to come on the future of the US-Australia alliance. Media have been full of opinions on what the relationship between the two countries ought to look like. These interventions have assayed the crucial importance of Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese meeting personally with Trump; whether Washington was rattled by Albanese's visit to China, whether Australia should "fortify northern Australia into an allied military stronghold for the region"; and whether the relationship is being mismanaged. The best model for this conversation would be the economic roundtable Treasurer Jim Chalmers will host in Canberra this month. Its purpose, Albanese said, is to "build the broadest possible base of support for further economic reform". Why not apply the same process to the future of our foreign policy and alliance with the US? A similar roundtable, convened by the foreign minister and bringing together the smartest and most experienced people from across the political and foreign policy spectrum to discuss all these issues, would provide the best and most sincere guidance for the country. There are three bedrock truths that are unimpeachably clear since Trump reassumed power in the US. First, Australia has not changed; the US has changed. Albanese and his government has not changed its posture towards the US. Trump has profoundly changed America's posture towards Australia. Second, the US is no longer the leader of the free world, because the free world is no longer following America. The democracies with which the US has been allied since the end of the Second World War are no longer acting in concert with the US, but in reaction to what Trump is doing across the global landscape - from the Americas, to the Atlantic, Russia, the Middle East, China, the Indo-Pacific and Australia. Third, Trump has destroyed the economic and trading architecture erected after the Second World War to promote growth and prosperity. Nations engaging economically with the US are no longer trading partners but trading victims. The "deals" Trump boasts about are involuntary. Trump's imposition of tariffs even on countries with a trade deficit with the US shows that his trade policy is, at heart, the unilateral exercise of US political power to force concessions to US domination. What is under profound challenge today - 84 years after prime minister John Curtin turned to the US and 73 years after the ANZUS treaty came into effect - is whether the US under Trump is still aligned with the vision the two countries have shared for decades. Australians have serious doubts about the relationship. The latest polling by Resolve Political Monitor documented "a strong desire for the country to assert more independence from the United States amid Donald Trump's turbulent presidency". Fewer than 20 per cent of Australian voters believe Trump's election victory was good for Australia. Nearly half of voters believe it would be "a good thing" for Australia to act more independently of the US. Pew Research reported in July that only 35 per cent of Australians believe the US is a top ally. Trump is driving away US allies. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said after winning office, "Our old relationship with the United States, a relationship based on steadily increasing integration, is over." When the leaders of Japan and South Korea received Trump's insulting letters of demarche on trade, they each said the correspondence was "deeply regrettable", with Japan's prime minister adding, "extremely disrespectful". Trump has also precipitated a trade war with India. How effective can the Quad - established by the US, Japan, India and Australia to serve as a counterweight to China - be if three of its four members are victims of Trump's tariffs? Australia has also broken with Trump on recognition of Palestine - issues of the highest importance to the president. Moreover, if the terms of whatever Trump is conjuring up with Putin to end the war with Ukraine are unacceptable to Ukraine and Europe, and Trump sides with Putin, a further sharp break by Australia with Trump is likely. The "soft power" wielded by Australia is also involved here. From the UN's inception, Australia has supported the architecture required to help secure peace, security, stability and the health and welfare of all peoples. But Trump has now withdrawn the US from UNESCO, the World Health Organisation, the World Trade Organisation, the Paris climate accords, the UN Human Rights Commission and others. He has terminated the USAID programs that delivered crucial health care and crisis relief. Medical studies project that millions of people will die as a result in the coming years. Australia uses that architecture to help change the world for the better. Trump is making that work much harder. Trump is repealing all US programs that combat global warming - the most important environmental issue of our times and the number-one existential security issue for Asia-Pacific nations. Australia shares their urgency. Since Trump's inauguration, AUKUS has consistently been viewed as a bellwether for the relationship. Australia's need for a modern submarine fleet is an existential issue for the country's defence capability. Will Trump, during the Pentagon's review of AUKUS, change its terms to be more favourable to the US? Is Australia spending enough on defence? Will the pace of submarine construction ensure Australia receives the subs in the 2030s? If not, are there better solutions than AUKUS? But the most important question is the most known unknown. What does Trump want from China? Trump has never outlined his endgame with President Xi Jinping. Yes, of course, the trade deal of the century. But at what price, particularly with respect to Taiwan? What are the consequences of all the scenarios and what does Australia need to do to be prepared? Trump is president and will continue to act with power and drama. Albanese will respond on behalf of Australia. That would be business as usual. But without the benefit of a considered national conversation about the future of the Australian-US alliance and what is in Australia's national interest, the current state of play does not rise to the challenges posed by Trump to Australia. US baseball legend Yogi Berra once said, "When you come to a fork in the road, take it." That's where we are. Let's talk about it.
