logo
Trump's AUKUS review gives us a chance to rethink our alliances

Trump's AUKUS review gives us a chance to rethink our alliances

Stephen Bartholomeusz' excellent article led me to speculate on our strategic defence strategy (' Has Trump created a path for the Euro to displace the $US?' June 12). As our prime minister prepares to meet US President Donald Trump, he will be well aware of the growing distaste among most Australians for our long-standing alliance with America. Now, Washington is reconsidering AUKUS (' AUKUS in doubt as US starts review ', June 11). It is natural for a state to put its own interests first, but why doesn't Australia do the same? You don't need to be Einstein to work out the AUKUS subs will never materialise. What if Australia got ahead of the game for once and explored a revised strategic alliance with Britain and France, based initially on French nuclear subs? We are at an historic juncture where most of the Western world is looking for a new, more stable order, so let's begin with a plan to not only strengthen our defence capability, but to strengthen our overall relations with Europe. This will also remove the possible perennial sore point that AUKUS threatens to become. Win-win? James Archibald, Enmore
Australia's commitment to AUKUS and its multi-billion dollar submarine project is misguided and outdated. It's as if our leaders have ignored everything the war in Ukraine has taught the world about modern warfare. We are investing billions in submarines that will take decades to deliver – vessels designed for a form of warfare that is rapidly becoming obsolete. Meanwhile, we've seen how inexpensive drones and smart technology can disable or destroy equipment worth 100 times more. The battlefield has changed, and we are failing to keep up. On top of that, we're now investing in long-range missile systems. One has to ask: who are these intended for? You don't buy long-range missiles unless you plan to use them – and that points to a dangerous shift in our military posture from defence to offence. What Australia really needs is a smart, modern, defensive capability – one that protects our people and land, not one that provokes arms races or ties us to foreign conflicts. It's time to stop buying Cold War-era hardware. It's time to modernise our defence, focus on protecting our own shores, and make foreign policy decisions based on Australia's best interests, not Washington's. Doug Cliff, Point Clare
In 2020, Donald Trump handed Scott Morrison one of America's highest military awards, the Legion of Merit. By 2021, the AUKUS deal between these two self-serving cronies had signed away billions of dollars of Australian taxpayers' money for a deal that gives us nothing but astronomical national debt and the award for being the world's biggest suckers. Anthony Albanese should have taken the opportunity to speak with a comparatively rational leader when Joe Biden was president and make cancelling AUKUS a priority before Trump's return. Instead, desperate to play with the big boys in the playground, he chose to deepen our commitment. We haven't just agreed to being fleeced by, and enslaved to, a dangerous and dishonest America, we have willingly funded it even though it's obvious the submarines will never appear. We expected to be betrayed by a lowlife like Trump, but we have mainly been betrayed by our own politicians, whose cringing weaknesses and pathetic egos have treacherously put our country last. Sally Morris, Leichhardt
Cut the rope. Push America off into the Atlantic. Cancel AUKUS. Get back our deposit. Buy our subs from Japan. Strengthen our ties with Japan, China, Indonesia, Europe and India. Let Trump pump his fists in front of his own mirror. Laurie Dicker, Forest Glen
If Trump cancels AUKUS, the US will be left with only one ally, Israel. Thinking of it, there's also Russia and North Korea. Ron Brown, Wallsend
Democrats blew it
With the escalating unrest in America, I am left with increasing anger at the incompetent Democrats, who must now take significant responsibility for the chaos by failing to 'read the room' in the election year (' Los Angeles is at war with Trump's vision of America ', June 12). I was in America for the three months before the election, and all the Democrats did in the media was bang on about a woman's right to an abortion. Fine indeed, but they completely ignored the concerns of the ordinary American people about issues that affected them: jobs, border control, inflation, the economy generally. So as a result of that incompetence, we are left watching America unravel. It is riveting reading each day and I think your US correspondent, Michael Koziol, has the best job in the world – if he can stay safe. Duncan Holmes, Freshwater
Q+A's demise began in 2019
It's no surprise that the ABC's Q+A is being canned (' Q+A axed, jobs cut ', June 12). The loss of host Tony Jones in 2019 was arguably the beginning of the end. No subsequent host was a match for his professionalism, innate humour and unbiased adjudication of what were much more interesting, robust and challenging discussions or debates. The later hosts invariably made it about themselves, their opinions, gripes, preferred preselected predictable questions, modifying and asking their own questions, and the twee pursuit of gotcha moments. This self-interested myopia is exactly what Australians have clearly just rejected in their politicians, so no wonder the ratings went south under the keen judgment of discerning ABC audiences. Robyn Dalziell, Kellyville
It really is enough to make an old political junkie cry (' Axed show no longer got us talking ', June 12). Panel shows where opposing parties eyeball each other and ideas are passionately contested should be the bread and butter of the ABC, but it seems our increasingly tame public broadcaster has lost its taste for the confrontation and controversy these formats deliver. The Drum disappeared without a whimper or any sign of a replacement. Now Q+A is 'dead, buried and cremated' … words I reckon Tony Abbott might be repeating as they pop the champagne corks over at the IPA. Phil Bradshaw, Naremburn
Now that Q+A is gone, I suggest the ABC reinstate The Drum. It was a stimulating and thought- provoking show leading in to the 7pm news and offered a well-balanced set of views from knowledgeable panellists, as well as politicians, on contentious questions. The current time slot is filled with a dreadful show that makes even Antiques Roadshow interesting. Currently Would I Lie to You? is the best option at 6.30pm on the ABC, an ironic choice indeed. Our national broadcaster should and could do better than this. Annie Scrivener, St Ives
Let's face it, Q+A is no real loss. Nor was the all-too-PC The Drum. The axing of Lateline was a great mistake, but I guess we can't hope for a return. Let's hope now that the ABC will moderate its chasing of, presumably, younger audiences with the frippery of lightweight reality programs and comedians laughing at their own, usually weak, jokes. So let's have some decent current affairs and news analysis and not of the attack dog sort, or the relentless chasing of 'gotcha' moments to fill tomorrow's headlines, or the repeat of what has been in earlier news broadcasts. Until then, this once rusted-on ABC TV viewer will seek decent analysis somewhere else. Greg Baker, Fitzroy Falls
What a shame about Q+A' s axing after I started watching it again this year. Has it really been six years since Tony Jones left the show? I stopped watching when it moved to Thursdays. It had been must-see TV after Media Watch on Mondays. With rotating hosts and internal dramas, Q+A lost its continuity and purpose. There was no need to change the formula and fix what wasn't broken. Robert Yen, Lidcombe
Tough stance welcome
For too long, Australia has taken its foreign affairs cues from the US, so it was gratifying to see Anthony Albanese and Penny Wong show some independence in sanctioning the right-wing Israeli ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich (' Australia imposes Magnitsky-style sanctions on two hardline Israeli ministers ', June 11). Our condemnation of them does not serve as a balm to Hamas, whose crimes against Israel are acknowledged by Australia. The people of Palestine must have a homeland. Only then will there be peace in the Middle East. Genevieve Milton, Dulwich Hill
Bradfield blame game
The Liberals' Bradfield mansion has burnt to the ground, and rather than accept that it was the result of years of neglect and misreading of the electorate, they are still running around looking for an arsonist (' Why the Liberals should just accept defeat in Bradfield ', June 12). Traducing the excellent and transparent work of the AEC, casting aspersions on the intellect of the electorate, anything other than recognising the result is due to their own political blindness and ineptitude. Let's hope the Trumpian refusal to accept the loss ends soon and some political insight results in the rebuilding of a relevant opposition. Mind you, pigs might also fly. Elisabeth Goodsall, Wahroonga
Liberal makeover
Finally, some common sense from Sussan Ley as she and her small band of survivors pick through the still smouldering ruins of their once powerful broad church, searching for any usable foundations on which to rebuild (' Ley to order radical Liberal review ', June 12). But perhaps even the big, old cornerstones of small government and lower taxes are no longer fit for purpose. To help in her deliberations she needs only to look to the experiment tearing America apart (' Trump: Dumb, dishonest and dangerous say Australians ', June 12). Voters recognise there is a growing need for government services – health, NDIS, welfare, unemployment, defence etc – not to mention lowering the confrontational brand that the Liberals seem wedded to. Their new manifesto could then also include actually doing our bit to save the planet and being generous towards less fortunate nations and individuals escaping persecution. If Labor ever dropped the ball, voters might even consider a party believing in the above values as a viable alternative. Peter Thomson, Brunswick (Vic)
Sussan Ley doesn't need to arrange a major review of the Liberal Party and the reasons for its failures. The Liberals just need to stop denying climate change/global warming, accept and embrace the march towards renewable energy and totally forget nuclear power. If the Nationals don't like it, then it will be time for Ley and the Liberals to say goodbye to them. Ken Butler, Mount Colah
Home truth
It is a no-brainer that the cost of building a new residence will soar if there is a shortage of materials and skilled labour (' Home building costs soar ', June 12). However, if one tours the more affluent suburbs, as I often do on my bicycle, the number of major renovations being carried out, usually on large houses for apparently well-off residents, is extraordinary. These renovations are consuming materials and labour, and one wonders if they should take precedence over desperately needed new housing. Perhaps councils could limit the number of approved renovations at any time in the interests of freeing up labour and materials, and thus reduce pressure on costs of new residences. Geoff Harding, Chatswood
Reality bites
We all know that climate change-worsened heatwaves, bushfires and floods are detrimental to our collective health. But climate change is also driving up incidences of horrible vector-borne diseases like dengue fever (' Mosquito disease cases on the rise', June 12). Mosquitos are already the most deadly creature on the planet, killing more than a million people a year. Our warmer climate is creating the conditions for these pests to spread more readily than ever – just another sting to add to the long list of reasons why climate action matters. Amy Hiller, Kew (Vic)
Tax gas giants
Ken Henry once said that he did not understand why young people weren't out on the streets rioting about the unfairness of the tax system. I wonder when we will charge sensible levies on the gas exporters who sell the nation's non-renewable gas resources and pay little to nothing for it, and use tax shelters to minimise corporate tax. Australian gas exporters pay an average of 14 per cent tax while similar companies in Scandinavia pay 73 per cent, and they have a massive wealth fund to pay for education and health, plus other important areas of good for the community. The new government now has the political strength to fix this outrage. Will they do it? I suppose not. Maybe I am just dreaming. Max Press, North Sydney
Sail on, sailor
The passing of the Beach Boys legend Brian Wilson brings memories flooding back from my early days of longboard surfing in Australia (' Brian Wilson dies at 82 ', June 12). Cars with boards on top and radios blasting out Wilson's songs like Surfin' Safari, Surfer Girl, Girls on the Beach along the beachfront. Later, as the Beatles grew in strength, even Paul McCartney praised Wilson for iconic titles like Good Vibrations, God Only Knows and Wouldn't it Be Nice, as the Beach Boys developed and matured. In Australia, those times will be remembered as the start of the great Australian surfing period, with heroes like Midget Farrelly and Manly's Glenn Ritchie and Robbie Lane, while in the car park Wilson's music dominated the airwaves. Many of us will be feeling sadness and nostalgia as we farewell Brian Wilson's musical genius. William Tuck, Mosman
Cheeky shortcut
Stories about the AMP building reminded me of when I was about 17 or 18 working as a cleaner there. Part of my job involved sweeping the roof. Instead of picking up the litter I would simply sweep it over the edge. As it was about 5.30am, I assumed it wouldn't land on anyone. At least I hope it didn't. Patrick McMahon, Paddington

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Crossbenchers pressure Labor to launch 'urgent' AUKUS inquiry
Crossbenchers pressure Labor to launch 'urgent' AUKUS inquiry

The Advertiser

time38 minutes ago

  • The Advertiser

Crossbenchers pressure Labor to launch 'urgent' AUKUS inquiry

ACT senator David Pocock and an alliance of parliamentary crossbenchers are calling on the Albanese government to urgently establish a formal inquiry into the AUKUS submarine deal. It comes after revelations the Trump administration will review the terms of the trilateral pact to ensure it meets "American First criteria", which has sparked doubts about the future of the landmark deal. Eight crossbench MPs wrote to Defence Minister Richard Marles on Friday, raising concerns about the $368 billion deal that could see Australia buy at least three Virginia-class nuclear-attack submarines from the US by the 2030s. The MPs said there has been insufficient parliamentary oversight of the pact and said Australians wanted to know more about its strategic and financial implications. "With the UK and now the US reviewing AUKUS, Australia is now the only country not actively considering whether the agreement in its current form best serves our national interest," Senator Pocok said in a statement. "Given the scale and cost of this deal, a transparent review is not just sensible; it's overdue." Australia is investing billions of dollars to support the US's submarine production base under AUKUS, which is estimated to be 20 years behind schedule. Independent MP Allegra Spender said there needed to be an open discussion about the "very clear risk" that the US will not be able to guarantee the transfer of the boats without diminishing its naval capabilities. "AUKUS is the centrepiece of our defence and foreign policy strategy, but it's been adopted by the major parties with very poor public engagement," Ms Spender said. "AUKUS will shape Australia's future for decades with enormous implications both financially, economically, and strategically, but in discussions at the community level, there are consistent questions and concerns that have not been addressed." Defence Minister Richard Marles has said he remains confident the deal will go ahead and that the US review was a "perfectly natural" thing for a new administration to do. "We've always known that increasing the production and sustainment rate in the United States is a challenge, but we're confident that we can meet that challenge," Mr Marles said on Friday. The Canberra Times has contacted a spokesperson for comment. A parliamentary inquiry into the ratification of the AUKUS treaty last year heard that a provision allowing the US and the UK to withdraw with a year's notice could have "significant implications" for Australia. The inquiry heard there were no specified terms in the treaty or in agreement documents to suggest Australia would have full ownership of the second-hand US-built boats, which are due to be sold and delivered by 2032. Opposition defence spokesman Angus Taylor said he was concerned about the future of AUKUS and called on Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to meet with Donald Trump to secure its terms. "We'll continue to make the case for AUKUS, and we must. It is a good arrangement and the right arrangement to ensure we get peace in our region through deterrence," Mr Taylor said on Friday. Mr Albanese is expected to hold his first in-person meeting with the US president on the sidelines of the G7 summit in Canada next week, which has yet to be confirmed. The potential meeting comes after Labor rebuffed US Defence Secretary Peter Hegseth's call for Australia to increase its military spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP from the current level of just over 2 per cent. ACT senator David Pocock and an alliance of parliamentary crossbenchers are calling on the Albanese government to urgently establish a formal inquiry into the AUKUS submarine deal. It comes after revelations the Trump administration will review the terms of the trilateral pact to ensure it meets "American First criteria", which has sparked doubts about the future of the landmark deal. Eight crossbench MPs wrote to Defence Minister Richard Marles on Friday, raising concerns about the $368 billion deal that could see Australia buy at least three Virginia-class nuclear-attack submarines from the US by the 2030s. The MPs said there has been insufficient parliamentary oversight of the pact and said Australians wanted to know more about its strategic and financial implications. "With the UK and now the US reviewing AUKUS, Australia is now the only country not actively considering whether the agreement in its current form best serves our national interest," Senator Pocok said in a statement. "Given the scale and cost of this deal, a transparent review is not just sensible; it's overdue." Australia is investing billions of dollars to support the US's submarine production base under AUKUS, which is estimated to be 20 years behind schedule. Independent MP Allegra Spender said there needed to be an open discussion about the "very clear risk" that the US will not be able to guarantee the transfer of the boats without diminishing its naval capabilities. "AUKUS is the centrepiece of our defence and foreign policy strategy, but it's been adopted by the major parties with very poor public engagement," Ms Spender said. "AUKUS will shape Australia's future for decades with enormous implications both financially, economically, and strategically, but in discussions at the community level, there are consistent questions and concerns that have not been addressed." Defence Minister Richard Marles has said he remains confident the deal will go ahead and that the US review was a "perfectly natural" thing for a new administration to do. "We've always known that increasing the production and sustainment rate in the United States is a challenge, but we're confident that we can meet that challenge," Mr Marles said on Friday. The Canberra Times has contacted a spokesperson for comment. A parliamentary inquiry into the ratification of the AUKUS treaty last year heard that a provision allowing the US and the UK to withdraw with a year's notice could have "significant implications" for Australia. The inquiry heard there were no specified terms in the treaty or in agreement documents to suggest Australia would have full ownership of the second-hand US-built boats, which are due to be sold and delivered by 2032. Opposition defence spokesman Angus Taylor said he was concerned about the future of AUKUS and called on Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to meet with Donald Trump to secure its terms. "We'll continue to make the case for AUKUS, and we must. It is a good arrangement and the right arrangement to ensure we get peace in our region through deterrence," Mr Taylor said on Friday. Mr Albanese is expected to hold his first in-person meeting with the US president on the sidelines of the G7 summit in Canada next week, which has yet to be confirmed. The potential meeting comes after Labor rebuffed US Defence Secretary Peter Hegseth's call for Australia to increase its military spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP from the current level of just over 2 per cent. ACT senator David Pocock and an alliance of parliamentary crossbenchers are calling on the Albanese government to urgently establish a formal inquiry into the AUKUS submarine deal. It comes after revelations the Trump administration will review the terms of the trilateral pact to ensure it meets "American First criteria", which has sparked doubts about the future of the landmark deal. Eight crossbench MPs wrote to Defence Minister Richard Marles on Friday, raising concerns about the $368 billion deal that could see Australia buy at least three Virginia-class nuclear-attack submarines from the US by the 2030s. The MPs said there has been insufficient parliamentary oversight of the pact and said Australians wanted to know more about its strategic and financial implications. "With the UK and now the US reviewing AUKUS, Australia is now the only country not actively considering whether the agreement in its current form best serves our national interest," Senator Pocok said in a statement. "Given the scale and cost of this deal, a transparent review is not just sensible; it's overdue." Australia is investing billions of dollars to support the US's submarine production base under AUKUS, which is estimated to be 20 years behind schedule. Independent MP Allegra Spender said there needed to be an open discussion about the "very clear risk" that the US will not be able to guarantee the transfer of the boats without diminishing its naval capabilities. "AUKUS is the centrepiece of our defence and foreign policy strategy, but it's been adopted by the major parties with very poor public engagement," Ms Spender said. "AUKUS will shape Australia's future for decades with enormous implications both financially, economically, and strategically, but in discussions at the community level, there are consistent questions and concerns that have not been addressed." Defence Minister Richard Marles has said he remains confident the deal will go ahead and that the US review was a "perfectly natural" thing for a new administration to do. "We've always known that increasing the production and sustainment rate in the United States is a challenge, but we're confident that we can meet that challenge," Mr Marles said on Friday. The Canberra Times has contacted a spokesperson for comment. A parliamentary inquiry into the ratification of the AUKUS treaty last year heard that a provision allowing the US and the UK to withdraw with a year's notice could have "significant implications" for Australia. The inquiry heard there were no specified terms in the treaty or in agreement documents to suggest Australia would have full ownership of the second-hand US-built boats, which are due to be sold and delivered by 2032. Opposition defence spokesman Angus Taylor said he was concerned about the future of AUKUS and called on Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to meet with Donald Trump to secure its terms. "We'll continue to make the case for AUKUS, and we must. It is a good arrangement and the right arrangement to ensure we get peace in our region through deterrence," Mr Taylor said on Friday. Mr Albanese is expected to hold his first in-person meeting with the US president on the sidelines of the G7 summit in Canada next week, which has yet to be confirmed. The potential meeting comes after Labor rebuffed US Defence Secretary Peter Hegseth's call for Australia to increase its military spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP from the current level of just over 2 per cent. ACT senator David Pocock and an alliance of parliamentary crossbenchers are calling on the Albanese government to urgently establish a formal inquiry into the AUKUS submarine deal. It comes after revelations the Trump administration will review the terms of the trilateral pact to ensure it meets "American First criteria", which has sparked doubts about the future of the landmark deal. Eight crossbench MPs wrote to Defence Minister Richard Marles on Friday, raising concerns about the $368 billion deal that could see Australia buy at least three Virginia-class nuclear-attack submarines from the US by the 2030s. The MPs said there has been insufficient parliamentary oversight of the pact and said Australians wanted to know more about its strategic and financial implications. "With the UK and now the US reviewing AUKUS, Australia is now the only country not actively considering whether the agreement in its current form best serves our national interest," Senator Pocok said in a statement. "Given the scale and cost of this deal, a transparent review is not just sensible; it's overdue." Australia is investing billions of dollars to support the US's submarine production base under AUKUS, which is estimated to be 20 years behind schedule. Independent MP Allegra Spender said there needed to be an open discussion about the "very clear risk" that the US will not be able to guarantee the transfer of the boats without diminishing its naval capabilities. "AUKUS is the centrepiece of our defence and foreign policy strategy, but it's been adopted by the major parties with very poor public engagement," Ms Spender said. "AUKUS will shape Australia's future for decades with enormous implications both financially, economically, and strategically, but in discussions at the community level, there are consistent questions and concerns that have not been addressed." Defence Minister Richard Marles has said he remains confident the deal will go ahead and that the US review was a "perfectly natural" thing for a new administration to do. "We've always known that increasing the production and sustainment rate in the United States is a challenge, but we're confident that we can meet that challenge," Mr Marles said on Friday. The Canberra Times has contacted a spokesperson for comment. A parliamentary inquiry into the ratification of the AUKUS treaty last year heard that a provision allowing the US and the UK to withdraw with a year's notice could have "significant implications" for Australia. The inquiry heard there were no specified terms in the treaty or in agreement documents to suggest Australia would have full ownership of the second-hand US-built boats, which are due to be sold and delivered by 2032. Opposition defence spokesman Angus Taylor said he was concerned about the future of AUKUS and called on Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to meet with Donald Trump to secure its terms. "We'll continue to make the case for AUKUS, and we must. It is a good arrangement and the right arrangement to ensure we get peace in our region through deterrence," Mr Taylor said on Friday. Mr Albanese is expected to hold his first in-person meeting with the US president on the sidelines of the G7 summit in Canada next week, which has yet to be confirmed. The potential meeting comes after Labor rebuffed US Defence Secretary Peter Hegseth's call for Australia to increase its military spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP from the current level of just over 2 per cent.

Woodside given more time to consider gas plant rules
Woodside given more time to consider gas plant rules

The Advertiser

time38 minutes ago

  • The Advertiser

Woodside given more time to consider gas plant rules

A final call on Woodside's massive gas project has been delayed with the energy giant granted more time to consider federal conditions on cultural heritage and air quality. Woodside had 10 days to respond to Environment Minister Murray Watt's provisional approval to push out the life of its North West Shelf project in Western Australia but an unspecified extension has since been granted. Under the proposal, the project - which hosts Australia's biggest gas export plant - will be able to keep operating until 2070. The tentative approval has angered Indigenous groups fearful it will damage nearby ancient rock art, as well as environmentalists concerned it will hasten climate change. Protesters took the campaign to the offices of five federal Labor MPs in Perth on Friday where they handed over an open letter opposing the project signed by more than 60 scientists and experts. The North West Shelf's go-ahead is subject to strict conditions about the impact of air emission levels, provisions the environment minister says will ensure the 60,000-year-old Murujuga Indigenous rock art is not destroyed. Senator Watt said discussions with Woodside had been constructive and it was not uncommon for proponents in this situation to take a bit longer to respond. "I can't predict exactly when it will be that Woodside will provide those comments," he told ABC radio on Thursday. The energy giant confirmed the extended consultation period on Friday. "Woodside recognises the importance of the matters being addressed by the proposed conditions of the environmental approval including cultural heritage management and air quality," the company said in a statement. Australian Conservation Foundation climate campaigner Piper Rollins said the public had a right to see the conditions proposed by the minister. "Australians who are worried about the protection of the ancient Murujuga rock art, which has been nominated for World Heritage listing and is right next door to Woodside's gas hub, deserve to see what Woodside is being allowed to negotiate behind closed doors," Ms Rollins said. "In addition to the damage to the rock art, extending the NW Shelf gas hub until 2070 locks in decades more climate pollution and will drive demand to open new gas fields." A final call on Woodside's massive gas project has been delayed with the energy giant granted more time to consider federal conditions on cultural heritage and air quality. Woodside had 10 days to respond to Environment Minister Murray Watt's provisional approval to push out the life of its North West Shelf project in Western Australia but an unspecified extension has since been granted. Under the proposal, the project - which hosts Australia's biggest gas export plant - will be able to keep operating until 2070. The tentative approval has angered Indigenous groups fearful it will damage nearby ancient rock art, as well as environmentalists concerned it will hasten climate change. Protesters took the campaign to the offices of five federal Labor MPs in Perth on Friday where they handed over an open letter opposing the project signed by more than 60 scientists and experts. The North West Shelf's go-ahead is subject to strict conditions about the impact of air emission levels, provisions the environment minister says will ensure the 60,000-year-old Murujuga Indigenous rock art is not destroyed. Senator Watt said discussions with Woodside had been constructive and it was not uncommon for proponents in this situation to take a bit longer to respond. "I can't predict exactly when it will be that Woodside will provide those comments," he told ABC radio on Thursday. The energy giant confirmed the extended consultation period on Friday. "Woodside recognises the importance of the matters being addressed by the proposed conditions of the environmental approval including cultural heritage management and air quality," the company said in a statement. Australian Conservation Foundation climate campaigner Piper Rollins said the public had a right to see the conditions proposed by the minister. "Australians who are worried about the protection of the ancient Murujuga rock art, which has been nominated for World Heritage listing and is right next door to Woodside's gas hub, deserve to see what Woodside is being allowed to negotiate behind closed doors," Ms Rollins said. "In addition to the damage to the rock art, extending the NW Shelf gas hub until 2070 locks in decades more climate pollution and will drive demand to open new gas fields." A final call on Woodside's massive gas project has been delayed with the energy giant granted more time to consider federal conditions on cultural heritage and air quality. Woodside had 10 days to respond to Environment Minister Murray Watt's provisional approval to push out the life of its North West Shelf project in Western Australia but an unspecified extension has since been granted. Under the proposal, the project - which hosts Australia's biggest gas export plant - will be able to keep operating until 2070. The tentative approval has angered Indigenous groups fearful it will damage nearby ancient rock art, as well as environmentalists concerned it will hasten climate change. Protesters took the campaign to the offices of five federal Labor MPs in Perth on Friday where they handed over an open letter opposing the project signed by more than 60 scientists and experts. The North West Shelf's go-ahead is subject to strict conditions about the impact of air emission levels, provisions the environment minister says will ensure the 60,000-year-old Murujuga Indigenous rock art is not destroyed. Senator Watt said discussions with Woodside had been constructive and it was not uncommon for proponents in this situation to take a bit longer to respond. "I can't predict exactly when it will be that Woodside will provide those comments," he told ABC radio on Thursday. The energy giant confirmed the extended consultation period on Friday. "Woodside recognises the importance of the matters being addressed by the proposed conditions of the environmental approval including cultural heritage management and air quality," the company said in a statement. Australian Conservation Foundation climate campaigner Piper Rollins said the public had a right to see the conditions proposed by the minister. "Australians who are worried about the protection of the ancient Murujuga rock art, which has been nominated for World Heritage listing and is right next door to Woodside's gas hub, deserve to see what Woodside is being allowed to negotiate behind closed doors," Ms Rollins said. "In addition to the damage to the rock art, extending the NW Shelf gas hub until 2070 locks in decades more climate pollution and will drive demand to open new gas fields." A final call on Woodside's massive gas project has been delayed with the energy giant granted more time to consider federal conditions on cultural heritage and air quality. Woodside had 10 days to respond to Environment Minister Murray Watt's provisional approval to push out the life of its North West Shelf project in Western Australia but an unspecified extension has since been granted. Under the proposal, the project - which hosts Australia's biggest gas export plant - will be able to keep operating until 2070. The tentative approval has angered Indigenous groups fearful it will damage nearby ancient rock art, as well as environmentalists concerned it will hasten climate change. Protesters took the campaign to the offices of five federal Labor MPs in Perth on Friday where they handed over an open letter opposing the project signed by more than 60 scientists and experts. The North West Shelf's go-ahead is subject to strict conditions about the impact of air emission levels, provisions the environment minister says will ensure the 60,000-year-old Murujuga Indigenous rock art is not destroyed. Senator Watt said discussions with Woodside had been constructive and it was not uncommon for proponents in this situation to take a bit longer to respond. "I can't predict exactly when it will be that Woodside will provide those comments," he told ABC radio on Thursday. The energy giant confirmed the extended consultation period on Friday. "Woodside recognises the importance of the matters being addressed by the proposed conditions of the environmental approval including cultural heritage management and air quality," the company said in a statement. Australian Conservation Foundation climate campaigner Piper Rollins said the public had a right to see the conditions proposed by the minister. "Australians who are worried about the protection of the ancient Murujuga rock art, which has been nominated for World Heritage listing and is right next door to Woodside's gas hub, deserve to see what Woodside is being allowed to negotiate behind closed doors," Ms Rollins said. "In addition to the damage to the rock art, extending the NW Shelf gas hub until 2070 locks in decades more climate pollution and will drive demand to open new gas fields."

Iran, Israel's open warfare after decades of shadow war
Iran, Israel's open warfare after decades of shadow war

The Advertiser

time39 minutes ago

  • The Advertiser

Iran, Israel's open warfare after decades of shadow war

Israel's strikes on Iran has heightened fears of an all-out war between the two countries, whose history of enmity spans decades of clandestine conflicts. A timeline of key events: 1979 - Iran's pro-Western leader, Mohammed Reza Shah, who regarded Israel as an ally, is swept from power in an Islamic Revolution that installs a new Shi'ite theocratic regime with opposition to Israel 1982 - As Israel invades Lebanon, Iran's Revolutionary Guards work with fellow Shi'ite Muslims there to set up Hezbollah 1983 - Iran-backed Hezbollah uses suicide bombings to expel Western and Israeli forces from Lebanon 1992-94 - Argentina and Israel accuse Iran and Hezbollah of orchestrating suicide bombings at Israel's embassy in Buenos Aires in 1992 and a Jewish centre in the city in 1994, each of which killed dozens of people 2002 - A disclosure that Iran has a secret program to enrich uranium stirs concern that it is trying to build a nuclear bomb in violation of its non-proliferation treaty commitments, which it denies 2009 - In a speech, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei calls Israel "a dangerous and fatal cancer" 2010 - Stuxnet, a malicious computer virus widely believed to have been developed by the US and Israel, is used to attack a uranium enrichment facility at Iran's Natanz nuclear site 2018 - Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hails President Donald Trump's withdrawal of the US from Iran's nuclear deal with world powers after years of lobbying against the agreement 2020 - Israel welcomes the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani, commander of the overseas arm of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, in an American drone strike in Baghdad 2021 - Iran blames Israel for the assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, viewed by Western intelligence services as the mastermind of a covert Iranian program to develop nuclear weapons capability 2022 - US President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid sign a joint pledge to deny Iran nuclear arms April 2024 - A suspected Israeli air strike on the Iranian embassy compound in Damascus kills seven Revolutionary Guards officers. Israel neither confirms nor denies responsibility October 2024 - Iran fires over 180 missiles at Israel in what it calls revenge for the killing of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah on September 27 and the killing of Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on July 31 June 2025 - Israel carries out strikes in Iran it says were aimed at disrupting the Islamic Republic's nuclear infrastructure and targeted scientists working on a nuclear bomb. The US denies providing assistance for the operation Israel's strikes on Iran has heightened fears of an all-out war between the two countries, whose history of enmity spans decades of clandestine conflicts. A timeline of key events: 1979 - Iran's pro-Western leader, Mohammed Reza Shah, who regarded Israel as an ally, is swept from power in an Islamic Revolution that installs a new Shi'ite theocratic regime with opposition to Israel 1982 - As Israel invades Lebanon, Iran's Revolutionary Guards work with fellow Shi'ite Muslims there to set up Hezbollah 1983 - Iran-backed Hezbollah uses suicide bombings to expel Western and Israeli forces from Lebanon 1992-94 - Argentina and Israel accuse Iran and Hezbollah of orchestrating suicide bombings at Israel's embassy in Buenos Aires in 1992 and a Jewish centre in the city in 1994, each of which killed dozens of people 2002 - A disclosure that Iran has a secret program to enrich uranium stirs concern that it is trying to build a nuclear bomb in violation of its non-proliferation treaty commitments, which it denies 2009 - In a speech, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei calls Israel "a dangerous and fatal cancer" 2010 - Stuxnet, a malicious computer virus widely believed to have been developed by the US and Israel, is used to attack a uranium enrichment facility at Iran's Natanz nuclear site 2018 - Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hails President Donald Trump's withdrawal of the US from Iran's nuclear deal with world powers after years of lobbying against the agreement 2020 - Israel welcomes the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani, commander of the overseas arm of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, in an American drone strike in Baghdad 2021 - Iran blames Israel for the assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, viewed by Western intelligence services as the mastermind of a covert Iranian program to develop nuclear weapons capability 2022 - US President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid sign a joint pledge to deny Iran nuclear arms April 2024 - A suspected Israeli air strike on the Iranian embassy compound in Damascus kills seven Revolutionary Guards officers. Israel neither confirms nor denies responsibility October 2024 - Iran fires over 180 missiles at Israel in what it calls revenge for the killing of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah on September 27 and the killing of Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on July 31 June 2025 - Israel carries out strikes in Iran it says were aimed at disrupting the Islamic Republic's nuclear infrastructure and targeted scientists working on a nuclear bomb. The US denies providing assistance for the operation Israel's strikes on Iran has heightened fears of an all-out war between the two countries, whose history of enmity spans decades of clandestine conflicts. A timeline of key events: 1979 - Iran's pro-Western leader, Mohammed Reza Shah, who regarded Israel as an ally, is swept from power in an Islamic Revolution that installs a new Shi'ite theocratic regime with opposition to Israel 1982 - As Israel invades Lebanon, Iran's Revolutionary Guards work with fellow Shi'ite Muslims there to set up Hezbollah 1983 - Iran-backed Hezbollah uses suicide bombings to expel Western and Israeli forces from Lebanon 1992-94 - Argentina and Israel accuse Iran and Hezbollah of orchestrating suicide bombings at Israel's embassy in Buenos Aires in 1992 and a Jewish centre in the city in 1994, each of which killed dozens of people 2002 - A disclosure that Iran has a secret program to enrich uranium stirs concern that it is trying to build a nuclear bomb in violation of its non-proliferation treaty commitments, which it denies 2009 - In a speech, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei calls Israel "a dangerous and fatal cancer" 2010 - Stuxnet, a malicious computer virus widely believed to have been developed by the US and Israel, is used to attack a uranium enrichment facility at Iran's Natanz nuclear site 2018 - Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hails President Donald Trump's withdrawal of the US from Iran's nuclear deal with world powers after years of lobbying against the agreement 2020 - Israel welcomes the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani, commander of the overseas arm of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, in an American drone strike in Baghdad 2021 - Iran blames Israel for the assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, viewed by Western intelligence services as the mastermind of a covert Iranian program to develop nuclear weapons capability 2022 - US President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid sign a joint pledge to deny Iran nuclear arms April 2024 - A suspected Israeli air strike on the Iranian embassy compound in Damascus kills seven Revolutionary Guards officers. Israel neither confirms nor denies responsibility October 2024 - Iran fires over 180 missiles at Israel in what it calls revenge for the killing of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah on September 27 and the killing of Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on July 31 June 2025 - Israel carries out strikes in Iran it says were aimed at disrupting the Islamic Republic's nuclear infrastructure and targeted scientists working on a nuclear bomb. The US denies providing assistance for the operation Israel's strikes on Iran has heightened fears of an all-out war between the two countries, whose history of enmity spans decades of clandestine conflicts. A timeline of key events: 1979 - Iran's pro-Western leader, Mohammed Reza Shah, who regarded Israel as an ally, is swept from power in an Islamic Revolution that installs a new Shi'ite theocratic regime with opposition to Israel 1982 - As Israel invades Lebanon, Iran's Revolutionary Guards work with fellow Shi'ite Muslims there to set up Hezbollah 1983 - Iran-backed Hezbollah uses suicide bombings to expel Western and Israeli forces from Lebanon 1992-94 - Argentina and Israel accuse Iran and Hezbollah of orchestrating suicide bombings at Israel's embassy in Buenos Aires in 1992 and a Jewish centre in the city in 1994, each of which killed dozens of people 2002 - A disclosure that Iran has a secret program to enrich uranium stirs concern that it is trying to build a nuclear bomb in violation of its non-proliferation treaty commitments, which it denies 2009 - In a speech, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei calls Israel "a dangerous and fatal cancer" 2010 - Stuxnet, a malicious computer virus widely believed to have been developed by the US and Israel, is used to attack a uranium enrichment facility at Iran's Natanz nuclear site 2018 - Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hails President Donald Trump's withdrawal of the US from Iran's nuclear deal with world powers after years of lobbying against the agreement 2020 - Israel welcomes the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani, commander of the overseas arm of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, in an American drone strike in Baghdad 2021 - Iran blames Israel for the assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, viewed by Western intelligence services as the mastermind of a covert Iranian program to develop nuclear weapons capability 2022 - US President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid sign a joint pledge to deny Iran nuclear arms April 2024 - A suspected Israeli air strike on the Iranian embassy compound in Damascus kills seven Revolutionary Guards officers. Israel neither confirms nor denies responsibility October 2024 - Iran fires over 180 missiles at Israel in what it calls revenge for the killing of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah on September 27 and the killing of Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on July 31 June 2025 - Israel carries out strikes in Iran it says were aimed at disrupting the Islamic Republic's nuclear infrastructure and targeted scientists working on a nuclear bomb. The US denies providing assistance for the operation

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store