Australia, Ukraine negotiate non-binding security pact
Defence experts say such a pact could help bolster collaboration between the two nations to boost Australia's capabilities.
Largely redacted briefing material prepared for Foreign Minister Penny Wong ahead of her December 2024 trip to Ukraine confirms the possibility of a security pact, but details remain classified.
Of the 28 bilateral security arrangements finalised with Ukraine as of late 2024, none were legally binding or included mutual defence or security obligations, one briefing document noted.
Ukraine's ambassador to Australia Vasyl Myroshnychenko didn't comment on any specific provisions that had been proposed due to the sensitivities of negotiations.
But he pointed to broad areas of collaboration such as intelligence sharing, drone technology and humanitarian assistance that have been covered in similar bilateral security agreements between Ukraine and other nations.
The British pact pledged increased co-operation between defence companies and the Ukrainian army, including building military repair facilities and providing cyber defence technology.
Humanitarian provisions are outlined in Japan's agreement, which pledges to provide medical treatment for wounded Ukrainian soldiers.
Japan and Ukraine also agreed to share and protect classified intelligence.
Ukraine has developed sophisticated drone capabilities after the three-and-a-half-year war that followed Russia's invasion.
"The innovation we have, no one in the world has it", Mr Myroshnychenko told AAP.
DroneShield CEO Oleg Vornik said the war showed drones had become central to modern warfare, "necessitating rapid innovation in counter-drone technologies".
The Australian company bolstered Ukraine's defences by giving soldiers the ability to detect and disable enemy drones.
A bilateral agreement between Ukraine and Australia would significantly elevate the company's ability to "operate more directly and responsively on the ground", Mr Vornik said.
He pointed to an arrangement in place between DroneShield and Ukrainian operators to ensure technology could be rapidly updated to tackle emerging threats.
Naval warfare expert Jennifer Parker said there were important lessons Australia could learn from Ukraine, but warned Canberra "can't lift and shift the capabilities they are using because our geography is fundamentally different".
Ukraine's use of naval drones was effective at hitting Russian ships and key infrastructure such as ports, but Australia would need to project power far beyond its coastline in a conflict, she said.
"Australia needs to defend the sea lines of communications, so we need to control certain parts of the ocean for certain periods of time - you can't do that with drones, you need ships," she said.
Naval drones could help protect key choke-points around Australia but the benefit of intelligence sharing and defence co-operation with Ukraine would come from lessons in cyber warfare and how to mobilise a local defence industry to build weapons at scale to avoid becoming over-reliant on imports, she said.
Australia is negotiating a security agreement with Ukraine to boost defence co-operation and codify support following Russia's invasion.
Defence experts say such a pact could help bolster collaboration between the two nations to boost Australia's capabilities.
Largely redacted briefing material prepared for Foreign Minister Penny Wong ahead of her December 2024 trip to Ukraine confirms the possibility of a security pact, but details remain classified.
Of the 28 bilateral security arrangements finalised with Ukraine as of late 2024, none were legally binding or included mutual defence or security obligations, one briefing document noted.
Ukraine's ambassador to Australia Vasyl Myroshnychenko didn't comment on any specific provisions that had been proposed due to the sensitivities of negotiations.
But he pointed to broad areas of collaboration such as intelligence sharing, drone technology and humanitarian assistance that have been covered in similar bilateral security agreements between Ukraine and other nations.
The British pact pledged increased co-operation between defence companies and the Ukrainian army, including building military repair facilities and providing cyber defence technology.
Humanitarian provisions are outlined in Japan's agreement, which pledges to provide medical treatment for wounded Ukrainian soldiers.
Japan and Ukraine also agreed to share and protect classified intelligence.
Ukraine has developed sophisticated drone capabilities after the three-and-a-half-year war that followed Russia's invasion.
"The innovation we have, no one in the world has it", Mr Myroshnychenko told AAP.
DroneShield CEO Oleg Vornik said the war showed drones had become central to modern warfare, "necessitating rapid innovation in counter-drone technologies".
The Australian company bolstered Ukraine's defences by giving soldiers the ability to detect and disable enemy drones.
A bilateral agreement between Ukraine and Australia would significantly elevate the company's ability to "operate more directly and responsively on the ground", Mr Vornik said.
He pointed to an arrangement in place between DroneShield and Ukrainian operators to ensure technology could be rapidly updated to tackle emerging threats.
Naval warfare expert Jennifer Parker said there were important lessons Australia could learn from Ukraine, but warned Canberra "can't lift and shift the capabilities they are using because our geography is fundamentally different".
Ukraine's use of naval drones was effective at hitting Russian ships and key infrastructure such as ports, but Australia would need to project power far beyond its coastline in a conflict, she said.
"Australia needs to defend the sea lines of communications, so we need to control certain parts of the ocean for certain periods of time - you can't do that with drones, you need ships," she said.
Naval drones could help protect key choke-points around Australia but the benefit of intelligence sharing and defence co-operation with Ukraine would come from lessons in cyber warfare and how to mobilise a local defence industry to build weapons at scale to avoid becoming over-reliant on imports, she said.
Australia is negotiating a security agreement with Ukraine to boost defence co-operation and codify support following Russia's invasion.
Defence experts say such a pact could help bolster collaboration between the two nations to boost Australia's capabilities.
Largely redacted briefing material prepared for Foreign Minister Penny Wong ahead of her December 2024 trip to Ukraine confirms the possibility of a security pact, but details remain classified.
Of the 28 bilateral security arrangements finalised with Ukraine as of late 2024, none were legally binding or included mutual defence or security obligations, one briefing document noted.
Ukraine's ambassador to Australia Vasyl Myroshnychenko didn't comment on any specific provisions that had been proposed due to the sensitivities of negotiations.
But he pointed to broad areas of collaboration such as intelligence sharing, drone technology and humanitarian assistance that have been covered in similar bilateral security agreements between Ukraine and other nations.
The British pact pledged increased co-operation between defence companies and the Ukrainian army, including building military repair facilities and providing cyber defence technology.
Humanitarian provisions are outlined in Japan's agreement, which pledges to provide medical treatment for wounded Ukrainian soldiers.
Japan and Ukraine also agreed to share and protect classified intelligence.
Ukraine has developed sophisticated drone capabilities after the three-and-a-half-year war that followed Russia's invasion.
"The innovation we have, no one in the world has it", Mr Myroshnychenko told AAP.
DroneShield CEO Oleg Vornik said the war showed drones had become central to modern warfare, "necessitating rapid innovation in counter-drone technologies".
The Australian company bolstered Ukraine's defences by giving soldiers the ability to detect and disable enemy drones.
A bilateral agreement between Ukraine and Australia would significantly elevate the company's ability to "operate more directly and responsively on the ground", Mr Vornik said.
He pointed to an arrangement in place between DroneShield and Ukrainian operators to ensure technology could be rapidly updated to tackle emerging threats.
Naval warfare expert Jennifer Parker said there were important lessons Australia could learn from Ukraine, but warned Canberra "can't lift and shift the capabilities they are using because our geography is fundamentally different".
Ukraine's use of naval drones was effective at hitting Russian ships and key infrastructure such as ports, but Australia would need to project power far beyond its coastline in a conflict, she said.
"Australia needs to defend the sea lines of communications, so we need to control certain parts of the ocean for certain periods of time - you can't do that with drones, you need ships," she said.
Naval drones could help protect key choke-points around Australia but the benefit of intelligence sharing and defence co-operation with Ukraine would come from lessons in cyber warfare and how to mobilise a local defence industry to build weapons at scale to avoid becoming over-reliant on imports, she said.
Australia is negotiating a security agreement with Ukraine to boost defence co-operation and codify support following Russia's invasion.
Defence experts say such a pact could help bolster collaboration between the two nations to boost Australia's capabilities.
Largely redacted briefing material prepared for Foreign Minister Penny Wong ahead of her December 2024 trip to Ukraine confirms the possibility of a security pact, but details remain classified.
Of the 28 bilateral security arrangements finalised with Ukraine as of late 2024, none were legally binding or included mutual defence or security obligations, one briefing document noted.
Ukraine's ambassador to Australia Vasyl Myroshnychenko didn't comment on any specific provisions that had been proposed due to the sensitivities of negotiations.
But he pointed to broad areas of collaboration such as intelligence sharing, drone technology and humanitarian assistance that have been covered in similar bilateral security agreements between Ukraine and other nations.
The British pact pledged increased co-operation between defence companies and the Ukrainian army, including building military repair facilities and providing cyber defence technology.
Humanitarian provisions are outlined in Japan's agreement, which pledges to provide medical treatment for wounded Ukrainian soldiers.
Japan and Ukraine also agreed to share and protect classified intelligence.
Ukraine has developed sophisticated drone capabilities after the three-and-a-half-year war that followed Russia's invasion.
"The innovation we have, no one in the world has it", Mr Myroshnychenko told AAP.
DroneShield CEO Oleg Vornik said the war showed drones had become central to modern warfare, "necessitating rapid innovation in counter-drone technologies".
The Australian company bolstered Ukraine's defences by giving soldiers the ability to detect and disable enemy drones.
A bilateral agreement between Ukraine and Australia would significantly elevate the company's ability to "operate more directly and responsively on the ground", Mr Vornik said.
He pointed to an arrangement in place between DroneShield and Ukrainian operators to ensure technology could be rapidly updated to tackle emerging threats.
Naval warfare expert Jennifer Parker said there were important lessons Australia could learn from Ukraine, but warned Canberra "can't lift and shift the capabilities they are using because our geography is fundamentally different".
Ukraine's use of naval drones was effective at hitting Russian ships and key infrastructure such as ports, but Australia would need to project power far beyond its coastline in a conflict, she said.
"Australia needs to defend the sea lines of communications, so we need to control certain parts of the ocean for certain periods of time - you can't do that with drones, you need ships," she said.
Naval drones could help protect key choke-points around Australia but the benefit of intelligence sharing and defence co-operation with Ukraine would come from lessons in cyber warfare and how to mobilise a local defence industry to build weapons at scale to avoid becoming over-reliant on imports, she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
25 minutes ago
- ABC News
Donald Trump handed Vladimir Putin multiple wins in Alaska
The bizarre summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in Alaska should sway all but the most credulous doubters that the White House is more interested in friendly relations with Russia's dictator than achieving a lasting peace in Ukraine. An abridged program saw the two leaders swiftly conclude the meeting earlier than had been expected. They then heaped praise on one another at a press conference that didn't feature any questions from the press. Worryingly, Trump is still as unconcerned about handing Putin symbolic victories as he is unwilling to put any real pressure on the Russian leader. The venue itself was telling. Russia has long carped that Alaska, which it sold to the US in the 1860s, is rightfully still its territory. Prior to the meeting, Kremlin mouthpieces made much of Putin's team taking a "domestic flight" to Anchorage, recalling billboards that went up in Russia in 2022 proclaiming "Alaska is ours!" That wasn't helped by yet another Trump gaffe prior to the meeting when he said he would "go back to the United States" if he didn't like what he heard. When Putin's plane landed, US military personnel kneeled to fix a red carpet for the Russian president to walk across — as a respected leader, rather than an indicted war criminal. Putin was then invited to ride along with Trump in his limousine. Beyond the optics, Trump handed Putin a number of other wins that will shore up his support at home and reinforce to the world that US-Russia relations have been normalised. A summit is typically offered as a favour — an indication of an earnest desire to improve relations. By inviting him to Alaska, Trump gave Putin a stage to meet the American president as an equal. There was no criticism of Russia's appalling human rights abuses, its increasingly violent attempts to fragment the transatlantic alliance, or its desire to reshape its fortunes by conquest. Instead, Trump sought again to portray Putin and himself as victims. He complained that both had been forced to "put up with the 'Russia, Russia, Russia' hoax" that Moscow had interfered in the 2016 US presidential election. He then gifted Putin yet another win, putting the onus for accepting Russian terms to end the war in Ukraine back onto the Ukrainian government and Europe, by observing "it's ultimately up to them". Putin got exactly what he could have hoped for. Aside from the photo ops, he framed any solution to the conflict around the "root causes" — code for NATO being to blame rather than Putin's unprovoked war of imperial aggression. He also dodged any prospect of vaguely threatened US sanctions, with Trump returning to his familiar refrain of needing "two weeks" to think about them again. And then, having pocketed both a symbolic and diplomatic bonanza, Putin promptly skipped lunch and flew home, presumably also accompanied by the bald-headed American eagle ornament that Trump had presented to him. After Trump's subsequent call with European leaders to brief them on the summit, details about a peace proposal began to leak out. Putin is reportedly prepared to fix the front lines as they stand in the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions of Ukraine, provided Kyiv agrees to cede all of Luhansk and Donetsk, including territory Russia doesn't currently hold. There would be no immediate ceasefire (which is Europe's and Ukraine's preference), but a move towards a permanent peace, which aligns with the Kremlin's interests. Make no mistake: this is a thinly disguised trap. It amounts to little more than Putin and Trump slinging a dead cat at Ukraine and Europe, then blaming them as laggards and warmongers when they object. For one thing, Ukraine still controls a sizeable portion of Donetsk. Giving up Donetsk and Luhansk would not only cede coal and mineral reserves to Moscow, but also require abandoning vital defensive positions that Russian forces have been unable to crack for years. It would also position Russia to launch potential future incursions, opening the way to Dnipro to the west and Kharkiv to the north. Trump's apparent backing for Russia's demands that Ukraine cede territory for peace — which NATO's European members reject — means Putin is succeeding in further fracturing the transatlantic partnership. There was also little mention of who would secure the peace, or how Ukraine can be reassured Putin will not simply use the breathing space to rearm and try again. Given the Kremlin has opposed NATO membership for Ukraine, would it really agree to European forces securing the new line of control? Or American ones? Would Ukraine be permitted to rearm, and to what extent? And, even in the event of a firmer US line in a future post-Trump era, Putin will still have achieved a land grab that would be impossible to undo. That, in turn, reinforces the message that conquest pays off. One apparently brighter note for Ukraine is the hint the US is prepared to offer it a "non-NATO" security guarantee. But that should also be viewed with caution. The Trump administration has already expressed public ambivalence about US commitments to defend Europe via NATO's Article 5, which has called its credibility as an ally into question. Would the US really fight for Ukraine if there were a future Russian invasion? To their credit, European leaders have responded firmly to Trump's dealings with Putin. They have welcomed the attempt to resolve the conflict, but told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky they will continue to back him if the deal is unacceptable. Zelensky, who is due to meet Trump in Washington on Monday, has already rejected the notion of ceding the Donbas region (Donetsk and Luhansk) to Russia. But Europe will have to face the reality that not only must it do more, but it must also provide sustained leadership on security issues, rather than just reacting to repeated crises. Ultimately, the Alaska summit shows that peace in Ukraine is only part of the broader picture for the Trump administration, which is dedicated to achieving warmer ties with Moscow, if not outright alignment with it. In that sense, it matters little to Trump how peace is attained in Ukraine, or how long it lasts. What's important is he receives credit for it, if not the Nobel Peace Prize he craves. And while Trump's vision of splitting Russia away from China is a fantasy, it is nonetheless one he has decided to entertain. That, in turn, compels America's European partners to respond accordingly. Already there is plenty of evidence that having failed to win a trade war with China, the Trump administration is now choosing to feast on America's allies instead. We see this in its fixation with tariffs, its bizarre desire to punish India and Japan, and the trashing of America's soft power. Even more sobering, Trump's diplomatic forays continue to see him treated as sport by authoritarian leaders. That, in turn, provides a broader lesson for America's friends and partners: their future security may well rest on America's good offices, but it is foolish to assume that automatically places their fortunes above the whims of the powerful. Matthew Sussex is an associate professor at the Griffith Asia Institute and a fellow at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at the Australian National University. This piece first appeared on The Conversation.
SBS Australia
25 minutes ago
- SBS Australia
'We hate his guts': Ukraine's ambassador calls on Australia to not 'reward Russia'
A senior Ukranian diplomat has described the Russian president as a "war criminal", telling SBS World News, "we hate his guts", as Russia continues its assault on Ukraine. Russia holds several Ukrainian territories, which it has seized since the full-scale invasion began in February 2022, and appears unlikely to relinquish them in ongoing negotiations. The fate of that Ukrainian land has been a sticking point in past peace talks, but now US President Donald Trump is hoping to shift the tide as he meets with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House on Monday (10 pm AEST). There are hopes the talks could help secure a peace deal and end the war in Ukraine, but Russian President Vladimir Putin has been described as untrustworthy by Ukraine's ambassador to Australia. "We haven't seen anything from Russia that Russians were actually serious about ending this war; they've actually stepped up their attacks," Vasyl Myroshnychenko said. "They have brought in more people to Ukraine, and they have sent more missiles and drones to destroy and kill more Ukrainians, so that's what we have seen. "Vladimir Putin is a war criminal, he's indicted by the International Criminal Court and we hate the guts of him." 'Remain hopeful' for peace talks The meeting between Trump and Zelenskyy follows a peace summit last week hosted by the US between Trump and Putin. The meeting in Alaska excluded Ukrainian leaders and, while failing to reach a deal, reportedly included discussions of Ukraine potentially giving up land to Russia. Myroshnychenko said he was hopeful for a positive outcome, but warned ceding Ukrainian land to Russia would be a "reward" for aggression. "President Trump gave a call to Zelenskyy and to the European leaders and he briefed them on the substance of the negotiations. We have to remain hopeful at this stage.," he said. "What we need to avoid — and I think Australia understands it, Americans should understand it — we can't reward Russia for aggression." Members of the Australian Ukrainian community have expressed outrage over the meeting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. Kateryna Argyrou, the chair of the Australian Federation of Ukrainian Organisations, said any peace talks must involve Ukraine. "At the Alaska summit, it was revolting to see President Trump lay out the red carpet, applaud and embrace Vladimir Putin, a murderous, indicted war criminal who has been waging war against the Ukrainians for more than a decade," she told SBS News. She said the stakes "could not be higher" for the meeting. "Ukraine deserves more than symbolic gestures — it deserves concrete commitments to its sovereignty, territorial integrity, and long-term security," she said. "We are deeply worried by reports suggesting that the Trump administration has indicated territorial concessions may be on the table. Any proposal that legitimises aggression or redraws borders under duress is unacceptable. Peace must not come at the cost of justice." Zelenskyy won't be alone this time European leaders will be joining the key meeting between Zelenskyy and Trump at the White House. It will be attended by the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, as well as leaders from the UK, France, Finland, and Germany. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese acknowledged a lack of trust between Putin and other world leaders, saying Ukraine should be a part of negotiations. "We know that Mr Putin has designs on not just Ukraine. The concern is certainly there, and there is certainly a lack of trust between Mr Putin and European and other leaders of democracies," he told Sky News on Monday. "We stand with Ukraine, we want to see peace in the region. Ukraine must, of course, not have a solution imposed on it. They need to be a part of those negotiations."
Perth Now
25 minutes ago
- Perth Now
‘Terrorism': Neo-Nazi's odd offer to cops
A prominent Australian neo-Nazi claimed that police were seeking to arrest him over a violent confrontation at a rally as he faced court on allegations he sought to intimidate an officer and his wife. Thomas Sewell, 32, disputes the allegations, telling reporters outside the Melbourne Magistrates' Court on Monday that it was instead him and his organisation experiencing intimidation and 'terrorism' from police. 'All of these charges come from the fact that we are advocating for white Australians; the government is against us doing that,' he said. It's understood the police investigation relates to an alleged assault on a man in Melbourne's Bourke St Mall in the early hours of Saturday, August 7. Thomas Sewell is facing allegations he sought to intimidate a police officer and his wife. NewsWire / Luis Enrique Ascui Credit: News Corp Australia About 100 black-clad men held signs and flags, including the Australian flag, the National Socialist Network flag and a sign reading 'White Man Fight Back', as they marched down the shopping mall in the city's CBD. Video from the scene captured a man, believed to be Mr Sewell, brawling with a member of the public. The march was condemned by Victorian Premier Jacinta Allen, who called the group 'goons' and vowed to introduce powers for police to unmask protesters. 'Nazis don't belong in this country and they know it. That's why they hide behind masks in the dark,' she said. Police were called after about 100 members of the National Socialist Network marched through Melbourne's CBD in the early hours of Saturday morning. Outside court, the National Socialist Network (NSN) figurehead showed media several stitches to a cut above his left ear. 'I do have some injuries from an assault on my person about a week ago. We did a large demonstration; we marched down Bourke St Mall about midnight … and I was attacked by a deluded, deranged person,' he said. 'The police have refused to charge the man with assault and instead have threatened to arrest me today.' Mr Sewell was supported in court. NewsWire / Luis Enrique Ascui Credit: News Corp Australia Mr Sewell said he'd offered police to arrest him outside of court but wouldn't attend the Melbourne West police station because he believed it would breach his bail conditions. Victoria Police has been contacted for comment. Mr Sewell was supported by six associates, clad in matching Helly Hansen jackets bearing the NSN's emblem and the Australian flag, including Jacob Hersant, Joel Davis and Nathan Bull. He led the march through Melbourne's CBD. X Credit: Supplied His comments came as a three-day hearing on allegations he sought to intimidate a police officer and their spouse was delayed following an application from the prosecution. Prosecutors allege Mr Sewell intimidated the officer and his partner on both October 21 and November 7 last year. He is also charged with alleged breaches of personal safety intervention orders protecting the couple on November 7 and failing to comply with a direction to provide police with access to an electronic device. The November 7 charges relate to Mr Sewell mentioning on a podcast hosted by Mr Davis and Blair Cottrell that a police officer allegedly attempted to remove a NSN member's face covering during a protest. Thomas Sewell appears on a podcast hosted by Joel Davis and Blair Cottrell. Supplied/ Rumble. Credit: News Corp Australia United Australian Party leader Ralph Babet watched the court hearing via videolink. The hearing was pushed back to September 1 by magistrate Michelle Hodgson after prosecutor Louis Andrews flagged the police officer's wife had expressed reluctance to give evidence. 'The prosecution has to consider whether or not to make an application for that witness to be treated as unavailable,' Mr Andrews said. Mr Sewell asked the court to 'note on the record' that police were seeking to arrest him over the CBD incident. He will return to court on September 1. NewsWire / Luis Enrique Ascui Credit: News Corp Australia Outside court, he vowed to fight the charges, labelling them 'false' and 'political persecution'. 'We have the right as Australian citizens to mention what police do and don't do in terms of their attacks on us and that is the beginning of this incident,' he said. 'Explaining the police's actions to the public and they've kicked my door in, arrested me and intimidated my family'.Mr Sewell will return to court for a hearing on the allegations next month.
