
Gas Pains: Why Australia Must Reset Its Energy Ties With Japan and South Korea
Behind closed doors, Australia has been lobbying hard to secure its bid to host the UNFCCC's annual climate forum in 2026. Although the deal has yet to be inked, key stakeholders in this space are already preparing for an Australia-Pacific COP31, with an end to fossil fuel expansion expected to be a key pillar of negotiations.
Following its decisive re-election in May, Australia's center-left Albanese government is confident it can sell its climate credentials on the world stage. This is in no small part due to a rapid rollout of renewable energy projects, with over 40 percent of Australia's main electricity grid now powered by solar, wind, and hydropower.
However, this success story is dramatically undercut by Australia's unwavering support for its fossil fuel exports, and the diplomatic nexus protecting this trade.
Australia is the second-largest exporter of gas in the world, and Japan and South Korea are two of the primary destinations for this gas.
While these countries have historically relied on Australia's gas exports (i.e. liquefied natural gas, or LNG), both Japan and South Korea have made public commitments to transition away from fossil fuels and increase renewable energy capacity, and their domestic demand for gas is already declining.
In spite of this, the Japanese and Korean governments continue to invest heavily in the extraction, processing, transport, and deployment of gas. Between 2008 and 2024, both countries contributed over US$20 billion of public finance into Australian gas projects, as outlined in Jubilee Australia's newly released research report. Such finance, funneled through export credit agencies, has been a key factor in the economic viability of many large Australian gas projects.
With these projects facing increasing scrutiny on the grounds of their intensive emissions contributions, international civil society have called for an end of the Japanese and Korean taxpayers bankrolling fossil fuel expansion.
In what have become familiar refrains in diplomatic and trade talks, Japanese and Korean financiers point to two key justifications for their expansion of Australia's gas production. The first is the need for further gas supply to meet their domestic energy security requirements. The second is that LNG is a bridging fuel, needed to transition regional developing economies out of coal and into renewables.
Neither argument stacks up.
A growing evidence base has been produced by independent financial analysts that demonstrates Japan is contracting more gas than its domestic economy requires. The surplus is resold around the region, with the buildout of the LNG supply chain intended to keep the gas industry operating and profiting for as long as possible. Japanese companies and public financiers invest heavily in downstream infrastructure, such as power plants, to 'cultivate Asian demand.' While Korean investment in Australian gas projects has declined in recent years, major industry firms continue to invest in LNG shipbuilding and transport. These corporate profit margins rely on the Australian government keeping the tap running, by opening up new and emissions-intensive gas fields for export purposes.
This 'Gas Empire,' as detailed in the Jubilee report, is heavily reliant on a sophisticated diplomatic apparatus to protect its interests. When the Albanese government has developed policies to support Australia's climate and energy priorities that would potentially derail proposed fossil fuel projects, Japanese government-aligned think tanks and industry bodies have made bold interventions in the Australian media to skew the domestic energy debate. These interventions appeal to Australia's national pride in being a reliable energy trading partner, with the more benign being calls to 'keep the lights on in Tokyo.' However, more alarming rhetoric has implied any moves by the Australian government to phase down its fossil fuel exports would jeopardize global peace.
Some members of the Australian government have seemingly welcomed these interventions, expressly inviting submissions by Japanese and Korean gas industry groups in drafting Australia's energy policies, notably last year's Future Gas Strategy that envisaged a role for gas 'beyond' 2050. As concern continues to grow within the Australian public about its own energy security, and the substantial taxpayer subsidies and favorable arrangements provided to the fossil fuel industry, we have to ask the question: can the Australian government exercise sovereignty in its own energy policies?
With COP31 on the horizon, the Albanese government is running out of time to answer this question.
A key test in the lead up to this event will be at the Asia Zero Emissions Community, or AZEC. Despite the name, civil society groups around the Asia-Pacific have lambasted AZEC as a greenwashing exercise for Japan's fossil fuel expansion. The criticism is that AZEC enables fossil fuel interests to promote technologies to 'mitigate' their emissions. These dangerous technologies, such as carbon capture and storage and ammonia co-firing, are proposed as solutions but consistently fail in their efforts to reduce emissions. Instead, they are promoted to justify opening up new gas projects. The gap between Japan's rhetoric and its action has previously been noted by other analysts on The Diplomat.
As a member of AZEC, Australia has a responsibility to hold it to account. Australia is involved in 12 proposed joint ventures under the initiative, only three of which are actually focused on renewables. With renewable energy alternatives already cheaper, cleaner, and less susceptible to geopolitical tensions, Australia's continued support for Japan's mythical fossil fuel abatement technologies is placing it on the wrong side of history. Though the comparison may have seemed unlikely some years ago, these diplomatic efforts to greenwash fossil fuels stand in stark contrast to China, which is well on the way to realizing its vision of being the region's renewable energy export superpower.
As humanity stands on the precipice, United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres has called for world leaders to scale up ambition to avoid irreversible climate damage. At a recent summit with world leaders he proclaimed that 'the world is moving forward, full-speed' and added: 'No group or government can stop the clean energy revolution.'
Diplomatic efforts between Australia, South Korea, and Japan must reflect this imperative. Australia's commitment to the Clean Energy Transition Partnership has marked an end to its public financing of the international fossil fuel sector, and the Albanese government must now take active steps to welcome South Korea and Japan into the agreement. Bilateral decarbonization agreements must be struck to support an orderly transition away from fossil fuel reliance. And in the lead up to COP31, Australia must set a clear standard that rejects the influence of fossil fuel lobbyists in multilateral climate negotiations.
But above all, Australia, South Korea and Japan must embrace the diplomacy of the future: no new coal, oil, and gas.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Kyodo News
39 minutes ago
- Kyodo News
Japan, U.S. discussing scenario for nuclear weapons use: sources
TOKYO - Japan and the United States have been discussing a scenario, in which the U.S. military would use nuclear weapons in the event of a contingency, during talks on so-called extended deterrence, sources close to the two countries said Saturday. It is the first time the allies have delved into the issue, in a sign that they are seeking to strengthen the U.S. nuclear umbrella, under which Japan is protected, amid intensifying military activity by China, North Korea and Russia, the sources said. Japan is the only country to have experienced an atomic bomb attack and has long advocated for a nuclear-free world. However, it also relies on the U.S. nuclear umbrella for defense. The United States dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima on Aug. 6, 1945, and a second one three days later on Nagasaki in the final days of World War II. As part of the extended deterrence talks in recent years, Tokyo and Washington have held multiple tabletop exercises to strategize a scenario in which a conflict broke out in East Asia and the United States is pressured to use nuclear weapons, according to the sources. With that in mind, Japan and the United States reviewed how to coordinate and how to deal with issues stemming from the possible use of nuclear weapons, such as managing public opinion. Discussions also broached how much information the United States can share with Japan, the sources said. In December, the countries announced their first guidelines for extended deterrence -- including U.S. nuclear protection -- to better tackle regional security challenges. But details were not revealed due to the sensitivity of information related to national security, according to a senior Japanese Foreign Ministry official. Diplomatic sources said the guidelines stipulated the steps the countries would take should the United States use nuclear weapons under Article 5 of the bilateral security pact. Article 5 obliges the United States to defend territories under Japan's administration from armed attack. The sources close to the nations also said the guidelines made it clear that Japan can convey its thoughts on a possible nuclear weapons use. Since extended deterrence talks were established in 2010, senior-level discussions, led by top foreign affairs and defense officials, have been held once or twice a year. The dialogue was upgraded in July 2024, with the first-ever ministerial talks on the issue held in Tokyo to better coordinate the alliance with an eye on China's military buildup and North Korea's missile and nuclear development.


Kyodo News
2 hours ago
- Kyodo News
Japan, U.S. ministers reached trade agreement in mid-June: sources
TOKYO - Japan's chief negotiator reached an agreement with U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick in mid-June on a deal offering massive Japanese investment in the United States in exchange for a reduction in tariffs, sources close to the matter said Saturday. Over the following month, Japan focused on convincing U.S. President Donald Trump through Lutnick of the advantages of the agreement, with the proposal of expanding imports of U.S.-grown rice used as the final bargaining chip. The trade deal, announced by Trump on July 23, includes tariffs on Japanese cars set at 15 percent -- lower than the 27.5 percent that was to have been levied -- in exchange for $550 billion of Japanese investment in the United States. During the course of the negotiations, which spanned around three months from mid-April, Japan identified Lutnick as the only person who could communicate "directly and on a deep level" with Trump due to their close friendship of over 30 years, and directed its efforts on him, according to one of the sources. Ryosei Akazawa, Japan's chief tariff negotiator, built trust with Lutnick not only through in-person talks but also through dozens of phone calls, the source said. Believing that Lutnick placed a high priority on economic security amid China concerns, Japan emphasized its willingness to contribute to strengthening U.S. domestic supply chains and eventually reached an understanding with him. Trump, however, maintained a hardline stance even in late June, venting frustration that Japan does not import significant amounts of American cars and rice. "I'm not sure we're going to make a deal. I doubt it," he had said, while demanding additional concessions in exchange for lowering tariffs. The tide turned on July 22 immediately following Japan's upper house election. A sudden meeting was arranged for the following day between Trump and Akazawa, who was in Washington for an eighth round of talks. Akazawa and Lutnick began to "rehearse" in preparation for the talks, with Lutnick suggesting that a total investment of $400 billion be proposed in the expectation that Trump would ask for $500 billion. A board was prepared by U.S. officials to clearly show Trump how much Japan would investment. But Trump demanded even more, leaving Akazawa no choice but to agree to $550 billion. A senior official of the prime minister's office acknowledged that the deal does not align with World Trade Organization rules or the Japan-U.S. trade agreement that took effect in January 2020, but also conceded that Trump "is a president who genuinely believes in protecting his country through tariffs."


The Mainichi
3 hours ago
- The Mainichi
Australia, Britain sign 50-yr AUKUS treaty amid US review
SYDNEY (Kyodo) -- Australia and Britain signed a new 50-year treaty on Saturday to cement the existing trilateral AUKUS nuclear submarine program with the United States, reaffirming their commitment to the plan amid a U.S. review of the three-way pact. The treaty will enable comprehensive cooperation on the design, build, operation, sustainment, and disposal of new AUKUS submarines, as well as supporting port visits and the rotational presence of a British Astute-class submarine at a navy base near Perth on Australia's west coast, according to a joint statement. The new bilateral treaty between London and Canberra sits under the existing trilateral AUKUS security agreement involving Washington. Under the plan announced by the three countries in 2021, Australia will purchase nuclear-powered submarines from the United States in the early 2030s and deliver its first domestically built vessels in the early 2040s. The strengthened commitment to the AUKUS submarine program comes after the United States announced a review of the trilateral AUKUS pact in June, seeking to ensure the agreement aligns with President Donald Trump's "America First" agenda. Speaking at the signing ceremony in the southeast Australian city of Geelong on Saturday, British Defense Secretary John Healey said the new treaty will fortify the Indo-Pacific and strengthen the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. "This is a treaty that will define the relationship between our two nations and safeguard the securities of our countries for our children and our children's children to come," said Healey. At a press conference in Sydney on Friday, Australian Defense Minister Richard Marles stressed that it was "the most natural thing in the world" for a new government to undertake a review, while Healey said that both Australia and Britain welcome it as an opportunity for the Trump administration to renew their commitment to the pact.