Labor and the Coalition have very different ideas about ties to the United States

Australia Broadcast Center

a day ago

The prime minister's well-telegraphed announcement this week that Australia will recognise a Palestinian state surprised precisely no one in the end.
Nor did the opposition's rejection of this diplomatic step.
But the arguments from both sides this week revealed more than just a foreign policy split over the Middle East. The growing divide over how deferential Australia should be towards the United States has become a chasm.
The prime minister and opposition leader have expressed starkly different views on whether Australia should be prepared to "break" with its great ally on such a major foreign policy question.
The partisan divide over how closely to align with the US has been steadily building since Donald Trump's return to the White House.
The Albanese government remains committed to the US alliance. It wants AUKUS to survive the ongoing Pentagon review and is confident it will. But at the same time, the prime minister is demonstrating greater independence from the US than any of his recent predecessors would have dared.
The unpopularity of Trump in Australia has allowed him the room to move.
Australia and the United States are now at odds on climate change (Albanese is sticking with net zero and the Paris Agreement), trade (Trump's tariffs are "not the act of a friend") and defence spending (Australia is resisting US calls to reach a 3.5 per cent of GDP target).
In his John Curtin oration last month, Albanese spoke of this greater independence within the US alliance as a virtue. He sees a more sovereign stance benefiting Australia's relations in the region and Labor's political standing at home.
When pressed this week on the implications of splitting with the US on Palestinian recognition, the prime minister's response was revealing. "We make our sovereign decisions as a nation state in Australia's national interest, and we are aligning ourselves with like-minded countries," he said.
"Sovereignty" and "national interest" carry a patriotic appeal. Aligning with "like-minded countries" refers to the UK, Canada, France who have all committed to Palestinian recognition. The US, notably, is not regarded as "like-minded" here.
Australia has been increasingly siding with this "like-minded" group as western nations navigate the turbulence of Trump. In statements condemning Israel, in discussions about how to support Ukraine without the US, on climate and trade — this "like-minded" coalition is finding more common ground.
Opposition Leader Sussan Ley's view of how Australia should prioritise the US relationship could not be more different.
The Coalition is already more closely aligned to Trump's world view on a range of fronts.
It's considering joining Trump in dropping the net zero target. On trade, it seeks to blame the Albanese government, at least in part, for Trump's tariffs. On defence spending, the Coalition's pledge to reach a 3 per cent of GDP target was re-stated immediately after the election, while everything else remains under review.
Barely a day goes by when the opposition isn't criticising the prime minister failing to secure a face-to-face meeting in the Oval Office. The Coalition views this as vital. It derided the length of Albanese's recent visit to China, on the grounds he should be in Washington instead.
On Palestinian recognition, the opposition leader revealed just how heavily she thinks the US relationship should weigh in Australia's thinking.
"There can be no breaking with our closest ally," Ley declared at a press conference after a shadow cabinet decision to oppose and reverse Palestinian recognition.
"It's disrespectful of the relationship with the US," she told 2GB.
Shadow Finance Minister James Paterson, incidentally, struck a somewhat different tone. While also strongly criticising the government's decision, he told Sky News Australia "of course, Australia's foreign policy is a matter for Australia, and we should decide it consistent with our own national interest, regardless of what our friends or allies might say".
It was an acknowledgement the Coalition's position should still be framed as a sovereign decision, not one driven by deference to the United States.
For his part, Trump is clearly not in favour of Palestinian recognition while Hamas remains in place and before a peace process. He agrees with those who argue recognition only rewards Hamas. He dismisses the significance of momentum amongst US allies who have taken this step.
But Australia's decision to join the list hasn't caused much of a reaction from Trump at all. Indeed, the level of presidential concern appears to be subsiding as more allies take this step.
A White House official told the Nine newspapers while the president's position is clear, he "is not married to any one solution as it pertains to building a more peaceful region".
Still, Trump is nothing if not unpredictable. He may well say something much stronger if directly asked. This difference over Palestinian recognition could add to strains in the Australia-US relationship.
The Albanese government has no doubt factored in that risk, along with all the other risks that go along with the decision to recognise a Palestinian state.
The fear of upsetting Trump, however, isn't stopping US allies from moving towards Palestinian recognition.
And here in Australia, this decision has exposed an even wider gap between the prime minister and opposition leader over whether "breaking with our closest ally" is OK.
David Speers is national political lead and host of Insiders, which airs on ABC TV at 9am on Sunday or on iview.