Interview - Sky News Agenda

Subjects: Zimbabwe, Trilateral Strategic Dialogue

DAVID SPEERS: First though, to the crisis in Zimbabwe.

President Robert Mugabe is pressing ahead with the run-off election against Opposition Leader Morgan Tsvangirai on Friday, despite Mr Tsvangirai pulling out of the race, fearing even more political violence.

Australia's Foreign Minister, Stephen Smith, has called on the world to strengthen sanctions against the Mugabe regime, but he has ruled out military intervention as an option worth considering.

I spoke to Mr Smith a short time ago.

STEPHEN SMITH: Well, Australia, in terms of sanctions, has for a number of years, been at the forefront. I think in terms of sanctions, whether they're travel or financial sanctions, Australia, the European Union, the United States, the United Kingdom, these have really been the four leading sanctions countries or in the case of...

SPEERS: …they haven't had much impact on Mugabe?

SMITH: Well, I'm not sure that's right. They have had an impact. We've been very careful to make sure that we haven't stopped, for example, humanitarian assistance or food aid. Our sanctions are aimed at the regime itself. I don't think it's right to there hasn't been any effect. But Australia can do...

SPEERS: …but the political violence is continuing?

SMITH: Yes, which is why Australia has been doing a lot and can do a lot.

We're asking other countries to look at their own sanctions regime, we're calling upon the Southern African Development Community states to be more robust and take more action.

And last night, for example, I had a conversation with two of my important African colleagues, the Foreign Minister from Zambia and Tanzania, because their respective presidents chair SADC, as it's called, the Southern African Development Community states and the African Union. And one of them said to me, you know, Australia should keep shouting because when you raise your voice, it makes it easier for the African states to put pressure on. And that's what we've been doing.

SPEERS: How important is South Africa here? Because we still haven't heard from the South African President, Thabo Mbeki, who is something of a mediator here between Mugabe and Morgan Tsvangirai. We haven't heard from him yet?

SMITH: Well, we have, as I've expressed before, been disappointed that South Africa hasn't been as robust as some of the other nation-states like Tanzania, Zambia and Botswana. And South Africa is crucial.

President Mbeki's approach has been one of what he describes as quiet diplomacy. For some time, he's been of the view that there should be an attempt to arrange a political solution between Mr Tsvangirai and Mr Mugabe. Most other people have frankly been sceptical of that, and I think it's the case that the so-called quiet diplomacy hasn't quite worked. I think South Africa needs to be more robust as Botswana and Tanzania and Zambia are now.

SPEERS: You today, basically took the prospect of military intervention off the table. You said that you weren't interested in it, other world leaders aren't interested in it. But in doing that, doesn't that take some pressure off Robert Mugabe, knowing that isn't on the table?

SMITH: No, I'm not sure that's right. I mean, the pressure we need is both political pressure, neighbourhood pressure, regional pressure from the African Union states and the neighbours on Mr Mugabe. And that can come by talking to him, by indicating just how deleterious this is not just for Zimbabwe, but also for southern Africa generally as a region.

The reason I've said I don't believe that military enforcement action is feasible is because I don't think you'll get international community support for it. And you certainly won't get support for it in the area that counts most, namely Zimbabwe's neighbours.

There is, I think, some prospect realistically of thinking in terms of peacekeeping. But again, I think in the first instance that would have to come from the African Union states just as in the first round of the presidential elections, the election observers came from those states.

SPEERS: You're heading to Japan tonight for the Trilateral Security Dialogue with Australia, Japan and the United States. There is some sensitivity on China's part about this grouping, this trilateral dialogue. Will you be discussing China at all, its military growth, with Japan and the United States?

SMITH: Well, it's a very important strategic dialogue. It's one of the things which when we came to office we said very strongly we support. It's a good regional arrangement, you have two allies of the United States, Australia and Japan. You have the very long-standing, enduring strategic, economic and security partnership between Australia and Japan.

So it's a good thing for our region. Yes, we will discuss global strategic issues.

SPEERS: Including China?

SMITH: Well, including the rise of China, including the rise of India.

As you know, this week I hosted the Indian External Affairs Minister, Mr Mukherjee. A very successful visit.

SPEERS: So how should that be seen in Beijing, then?

SMITH: Well, there's been no great sensitivity so far as the trilateral is concerned.

There's some well acknowledged sensitivity in China about a one-off meeting of officers called the Quadrilateral, which included India as well. But the Trilateral Strategic Dialogue is not aimed at any one country or aimed at any particular countries. It's a very good, important opportunity for Australia, Japan, and the United States to sit down and talk about the region.

I'll raise, for example, better regional cooperation between our three nations on humanitarian assistance and disaster relief in our own region. It's a good way of encouraging more Japanese engagement in the Asia-Pacific and ongoing United States engagement in the Asia-Pacific.

We'll also talk about some of the key global or strategic issues. I want to talk about Afghanistan and Pakistan, which is obviously a key counterterrorism issue where Australia and the United States and Japan all have an interest, Japan in the civil reconstruction sense.

SPEERS: You will also have an opportunity for a bilateral talk with your Japanese counterpart. Now, the issue of whaling has been the big sensitivity between the two countries.

Last week, Kevin Rudd promised that the Labor Government would, quote, take Japan and any other country necessary to court, to the International Court of Justice, in order to bring a stop to this practice.

Does that promise, that commitment by Kevin Rudd to take international court action against Japan still stand?

SMITH: Well, we've made it clear that we haven't discounted or put out of question international legal action. Our objective here is...

SPEERS: That was a commitment to do it, not to consider it?

SMITH: The commitment is to get the Japanese to cease whaling. We've said that we want to try and exhaust diplomatic efforts to do that.

SPEERS: This commitment was to take them to court?

MR SMITH: And we continue to give consideration to the taking of legal action.

But what does the Australian community want and what was our commitment? Our commitment was to persuade the Japanese to cease whaling in the Great Southern Ocean. If we can do that diplomatically, that will achieve our objective.

This week, for example, you've seen Peter Garrett at the IWC, pursuing discussions at the IWC.

SPEERS: The International Whaling Commission. What's that achieved this week?

SMITH: Well, Peter has put Australia's position in terms of wanting Japan to cease whaling in the Great Southern Ocean...

SPEERS: And they've said no.

SMITH: But he's also made the point that Australia believes very strongly that the International Whaling Commission can become a much better forum, a genuine forum which is discussing and making decisions about conservation and the environment, including the conservation and preservation of whales, not just the, if you like, a combative forum where what's announced by some nation-states is a whale cull for a season.

But let me just come back to the question of how we're approaching the whaling issue.

We want the Japanese to cease whaling. We're exhausting diplomatic efforts to that effect. Yes, I will speak with Mr Komura, my Japanese counterpart, about whaling.

If we come to a conclusion that we've exhausted diplomatic measures and we haven't achieved the result we want, then of course we will consider, as we've made clear, international legal action, either before the International Court of Justice or before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.

SPEERS: And when are you going to appoint the whaling envoy that Kevin Rudd announced would be appointed back in December?

SMITH: We're giving consideration to the timing of that announcement. We'll do that at the time where we think it'll help our efforts.

But again, if I can just make this point: our ultimate objective here is not when and whether we appoint an envoy, when and whether we take international legal action, when and whether I have conversations with my Japanese counterpart. Our objective here is to get the Japanese to cease whaling in the Great Southern Ocean.

That's what I think the vast, overwhelming majority of Australians want, and that remains our objective and we're pursuing every means available to us to do that.

SPEERS: Stephen Smith, thanks for your time.

SMITH: Thank you.

Media Inquiries: Foreign Minister's office (02) 6277 7500