E&OE
22 July 2008
Interview - BBC News, Singapore
JONATHAN HEAD: My first question. Minister you’ve arrived at this meeting of the Association of South East Asian Nations; an organisation which is still struggling to become coherent and have a voice. What’s your impression of how ASEAN itself is evolving, especially on thorny issues like Burma?
STEPHEN SMITH: Well, I think ASEAN is central to the South East Asian region, central to the Asia-Pacific. Australia has been a dialogue partner for over 30 years, we were the first dialogue partner for ASEAN. That reflects our thoughts on our engagement with the Asia-Pacific. Like any institution, ASEAN itself is evolving. When ASEAN was first created, no-one contemplated dialogue partners, no one contemplated the East Asia Summit, no one contemplated the ASEAN Regional Forum. So, there is evolution.
I think qualitatively the advance that ASEAN is making is now starting to make a real practical influence in some of the region’s difficult problems. Its intervention in Burma in the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis was very important. Currently, both Cambodia and Thailand are looking to ASEAN to play some role in facilitating their differences over the Preah Vehear temple. There is a need for ASEAN to be looking at practical solutions to assist the region with the resolution of conflict.
HEAD: Minister, one of the initiatives that your government has presented is the idea of the Asia Pacific Community, another forum. What is the value of that do you think, when we have APEC, ASEAN, East Asia Summit and all those?
SMITH: Well, each of those institutions do their own work very well. ASEAN itself, East Asia Summit, ASEAN Regional Forum and APEC, but when you look at all of those institutions, there’s not one institution in the Asia-Pacific region where of all of the nation states are in the same room at the same time.
Australia’s rationale is when you look at the sweep of this century, economic, political, strategic influence is shifting to the Asia-Pacific region. The rise of China, the rise of India, and inexorable shift of importance to the Asia-Pacific region. Are the Asia-Pacific region’s institutions and its architecture ready for that?
So we’ve started a conversation. One of two things will occur. There’ll be the creation of a new body or there’ll be an evolution from one or more of the existing bodies, which is what we’ve seen with ASEAN itself.
HEAD: But these bodies are often dismissed as talk shops. Every time APEC comes around it’s just a gathering of leaders who don’t actually appear to decide very much. Why another one?
SMITH: Well sometimes summits are dismissed as talk shops, but in the end they do things, make decisions and in terms of regional or international institutions their role is to help bring stability, peace, security and prosperity to the region and more generally to the global or international community.
So all of these things play their part, play their role. We think, for example, that the ASEAN and related institutions have been very important in helping to bring stability to the region, but also very importantly to bring prosperity to the region. Again, a lot of people look at the rise and prosperity of China, I also look at the rise and prosperity of India. I also look at the rise and prosperity of the ASEAN nations themselves, exponentially on the growth rate over the last couple of decades.
Some of the things that have been facilitated by the ASEAN regional infrastructure are free trade agreements, discussions about financial regulation, synchronisation of that, to encourage trade, to encourage investment. All of these things in the end have a productive output and a productive output is stability and prosperity. That’s the aspiration of Australia and the aspiration of all the nations in the region.
HEAD: How satisfied is Australia with the trading arrangements that you’ve been pushing for, with a free trade agreement with ASEAN for some time. It’s going pretty slowly isn’t it?
SMITH: These things always take time. We’re actually pursuing an ASEAN Australia - New Zealand free trade agreement. We’re also pushing for a comprehensive economic partnership in the East Asia Summit context. We have a number of free trade agreements in the region that are currently effective, under negotiation or on the books, including negotiations with China, including contemplating a free trade agreement with India. So these things always take time, but there’s no doubt that in the end, provided they are WTO consistent, these are effective in encouraging investment and trade liberalisation between countries and between regions.
HEAD: One of the defining aspects of the last few years in Asia is the apparent disengagement of the United States in this region. That’s the widely felt perception here. How concerned is Australia about that and what message would we be giving to the next US administration about this region?
SMITH: Well, firstly I don’t know whether that perception is a reality, so rather than looking upon past performance or perceptions let’s deal with the reality. Australia believes it’s absolutely essential, absolutely essential for the United States to engage in the Asia-Pacific region, so we encourage that and the region itself encourages it. So, the ongoing engagement of and by the United States is unambiguously in the region’s interest, and that’s ongoing. So whichever administration is elected in the United States' democratic process, we support that engagement and encourage it and so does the region.
HEAD: What’s your government’s view about the best strategy for pushing political change in Burma; one of the biggest issues here. Because we’ve seen people lose faith in the sanctions regimes they’ve imposed and at the same time ASEAN clearly doesn’t believe constructive engagement works anymore. What do you think is the best way forward in Burma?
SMITH: Well I think firstly, if I can deal with the positive, I think that what ASEAN did, together with the United Nations, in forging a tripartite arrangement to get international assistance into Burma in the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis was very, very good work. That has, if you like, opened the door. And the success of that, after a very slow start, and the success of that in the ASEAN region itself in the last couple of days has encouraged the Australia Government to give a further $30 million contribution towards humanitarian assistance. Australia very strongly continues to be of the view that there has to be political change in Burma. We have very tough sanctions against Burma, and I’ve made these points yesterday.
HEAD: Do you think the sanctions should continue?
SMITH: Absolutely.
HEAD: Even though many people say they don’t work in Burma?
SMITH: Well, that’s not our view. They do have an impact and effect.
HEAD: But don’t they mostly hurt the Burmese people?
SMITH: Well, that’s not the nature of our sanctions. Our sanctions are predicated on the basis of directly impacting adversely on the financial arrangements and the travel arrangements of people close to and in the regime. And we continue, as we have for example with the cyclone, our humanitarian assistance direct to the Burmese people themselves.
I made all these points yesterday in the Burmese dialogue, the bilateral meeting. We want Burma to return to democracy. We want … respect for human rights. We want all of the political players, including Aung San Suu Kyi to have a role in the political process (inaudible).
But the regional community, the international community, has to continue to apply pressure to the Burmese regime to effect political change. Is it a long, hard process where the regime from time to time seems impervious? Yes, it is. But the prospect of the alternative, doing nothing, is just simply not acceptable.
HEAD: I’m interested in your own personal role. You’re a new government, a Labor Government in after a very long period in opposition. Labor has a long tradition of deep engagement in Asia. Do you see a change in Australia’s foreign policy towards Asia?
SMITH: Well, we’ve come to office with three fundamental pillars to our foreign policy approach: our alliance with the United States, which is enduring and ongoing; our engagement in the United Nations and international institutions; and our engagement in the Asia-Pacific region. And we are very strongly of the view that our engagement both in and with the region has to be more substantive and more substantial.
I’m not proposing to be politically pejorative to reflect on the past, but there is a lot more that Australia can and will do. India, for example. I think Australia has neglected its relationship with India for over 30 years. India is a country that Australia has to take to the frontline of its international partnerships.
HEAD: Your predecessor, Alexander Downer, was in the job for a very long time and we all got used to his rather larger-than-life style here in Asia, what sort of changes of style can we expect from you as Foreign Minister?
SMITH: Well, Alexander was Australia’s longest serving Foreign Minister. We recently very strongly supported his appointment as a Special Envoy for the UN Secretary General to Cyprus. You know people will make their own judgements about Alexander just as they’ll make their own judgements about me. But I have told Alexander that he should proceed very strongly on the basis that, for me, it’ll never be the fish-net stockings. I’m entirely happy to leave that to Alexander.
HEAD: A change of style then?
SMITH: Well I’ll let other people judge that, but I’ve vetoed the fishnet stockings. That’s entirely Alexander’s domain.
[Ends]
Media Inquiries: Foreign Minister's office (02) 6277 7500