20 Burst results for "Tom Switzer"

"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

Between The Lines

04:20 min | 3 weeks ago

"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

"Tom Switzer and this is between the lines, the summer series. Now coming up later in this episode, how Osama bin Laden's reached in power has been widely overestimated in the post 9 11 years. Nelly lahoud reviews and analyzes the infamous terrorists personal papers. But first, to a sense of balance and a lengthy conversation I had back in September with the former prime minister John Howard. Well, Australian prime ministers can be defined into two categories. There are those who enter politics as just

Tom Switzer Nelly lahoud Osama bin Laden John Howard
"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

Between The Lines

02:37 min | Last month

"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

"<SpeakerChange> <Speech_Male> Fries and Nelson, <Speech_Male> the spectator editor <Speech_Male> whom he just referred to <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> and you actually <Speech_Male> dedicate your book to <Speech_Male> frieser and his fellow <Speech_Male> editors who <Speech_Male> never delete your jokes. <Speech_Male> <SpeakerChange> <Silence> <Speech_Male> Yes, I can't <Speech_Male> tell you how grateful I <Speech_Male> am for that. <Speech_Male> The truth is <Speech_Female> that if <Speech_Female> people in <Speech_Female> positions of authority <Silence> <Speech_Male> would act <Speech_Male> as if <SpeakerChange> <Speech_Female> they are an authority. <Silence> <Speech_Female> And use the power they <Speech_Female> have to be <Speech_Female> loyal <Speech_Female> to the <Speech_Male> writers and <Speech_Male> artists and <Speech_Male> journalists <Speech_Male> that <Speech_Male> they publish. <Speech_Female> We <Speech_Female> wouldn't have <Speech_Female> cancel culture. <Speech_Female> Cancel culture <Speech_Female> is ultimately <Speech_Female> a failure <Speech_Female> of <Speech_Male> people at the top. <Silence> <SpeakerChange> It <Speech_Female> is cowardice, <Speech_Female> rampant <Speech_Female> cowardice. <Speech_Female> <Speech_Male> By people who should know <Speech_Female> better <Speech_Female> and are in a <Speech_Female> position to <Speech_Female> whether <Speech_Female> Twitter storms <Speech_Female> easily. You <Speech_Female> just ignore <Speech_Female> it and wait for it to <Speech_Female> go away. <SpeakerChange> <Speech_Female> But instead, <Speech_Female> you know, you've got <Speech_Female> <SpeakerChange> CEOs <Speech_Female> and <Speech_Female> publishers <Speech_Female> <Speech_Music_Female> just saying, <Speech_Female> oh, oh, this <Speech_Male> is, <SpeakerChange> this makes <Speech_Male> us look bad. <Speech_Male> You know, <Speech_Female> fire her ass. <Speech_Female> And I <Silence> just, <Speech_Female> that's where the <Speech_Female> problem lies, <Speech_Female> not so much <Speech_Female> in social media. <Speech_Female> It's the people who <Speech_Female> are paying attention <Speech_Male> to social <Speech_Male> media <SpeakerChange> that <Speech_Male> are the problem. <Silence> <Speech_Male> Yes, I think a strong <Speech_Male> argument can be made <Speech_Male> that social media, <Speech_Male> particularly the <Speech_Male> twittersphere, <Speech_Male> has just a base <Speech_Male> public discourse and <Speech_Male> you avoid social <Speech_Male> media, especially <Speech_Male> Twitter, <SpeakerChange> don't you? <Silence> <Speech_Male> All of it. <Speech_Male> Yeah, I just don't <Silence> do it. <Speech_Male> They're not enough hours <Speech_Male> in the day. <Speech_Male> I <Speech_Male> know myself well <Speech_Female> enough <SpeakerChange> that <Speech_Female> I would be vulnerable <Speech_Female> to <Speech_Female> reading this that and the other <Speech_Female> thing. And ending <Speech_Female> up walking down the street. <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> You know, <Speech_Male> he said <SpeakerChange> me up. <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> <SpeakerChange> <Speech_Male> I don't want <Speech_Music_Female> that life. I <Speech_Music_Female> don't want to be contaminated <Speech_Music_Female> in that way. <Speech_Music_Male> <SpeakerChange> <Speech_Music_Male> That was <Speech_Music_Male> novelist and columnist, <Speech_Music_Male> lion will <Speech_Music_Male> shriver, speaking <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> with me back in <Speech_Music_Male> October, <Speech_Music_Male> at the time of the publication <Speech_Music_Male> of her <Speech_Music_Male> first nonfiction <Speech_Music_Male> book, its <Speech_Music_Male> titled abominations <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> selected SI's <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> from a career, <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> of quoting <Speech_Music_Male> self destruction. <Speech_Music_Male> <Speech_Music_Male> And that's it <Speech_Music_Male> for the first of <Speech_Music_Male> our summer series, <Speech_Music_Male> more best <Speech_Music_Male> of between the lines <Speech_Music_Male> in our next <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> episode. <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> I'm Tom Switzer <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> till then, <Speech_Music_Male> bye <SpeakerChange> for now. <Speech_Music_Male> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Speech_Music_Female> <SpeakerChange> <Speech_Female> You've been listening <Speech_Female> to an ABC <Speech_Female> podcast. <Speech_Female> Discover more great <Speech_Female> ABC podcasts, <Speech_Female> live radio <Speech_Female> and exclusives on the ABC listen app.

Twitter Tom Switzer ABC
"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

Between The Lines

03:06 min | Last month

"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

"Hello there, I'm Tom Switzer, great to have your company and this is between the lines. Well, as 2022 draws to a close, most people will be glad to see the back of it. The post Cold War era has resolutely ended. With a Russian attack on Ukraine and China shaking its fist at Taiwan. Much of the western world has been additionally destabilized by higher energy prices and an acceleration of inflation. America is fair to say remains a polarized and divided society. And

Tom Switzer Ukraine Taiwan China America
"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

Between The Lines

04:48 min | 2 months ago

"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

"Judas line, what do you make of labor's plans on the environment and energy just generally? I mean, they just kind of illogical and inconsistent to tell you the truth. You know, if you really want to try and understand what's going on, the first point is the lift of the Labor Party, even though Bond, for example, it's not of the left. It's absolutely critical in driving these things. So they're not just anti cold. They're anti gas. And that's absolutely critical to understanding what's going on at the moment. They do not want to increase the supply of gas. And unless we increase the supply of gas, there's no way that electricity prices are going to moderate over the medium term. The second point is that in a related point, they acknowledge that one of the problems is that it's easier for dispatchable power to exit out of the system. So we have had a bit of Liddell. It will go completely next year. Maybe in 25, I think 25. But we haven't replaced that with equivalent dispatchable power, let alone increase dispatchable power to deal with population growth and the electrification electrification associated with say electric vehicles and the like. But this is the long before the storm, I think, that unless we can kind of see our way through some means of improving what often is called firming power and gas is probably the best to complement renewables. We really are in for choppy town. Okay, this is Tom Switzer and my guests are Judas Sloan from the Australian and Jenny Hewitt from the Australian financial review. Now the fun time of the segment, Australian winners of 2022 first to you, Jenny. Who's your winner of the year? Well, frankly, I don't think you can go past Anthony Obama. For one of the reasons that we talked about, he's had a good start to his prime ministership. And people are generally kind of receptive to that. I think that will, well, as Judas and I talked about, you know, there's going to be problems to come as a result. But for now, I think he's riding high as reflected in the opinion polls as he heads into 2022. Judith is elbow still. Is he your political winner as well? Well, I mean, being a Victorian or a perfect and you have to put Dan Andrews there too somewhere because I mean really extraordinary. When you think about it, you know, he would have won another term in the face of what were I think extraordinary restrictions and damage for a lot of victorians. Losers of 2022, Jenny Hewitt. Well, again, it's pretty predictable, but I don't think there is a bigger loser in the year than Scott Morrison voted out in a big way by the Australian public, but it also kind of, and there's a very personal repudiation of him that is quite remarkable, really. And he feels obviously very, very unfairly done by and including, you know, then you saw that movement against him in parliament.

Jenny Hewitt Tom Switzer Labor Party Judas Sloan Australian financial review Anthony Obama Liddell Dan Andrews Jenny Judas Judith Scott Morrison parliament
"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

Between The Lines

04:08 min | 4 months ago

"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

"Hi, I'm Tom Switzer and thanks for joining me on between the lines. Now in this episode, it's all about anniversaries. We'll be remembering and reflecting on four big events that shaped and change our world. 75 years ago, 1947, the British partition of India. 60 years ago, October 1962, the Cuban missile crisis. 50 years ago, U.S. president Richard Nixon goes to China. And 20 years ago, militant Islamic jihadists unleash death and destruction, more than 200 people were killed, including 88 Australians in the Bali bombing. Woken by the bomb blasts, the witness wren from his home to the nearby Sari club. Inside I was bambang saw more than 50 people crying for help. He too cried as he described what they said.

Tom Switzer Richard Nixon India Sari club U.S. China Bali wren bambang
"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

Between The Lines

05:42 min | 5 months ago

"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

"And yet Trump, according to all the available opinion polling still is the most popular choice to run for president in 2024. Well, barely. Different surveys show different things. The last survey I took before the subpoena had Trump 33 desantis 31 and a series of others in single digits. The reason I think Trump gathers support is that when he becomes the target of the Biden administration of the left in America, people rally around him. It's a tribal kind of thing. But having said that, they know his flaws. His real support within the Republican Party, in my view, is actual bases maybe 15 to 20% of the party. Okay, just in terms of those formal Republican colleagues who say they all support Trump come hell or high water, what's your message to them? Well, if you want to lose, be my guest, that's not particularly what I want to do. He cost us the House of Representatives during the course of his incumbency. He cost us the United States Senate. He cost us The White House. He cost us and state and local elections. And this subpoena, I mean, if you're a real conspiracy theorist, you think the Democrats did it to bring Trump back into the center of American politics. I think it's more a question of naivete on the part of the Justice Department, but nonetheless, if the election is about Donald Trump, this November, Republicans will not do as well as they should have. And that perhaps explains why many Democrats big donors are supporting candidates who are alone with Trump in the House and the Senate. Well, you know, if Republicans were trying to interfere in the democratic primaries to pick the weakest candidates, the media would be trumpeting dirty tricks, you know, you can just imagine what they would be saying. But when the Democrats try to influence Republican primaries to get what they think would be the weakest candidates, well, that's just fine. Including when they back people who believe in Donald Trump, that's how hypocritical this is. This is Tom Switzer and this is between the lines on ABC's RN, my guess is John Bolton, former president Trump's national security adviser, John, let's turn to Ukraine. It's fighting back and hard in of all places Crimea, which of course has been occupied by Russian forces since 2014. How far could the Ukrainian counteroffensive go? Well, that's the race we're in now to see who can gain the most territory. The Russians have been slowly grinding out territorial gains. They now control roughly 25% of Ukraine's territory, maybe a little bit more. But the U.S., Britain and other NATO allies have armed the Ukrainians with increasingly sophisticated weapons, high Mars, the highly mobile rocket systems, anti radiation, air to surface missiles to hit Russian defenses, a series of other sophisticated weapons that really have proven themselves in battle, javelin anti tank missiles for some time now. And I think that's enabled the Ukrainian forces to do very well. But I also think that both sides here may be near exhaustion in terms of casualties. The Russians have suffered casualties beyond comprehension in the west. I think it just shows their calculus about the value for human life is not what ours is. But while the Ukrainians have been very silent about their total casualties, I don't think we should take that to mean they've been white. I think they've been very heavy. So we're in a race against exhaustion in a certain sense here. And the most likely outcome, though, is that the war will simply continue because there's no diplomatic advantage, certainly the Ukraine side to bring it to a halt. And the significance of the assassination of the daughter of the Putin ally this week.

Trump Biden administration desantis Donald Trump U.S. Senate Tom Switzer Republican Party House of Representatives Ukraine Justice Department White House John Bolton Crimea ABC House NATO John
"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

Between The Lines

05:56 min | 6 months ago

"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

"This is an ABC podcast. Hi, I'm Tom Switzer and on between the lines this week. Skyrocketing costs in uncertainty over Russian energy supply to Europe. China breaks off climate talks with the U.S. over Taiwan, meanwhile, coal is booming worldwide and the percentage of global electricity generated by natural gas. That's rising. So is the energy transition agenda in sync with political and economic reality. That slide up. But let's hear first from a leading critic of the indigenous voice to parliament. It would be far more dignifying if we were recognized and

Tom Switzer ABC Taiwan Europe China U.S.
"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

Between The Lines

05:33 min | 9 months ago

"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

"Hello there, Tom Switzer here from between the lines. Now today we bring you my conversation with the former prime minister John Howard. He joined me to reflect on his very first election victory. And he's near 12 years in power. March 2, 1996, this happened. We have been elected with a mandate. We have not been elected to be just a pale imitation of the government.

Tom Switzer John Howard
"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

Between The Lines

05:44 min | 10 months ago

"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

"They've shut us out North Korea has not opened the border to its own people or to us for more than two years. It means that we rely on north cruise propaganda. It means that they can shape the narrative. Yes, well, you say the North Koreans have shot us out, but that hasn't stopped sanctions being imposed in response to the latest missile tests right? Well, every one of these ballistic missile tests is a violation of UN Security Council resolutions. And we are starting to see the UN Security Council gather and meet for these highly provocative and very dangerous tests. But the problem has been that China and Russia have not agreed with the United States, no surprise there, and they've not agreed with the United States and the U.S. allies on condemning these ballistic missile launches. And so we are starting to see that divide between the United States and its allies and Russia and China defending North Korea. We're seeing that divide deepen. And I have to say, I think that global issues, especially around Ukraine, certainly don't help when it comes to that divide. So we are seeing, in terms of sanctions, we are seeing the US Treasury impose new sanctions on companies and individuals that they are they say are responsible for the proliferation in Japan as well as imposed. So we're seeing some of these bilateral sanctions, but we have yet to see new UN Security Council sanctions. But the United States is saying that they're going to push for them. So we'll see if they're able to get China and Russia on board. On ABC radio national, this is between the lines, I'm Tom Switzer and my guest is Jean Lee, senior fellow at the Wilson center in Washington, and veteran reporter and former bureau chief stationed in Pyongyang. You know, this all brings to mind the Donald Trump detente with the North Korean dictator back in 2018. In retrospect, Jane, was it worth Trump's effort? I think it's always worth an effort to try to deal with the North Koreans. Because only when they get to those negotiations, will they find a way to pass this tension. However, I think we need to go back beyond 2018 and look to see what then president Trump did in 2017, which was to raise tensions to a point where we were on the brink of war, so that was the fire and fury period. And so that's a similar period to what we're seeing now where North Korea is launching these weapons and what president Trump did at the time was reaction to them..

UN Security Council United States North Korea Russia US Treasury China Tom Switzer Jean Lee Ukraine Wilson center Japan Pyongyang ABC president Trump Donald Trump Trump Washington Jane
"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

Between The Lines

04:16 min | 11 months ago

"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

"Somehow try and cut some sort of conversation ordeal with Putin. And in the end, we have to ask ourselves one question. Not what makes us feel good in the west, but what is the least bad outcome for the Ukrainian people? That's max Hastings on why we should be ready to make painful concessions to Moscow to end the Ukraine war. Hello there, this is Tom Switzer from radio national here. Welcome to another episode of between the lines. Stay with us for my chat with the distinguished military historian max Hastings on the lessons of the Cuban missile crisis 60 years ago. But.

max Hastings Putin Tom Switzer Moscow Ukraine
"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

Between The Lines

05:08 min | 1 year ago

"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

"NATO has always been a defensive alliance. And Russia could have joined it at one point. That's gone now and really it's Russia is pushing itself away from Europe away from the west as a whole toward China. Hi there, this is Tom Switzer and you're on between the lines and that was John Bolton. President Trump's national security adviser and a U.S. ambassador to the United.

Russia NATO Tom Switzer President Trump Europe John Bolton China U.S. United
"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

Between The Lines

05:51 min | 1 year ago

"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

"Which by today's standards is undoubtedly true, particularly given his views towards India. But what do you make of this campaign to cancel history after all? Isn't Churchill honored because he saved Britain from a much worse righteous, in Adolf Hitler. Well, of course he is, and that's why I deplore the ideal movie his statue. I'm not particularly keen on the whole council culture of taking down statues and renaming buildings. We can not go through the whole of history, trying to find out what the individual failings work, at the various historical actors, and then try and erase their names from history. I mean, I'm opposed to strongly opposed to this idea of cancellation. Now, I am in favor of what the Germans call their gang and heights gravity or making a reckoning with the past, which is what my humble way I've tried to do with my book, which is to look seriously and hard at history, and at least write a budget honestly without trying to undo all of past history, which we can't undo. Yeah, and that brings me to my final question, Jeffrey. Given everything you've just said and your book and despite the Andrew Roberts spectator review and I think a Columbine neoconservative in The Washington Post. It's generally been well received particularly in The New York Times. But can we ever escape Churchill's shadow? That's the question. Jeffrey wycroft. Well, at the moment, it doesn't look like it. I've done my modest best and have you say to my age interesting that my book has been better received in America than it has in here in England. And it's just possible that the American cult of Churchill, which is the most extraordinary for woman. It might just be fading but after all the failures that it's led them into. But I think the immediately see any sign but honest reckoning with Churchill as a real historical figure. If you could have a movie called Lincoln, it's a sentimental anterior worshiping, as you might expect from Steven Spielberg. But at least it sticks quite close to historical fact. If you go to a movie called Churchill, which was came out about four years ago and didn't make much impact. Or darkest out, which was a huge success about 1940. They are complete fantasies. There is no pretense whatever but Churchill is anything other than a creature of mentioned. And you can write anything you like about him and turn him into justice that English school trip one sort. And his thick strong character, and nobody seems to mind. Trying to get to grips with the historical reality of Churchill remains very difficult. Well, Jeffrey, it's been lovely as always to be with you again. Thank you so much for being on between the lines. As always, it's very good to talk to you, Tom. That was Jeffrey wycroft all throughout Churchill's shadow and astonishing life and a dangerous legacy and we'll put the link to the book on our website. This is between the lines with Tom Switzer..

Churchill Jeffrey wycroft Adolf Hitler Andrew Roberts Britain Jeffrey India The Washington Post The New York Times Steven Spielberg England Lincoln America Tom Tom Switzer
"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

Between The Lines

05:12 min | 1 year ago

"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

"Can understand why the Finn review that was really the in the Vanguard of the anti tariff argument in Australia. I quite understand why they said that if you look at the long view, you take the long view, we were a low tariff government. And very importantly, when hawke proposed reducing tariffs when he was prime minister, instead of opposing that reduction, John Hughes and and others in the Liberal Party on his was later then argued that he should go further. He did not take to his credit Houston did not take an opportunity view and that would be remembered because if the Labor Party, the Labor Party's decision to reduce tasks was the courageous decision. It was, in my view, the most courageous economic decision the Labor Party took in government, but it was greatly aided by the fact that we didn't oppose it. We supported it. It is interesting because if you look at the United States and America we're talking about Brexit and Trump and how globalization, technological change, many people believe has helped explain why so many working class folks have been the forgotten people. We don't really have that problem in this country. Certainly not to that extent. No, no, no, we don't have that to the same extent. And this has got a lot to do with the point of my earlier. We have found a sweet spot as a nation when it comes to government intervention. We need aven sufficiently to protect the really vulnerable. Whereas in Europe, there's over intervention and some of that intervention is impeding commerce and hiring in favor. But in America, the safety net is not as strong. And there's a house that's in the American welfare system under both the Democrats and the Republicans that Australians would not accept, and that's very important and it's very relevant for social cohesion. Well I guess as John Howard and you're on radio national with me Tom Switzer now, let's address the prominent social and environmental issues you opposed in power but which have now become the political mainstream including in Scott Morrison's Liberal Party. The Aboriginal apology. Well, I had reasons for that and I don't retract. It was a very Mexico, but I didn't think one generation could apologize for the climbed mysteries of an early generation. When you say you're sorry to somebody about an event, it doesn't mean that you assume responsibility for it. And there were other reasons, but.

Labor Party Liberal Party John Hughes hawke America Australia Houston Tom Switzer John Howard Europe Scott Morrison Mexico
"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

Between The Lines

05:17 min | 1 year ago

"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

"The lines on air online or via your ABC listener. This is Tom Switzer and thanks for tuning in. Later on the program. The controversy over the disappearance of China's tennis star, Pancho. In her social media post when she accused the former vice premier of sexual abuse, she wrote that she would tell the truth even if it would be like a moth attacking a flame and courting self destruction. Stay with us for my chat with Nadal, a former French government China analyst. But first, the threat of rising inflation. Well,.

Tom Switzer Pancho ABC tennis China French government Nadal
"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

Between The Lines

05:30 min | 1 year ago

"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

"You know, the built on road is Xi Jinping's signature initiative. It includes what's called the maritime Silk Road, a major strategic initiative since at least 2013. That is about China building connectivity influence and presence across the indo Pacific because China sees its dependence on the sea lanes for resources and energy and trade as being absolutely vital to the Communist Party's ability to maintain control domestically. So I would continue with the view that somehow China has this narrow sphere of interest that will be confined to East Asia. And I think in many ways, China has this accelerating map of vulnerability across the indo Pacific, which provides the opportunity for other countries to balance against Chinese power across this much larger canvas while at the same time recognizing the need to deter the more dire and adventurous actions that China could take in East Asia, particularly against Taiwan. It's going to be tough, but it is, whether we like it or not, an indo Pacific game, not a narrow East Asian contest. Rory, great to have you back on our end. Pleasure to be on the program. Tom, thank you very much. Rory Metcalf is head of the a news national security college. And the revised international version of his 2020 book is called indo Pacific empire. China, America, and the contest for the world's pivotal region. And we'll put a link to that book on our homepage. This is between the lines with Tom Switzer. We'll.

indo Pacific China Xi Jinping East Asia Communist Party Rory Metcalf Taiwan Rory Tom America Tom Switzer
"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

Between The Lines

07:42 min | 1 year ago

"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

"Well, if you just tuned in, you're on our ends between the lines with me, Tom Switzer. My guests are Alice hill in Glasgow and Marion Wilkinson in Sydney, and we're talking about the Glasgow climate talks. Okay, now let's just get this clear the non OECD accounts for anywhere between 60 and 65% of global emissions, global energy consumption. That's expected to increase 50% by 2050. Now that's a raw as fueled mostly by developing nations. I want to grow their economies reduce poverty. So you can understand Marion why so many developing countries assigned to the Americans and the Brits and the Europeans and the Australians. Hey, you cough up the money for us to transition where's the money? Well, that's a very important question at this cop. And I think that the two issues in this, if we unpack them a bit, one is the money to help invest in the energy transition, which, of course, is beneficial to all of us and the second part is the money to cope with adaptation and that's what Alice was talking about before sea level rise, increasing extreme weather. And there is attended several of these cults, and I can tell you, it is an issue of huge, huge importance to the developing world. And it's one of the great moral issues I remember talking to the Indian foreign affairs minister at Copenhagen, the negotiators there. And they were absolutely adamant. You know, that they were calling Kevin Rudd, the Ayatollah because he was negotiate on this issue former prime minister. And what it's about is, you know, they say we keep the ledger. We keep the ledger of the emissions in the atmosphere of a total emissions in the atmosphere over time since the industrial revolution that puts the developed countries up there as largely causing this problem. Now we all know, of course that China and India are now in countries also like Indonesia and now a huge problem on their emissions. But I think that ledger of the past is what the developing world keeps on going on about. But at the bottom line at the end of the day, is that it is in our self interest. I think this problem of migration from climate disaster will be a huge problem and in Australia where this issue is in the forefront of our politicians, minds, border security, that is where we're going to see in the future this play out. You know, if you look at the low lying cities around us, including places like Jakarta, this is really important for us. I think your problems Tom that you raise is spot on post pandemic, how enthusiastic will voters be for this? And I think the only way to sell it is to say that it is in our national interest to do this. And the developing world Marion do highlight the hypocrisy of the west, now Alice, I know you were critical of Donald Trump for pulling the Americans out of the Paris climate accords from 2015, but while Joe Biden is in Glasgow as is well known this week, there's legislative gridlock in Washington over his watered down climb and agenda. Meanwhile, bought in his presiding over a Colby in the U.S. that's aggravated the activists most notably Greta Thunberg. And Biden's calling on Russia and Saudi Arabia to boost gas and oil production. So the question here is, does barn and have much credibility at Glasgow? Alice. Well, I believe he does. He's come in. Guns are blazing. But if you look at from day one of his presidency, he issued a slew of executive orders requiring really a major gear shift from the federal government after president Trump had put us in reverse. He is also held the leader in April. He's continued to up his ambition in terms of financing for the developing world. He put forth today his U.S.'s long-term strategy for achieving its promises that it's already made. He's brought very large delegation to Glasgow to reinforce the message that the United States is back. And he has come up with a plan B in terms of being able to achieve the ambition if he can not reach what he would like to have happen through Congress. Of course, it's always wonderful to have legislation and that is the first move. But that if that legislation fails, and it doesn't look like frankly, it will certain portions have been pulled out, but that's part of the democratic process. There's compromise. It's looks like it'll pass, but if it doesn't pass, he has a plan B for how he will achieve the goal. So I think that the world can take comfort in the fact that the United States will continue on this path. This is particularly because true because climate change is much more widely recognized as a threat across the world and by American citizens. So it's climbing in terms of the urgency on the political agenda. And that brings us to Australia Marion under prime minister Scott Morrison and we address this issue a few months ago, we were still not sure whether he would commit to a net zero emissions by 2050. He's done the dramatic U turn, but can Canberra's commitment be taken seriously in Glasgow. Marian. I don't think it is being taken seriously Tom. And I think it comes down to the obvious and that is the 2030 target we're in a position now where our key trading partners outside China in other words, you know, the U.S. the EU South Korea and Japan all have a significantly higher 2030 target than us. I think that there is a feeling Australia is pulling the chain on this that it's giving encouragement to other countries at Glasgow who are being less ambitious and I think that there is also a feeling that Australia is not pulling its weight on the technology side while we talk the big talk on technology. If you look at our goals, they pushed out really beyond 2030. And with the incredible skill set, Australia has with its access to capital, not the least hopefully through our superannuation funds with our access to being able to draw in foreign skill base and most importantly with our access to natural assets of wind and solar. There's a feeling we should be able to play a much bigger role in the energy.

Glasgow Tom Switzer Alice hill Marion Wilkinson Marion Alice Greta Thunberg OECD U.S. Kevin Rudd president Trump Sydney Copenhagen Australia Donald Trump Jakarta Joe Biden Indonesia
"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

Between The Lines

05:49 min | 1 year ago

"tom switzer" Discussed on Between The Lines

"This is Tom Switzer and it's always great to have your company on the program. The Wuhan lab theory. There's actually a lot of evidence for a lab like and there's no evidence that it emerged naturally. The only reason people think it emerged naturally is because this is how viruses have started in the past. That's journalist shari maxon, whose author of what really happened in Wuhan. Stay with us for that. But first, history school teaching. Well, do you think that authoritarianism is the way forward? Now it's a serious question. Just ask young Australians, those aged in the 18 to 29 year bracket. According to a lowy institute poll, nearly 40% of these young Australians, they say that, in some circumstances, non democratic government may be preferable or that it doesn't even matter what kind of government we have. Now, that's nearly 40% of Australians aged 18 to 29, 60%, of course. Happy with the status quo, which is encouraging, but 40%. Why is that the case? Why does so many young Australians dislike liberal democracy and prefer a different non democratic model? Does it have anything to do with the teaching at our schools? Well, the federal education minister thinks so. And he's pushing for more far reaching changes to the draft national curriculum, including its treatment of history. Tell us more, let's hear from the minister himself, Alan tudge, welcome back to radio. Good idea Tom. Now let's start with our Cara. This is the Australian curriculum assessment and reporting authority what did you reject their April draft of the new national curriculum? Well, for a number of reasons, Tom, thanks for having me on your program. But firstly, because we need to lift overall learning standards in Australia and the draft, which they put out actually head learning standards decline in many areas. For example, the most obvious one was the times tables, which presently are being taught in year three. That was suggesting they taught in four. In many other countries that are actually taught all this started to be taught in year two. So that was the first reason. We need to live learning standards because we've actually declined in our learning standards over the last 20 years, which we could explore if you walk. The second reason was because it was the overall document was so unwieldy, literally at three and a half thousand pages, which is four or 5 times the length of most national curriculums around the world. Thirdly, because key evidence based practices weren't embedded in that national curriculum. The most clear example of these is phonics, which is your methodology for teaching kids to read. That was devalued at the expense of whole language approaches to rating. When the evidence is crystal clear now and has been for 20 years that you need to teach kids to decode the alphabet. And then finally, Tom, I had great concerns about the draft, which was put out in relation to the teaching of history..

Wuhan Tom Switzer shari maxon lowy institute Alan tudge Australian curriculum assessme democratic government Tom Cara Australia
Trump's achievements in the Middle East

Between The Lines

08:58 min | 2 years ago

Trump's achievements in the Middle East

"Donald. Trump's foreign policy is all too often met with derision or simply chairmanship? Isn't it? The critics Maki's diplomacy and they pan the choice of son-in-law Jared Kushner as a Middle East envoy. However just dies away from the US presidential election. Trump has had a few certifiable victories to put in his closing advertising pitch to the American people. I'm of course referring to the peace deals between Israel and Bahrain the United Arab Emirates and Sudan these have been brokered by the trump administration well to tell us more about the significance of these Abraham. Cords. For the Prophet of Jews, Christians and Muslims alike. Let's tune to Greg. Sheridan, he's foreign editor of the Australian Gregg welcome back to the show. Glad to be with your. Greg, your assessment of trump foreign policy generally. Well I think. The media has done generally around the world agree poor job on analyzing trump because themselves have become. So polarized there the all against trump or a small minority of the mural for trump whereas I trump has had some wins and some losses. stylistically he's been very unorthodox and at times on counterproductive but you can look back inside that what trump has been a bath is being creating leverage. The United States in K. relationships is put tariffs on China, and that gives him something to negotiate with Jonah He's put sanctions on Iran that. Gives him something that Iran wants to get rid of an in every relationship? He's got leverage for the United States. Now I think he's done a lot of specific things that have actually been quite good. You can certainly criticize the way he talks about alliances, but it these actions rather than his words quite a lot of the things he's done have been very successful especially in Asia and the Middle East is increased the US military budget more than any other president and American allies. Niger very happy about that the allies in Asia. Have Been Critical of China and most inclined to stand up against Jonah namely Japan India Vietnam Singapore Australia a couple of Damon our full hours course I very good relationship with trump role. Bilaterally, a lot of his relationships been very successful India and Australia. His administration has built the quotes the quadrilateral security dialogue. He has recognized the nature of the Chinese threat to the international system and do American interests better than any other president. Andy's moved the debate along at the same time. There's been a lot of chaos in his administration, the White folks terrible but I think he's had some real wins and I think he's done very well in the Middle East. Okay. We're talking about the Middle East You have argued in the astride newspapers I amount to a major step forward in the pace there why these Arab states altering their relations with Israel is it because of the mutual fee of Iran or is it because the US has leaned on the Motley? Well it's by the size I think Tom plus some other factors as well, but you've just got to pause. And model at the size of trump's achievement in and. To even out of these words, probably you know get you sort of condemned by all international relax plots society at. A. O. Over knocks the of international relations would would excommunicate you for saying it. But you know Israel has five peace treaties with Arab nations. Three of them have come under Donald Trump. He has said we back Israel one hundred percent is move the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem tremendous symbolic sign of his commitment to Israel. But he has said we all sat back the security of the Gulf Arab states and are opposed to Iran and we kind to put sanctions on it. We think the nuclear deal when far enough now, the Gulf Arab states all agree with trump about Iran. But also items cells to some extent lost interest in the Palestinian cause. They're certainly not going to allow Palestinian view of Israel to be a roadblock. Now, they say Israel is a very good security Patna and they are encouraged by the US administration to might place with Israel if you just change in your ABC's ready national with me Tom Switzer my guest is Greg Sheridan foreign editor of the Australian. Now Greg you've been one of Australia's leading defenders of Middle East policy for decades. Trump came to power on an America I strategic. He's goal a piece to be to reduce significantly America's military role in the Middle East. We just talked about this grand aimed Iranian coalition that can contain tyron wants the Americans have gone given that America is now energy independent moralists isn't this retrenchment from the middle. East if trump is reelected, isn't that a good thing? Well. I think. It's makes Grill Tom. I think it is probably a good thing. The thing tonight is about trump is that on the whole he has implemented a lot of his foreign policy promises. If you put trump's record on the Middle East, all together it's pretty impressive. The US defeated Isis and he's decided that the Iranian. Nuclear deal is a very bad deal. I agree with him about that because it recognizes the legitimacy of Iran's nuclear industry allows enrichment of uranium a whole lot of other things and then allows in a very short period of time I'm sales to rent said trump said that's completely unacceptable. He wants a new and much better they'll, and in the meantime he's applying sanctions to Iran. has significantly diminished Iran's ability to cause mayhem in the region but that brings me to the point about what happens if Joe Biden is elected knicks wiggle the polls. Many of the pundits the betty markets point to a Democratic victory next week if a bottom administration comes to POW, Greg dozen that increase the chances of everything you've just been saying being wound back, I? Mean wouldn't Baden for example. Revert to the Obama nuclear deal with Iran. Well Eight. That's what he says he'll do allow. Kind of the problem. So the final point from the past there is that trump is not engaged in any new military adventures whereas even Bama engaged in the regime change in Libya which had absolutely eleven offers consequences now, Baden. It's very unclear. What kind of Administration Baden will provide his advisors at the moment seemed to be dominated by retreads from the second, I. Bob. Administration Susan Rice and Ben Rides. But then his party has moved along why for an elect- with Anastazia. Cortes and Bernie Sanders and the influence of the crew he says he's going to make climate change the center of all of his foreign policy I think. He may repeat a mistake of trump's, which is simply to try to undo everything his predecessor is done whereas trump has left Baden assuming button does win trump was left on a lot of leverage tramples. Authorized the elimination of the commander of the Iranian could force SOMAINI and. The, Iranians, like everyone else are scared of trump and they're. Constrained by not knowing what he's going to do even though he hasn't done any major military intervention, I don't think I've boughten will WANNA put more troops back into the Middle East or anything like that. The story of the last ten or twelve years really has been Americans will will say trying to get out of the Middle East and finding it very, very difficult to do so but Baden would be. Tremendously mistaken if he didn't try to capitalize on the successes, trump might I certainly don't think he's GonNa WanNa Talk Sudan or by Ryan will will the United Arab Emirates? Out of normalization with Israel, but will is administration base smart enough to keep it going with other Gulf states in trump was saying the other day that he thinks Saudi. Arabia can might place. With Israel, we'll that would been shattering. That would be I don't tectonic shift in the Middle East and Baden if he's smart or his administration as. Will keep going down that road and then God bless them. They can get all the accolades for forever success they won't themselves. But if they get back to the Paragon the John Kerry paradigm, you've gotTa somehow miraculously solve the Palestinian problem before we can do anything else Well, I think it could be much less effective than trump.

Donald. Trump Middle East Iran Israel United States Baden United Arab Emirates Greg Greg Sheridan Sudan Administration Baden Tom Switzer Jared Kushner President Trump Australia China Editor Maki
Muscling up to China and 25 years since Srebrenica

Between The Lines

28:17 min | 2 years ago

Muscling up to China and 25 years since Srebrenica

"Tom Switzer, he and welcome to another episode off between the lines now today on the program will be commemorating the twenty fifth anniversary of Europe's worst massacre since the Holocaust in ninety, ninety, five more than eight thousand people died in Shrimp Nitsa. The town was supposed to be a U N protected safe haven in the vicious civil war that tore Yugoslav apart instead the civilians ended up being massacred by Bosnian Serbs. Were lightning fast with their superior weapons. They easily overran the lightly. I'm Bosnian government troops and the token full civilian peacekeepers. The UN's Valley to protect the civilians inspired Washington to launch unilateral action against Serbia and end the civil war. Would things be the same today now? That's later in the program, but first defense. Last week the Morrison. Government launched a defence strategy and force structure review now the move signals a major shift away from the strategy outlined in the last defence white paper. Remember that just four years ago in two thousand sixteen. It plotted out Australia's strategic costs for the next decade. But that White Paper has as we know been rapidly overtaken by Vince covert China or that now the new review has promised two hundred and seventy billion dollars over the next decade to enhance Australia's defence capabilities with renewed focus on areas like Saba and spice capabilities and the possible development of hop sonic weapons will be fitting aircraft with long-range anti-ship missiles, increasing underwater surveillance and boosting fuel ammunitions reserves. Now, underscoring the seriousness of the shift, the Prime Minister even drew comparisons to the nineteen thirties and the lead up to world. War Two that period of the nineteen thirties. Is Been Something I've been revisiting on a very regular basis and when you connect by the economic challenges and the global uncertainty. It can be very haunting, but is the money too much or not enough is going to all the right places, and we'll do enough to safeguard Australia from China's increasing assertiveness and is rapidly growing military capabilities. What's the role of Australia's diplomacy? And all of this will joining me to discuss this at three distinguished guests. By skill is professor of Asia Pacific Security Studies at Macquarie University Holiday Bites. Thank you good to be here Melissa Conley. Tar is a research fellow at the Asia Institute at the University of Melbourne. Hi There Melissa could to speak again Tom. And Pay. The Jennings is executive director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. Tom No. Can you talk us through the top of scenarios and potential conflicts that the defense review is preparing us for the scenario that the review is focusing on is one involving a high end conventional conflict, so I've gone to the days of stabilization operations in t more Counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan This document is preparing foresight on onsite conflict. Involving countries that have sophisticated military forces. And, of course, the document doesn't say. I don't think it would be reasonable to expect it to say. That China is the problem. But let me tell you China is the problem that is the now neoplasia competitive that way of thinking about when we think about what's adequate in terms of the topic of military capability we need to have. and to does reflect to change. From past years Tom I recall when I started by defense career, we were thinking much more about the risks presented by Indonesia, and the so called low level in cushions in the northwest. Of course, that's no longer features in anyone's strategic thinking. Really it's about China and the risks that the People's Republic is presenting to all of its neighbors in abroad since in the Indo Pacific region and beyond I cabinet crudely putting it some sites laying the groundwork for fortress Australia US sign. This is preparing us to join a potential use LID. Containment slash war against China for example to protect Taiwan Peter Jennings. I think that is it covers a spectrum of possibilities. One possibility which I think is Epson you were in terms of language of the document is that we might conceivably end up having to face military conflict without being able to rely on the direct combat support of the United States, and that's what leads to discussions around extra stockpiling munitions and fuel insightful. But I think in general terms. Yes, the expectation is that Australia. Through its history has been a country that forms coalitions usually have like minded partners, the share the same types of objectives. And the the plan will design the Defense Force. Really gives us the capacity to do that with Rachel Ellis lecture, example, Japan but also with our traditional ally the United States okay bates skill. You've recently completed a review of China's defense capabilities and its recent military modernization, specifically looking at the implications for Australia Wind you expect the Peo- The People's Liberation Army and its navy. When do you expect them to have the capability to project power as far as Australia annual Pacific knives, well in many respects Tom, they already can I mean they have the long range missile capabilities to do that? Know as a from a standoff position launched from their own from their own homeland against hours. But what I think, the the new strategy is looking at is really the development of capability over the next ten fifteen twenty years, and that's by the Chinese own own acknowledged calendar that they would be able to by that time of mass, a large enough capability, both in terms of its long range strike, you know striking from their own homeland, but also bill to project. Project Power passed the so-called first and second island change and being a position to more directly threatened through those platforms Australian security. So you know we're talking ten or fifteen year window here and I think given the time it does take to try and respond to develop the the deterrent and defense capabilities for Australia. That's that's you know that's in some ways a short window. for Australia to be mobilizing in reaction Melissa Tali. What's the role of a strong diplomacy and all these well I think it needs to be growl. And one of the concerns when we look at the deteriorating strategic environment is we think all that's a defense problem? And so when the prime minister launches the strategic update with those comparisons with the nineteen thirties. It pushes US toward seeing in purely military terms but we don't just want to say things in that security lands, we want to think about all of the parts about national power projection, so that's diplomacy and development as well as defense I think if if people thought about it I think what we invest in all three strongly, but that's not where it is if you look at federal budget fifty. Fifty nine billion to defense and less than seven billion to diplomacy and development together the lowest point with ahead in our history and I think we missing that opportunity. If we don't take US seriously, the way that diplomacy and development can shape things in the world so I was struck. Today was a defendant looking at the latest poll on what are the major concerns that Australians have at the moment of the top threats in the world and the first five, a role nontraditional that drought, environment, disaster, climate change, pandemics, and downtown, global economy, and those places where you know military spending isn't going to help shape that environment. So we need to have an effect on those. We need to be thinking much more about what we can do in the diplomacy and development to mind Peter Jennings. What would you say in to Melissa's observations? Because they reflect a certain mindset that that perhaps we should be focused more on non state actors rather than say China for instance well, I think all of these you know threats that have to be taken seriously. I'm and simply because we're living in the middle of a pandemic for example, doesn't the climate change is gone away in this no longer going to present a problem to us. I guess what I'd say. Is that the you know the five things Melissa listed? That were in the featured in the low e Poland terms of popular concerns. Are also the things which could. In different ways late to the risks of conflict escalating in the Indo Pacific region generally so You know my my view, please while I would like to see spending on diplomacy increased. While I. Say Development Assistance is being something which is effectively the United soft in of Australian power, and the military is the hot end of Australian power. I think. The message against all of these areas is that we have just been underinvesting for decades underinvesting for decades, so we're we're all. High fiving ourselves at just reaching about two percent of gross national product, being spent on defense, but that is compared to what we spending in cold or years, which was sometimes between three and a half percent in four percent of rustic product. So what we have grown used to Tom I would say is. Free written on the United. States code tiles of security for for decades. We've dramatically under. Invested in the things that we need to do to strengthen Australia's position, not just militarily, but also diplomat. A now. We're rather surprised to hear the news that Gosh the bill is a lot more expensive than we really thought. It was only if you've got that confidence in the US. and. In fact, the whole trump stories, the story of the Americans really big being fed up with the rest of the world, thinking that the US can fund the bill for their security, so we're going to have to do more and I think we're going to have to do it against multiplicity of areas not. Justin sought the defense organization. We'll some scholars such as you want and James Current from the University of Sydney. They say that this document sounds a lot like an acknowledgement that the US might not always be there to help us out. By are we starting to plan for more independent Australian defense posture I think it would be a wise move to keep that option open when you think of the capabilities that the Chinese developing in which do have a direct pose a direct threat to Australia or could do so. In many respects, the I think the types of threats that you might not expect an immediate or even timely response on the part of the United States what I'm thinking here. Cyber capabilities is a huge priority for the Chinese. We already know what they see the sort of capability. They can wield against Australia and that's not the sort of thing you can expect a kind of cavalry to. Lead the charge from from Washington to come to Australia's defence slowly long range strike capability on the part of the Chinese capability. They already have in which are going to continue to develop. which could threaten Australia down the road now? These are capabilities that I think that Australia's going to have to develop their own defenses for. They can certainly do that with United States, but again it's not necessarily the sort of threat that we would expect some sort of traditional ally joint response not to make it well. Some of are in listeners will email me and they'll say that if Uncle Sam struggles to police. It's own CDs. Melissa. How on Earth Can Uncle Sam Police? The Asia Pacific region in the face of a rising China. What's your sense about us staying power in the next decade or two in look? It's difficult One of the things that strategic update looks at is more threats to the global rules order, and unfortunately the you know, the US is part of that. the US is not along with the strategies interest on things like global trading system, and a number of international issues like global health where we would say you need to be supporting. A Global Response that said I don't think the strategic update will be read negatively in. Washington, it's my guess. it very clearly couched in terms that I think the US will lock about Australia contributing more and having more self. that could be seen as a statement that we think that the US might not have outback, but can also be seen as something that the US has been for for a long time. I particularly liked a few elements of the update things like making sure that we have. You know material ammunition You know that aren't going to be disrupted. Buckle supply trying having more capability eight industrial cut suffering capability here antiques fuel reserves, which is not as long sane as an issue for us, so I mean those are things that are worth investing in. Regardless of US resolve because as we've seen from COVID, we know that supply chain can be disrupted very quickly and easily, and it's worth having eligibilities. Cepeda Jennings bite skill and Melissa Conley Toilet and Melissa. The Pacific step up last year. That realigned Australia's development budget to deal with some of the strategic challenges posed by China in the Pacific Do you think it goes far enough? The step up was followed recently by strategies new International Development Policy Partnerships for recovery, and that's made it very clear that strategies focus should be on the Pacific and also southeast. Asia including. Indonesia and team August. I think that has a very clear statement about what we want. In the region of being entrusted trusted development partner and influencing those societies that we think positive for four region. Again you're going to. You're going to say you. Hear this from me all the time, but again the problem is that we not really making much invasive lunch, so partnerships for recovery head no new money it talked about the massive challenges that covered as as creating for for the for the Pacific, and for for our region broadly, and the only funding announcement was that we're going to repurpose the money. We would have spent on sending Australian. Volunteers in scholarship holders. And we're GONNA use that so I I suppose I. Feel a little bit with all the areas, not actually include district update in that as well that what we've seen through the foreign policy, White Paper and International Development Policy through to to the defense. Strategic Updike is. We talk about how. how? What a time! These these frosty leaving a contested difficult awful environment that we've now got to leave in and the Dow L. Easy Times over, and then we say, and we're not gonNA. Give any new money so I mean the defense announcement is essentially just that we're going to continue to you know, extrapolate out the money that was planned to be spent in the twenty twenty six, and we're going to extrapolate that out to twenty thirty terabytes skill. Do we risk getting into a bidding war for influence in the Pacific? I don't know if it's a risk. If it is a risk worth worth taking. I mean obviously the Pacific region is so extremely important Australia's future. Both for for defense reasons for regional engagement for diplomatic reasons, developing reasons and the like. so It's quite possible that we're entering in a more competitive phase with China in this. SITES WRIST BYTES I'm talking about more the budgetary concerns he because in the wake of the Corona Virus Crosses. There'll be serious limits on how we can spend on these things scholley. Yes, there is and party left to be be developed for that, but you know when you're talking about your own backyard. I mean I I. I don't think it's the kind of country that can simply. Pretended it's by itself getting back pay to Jennings to the region, generally in the rise of what. Angus Campbell is of the Defence Force he's talked about the rise of political warfare, the idea of grey zone warfare things like cyber attacks, economic coercion influence operations that fall below the traditional threshold of war. He says we need a whole of government response to it. I, you seeing that whole of government approach happening in Campbell, or is this Manley focus on defense and the spy agency so far Peter Jennings. It probably is focused on the national security agency's Tom. That's not too surprising because you'd expect them to sort of pick up on the risks I. But General Campbell is right. It does need to be all government is. There's a whole lot of things happening there that simply cannot and should not be done by defense organizations. and. I think that realization is slowly dawning. Along as both of the speakers have said that actually ladyship comes with cost of infrastructure is going to play that role, but you know, give you a small example of this we. We have lost the ability to broadcast into the South Pacific and Southeast Asia. In a way that we used to very successfully over over decades to give us the capacity to do that. We're probably talking about you know that. He million a year forty million a year, which sounds a lot of defend. It's nothing if you're in the Defense Department. Let me tell you. But you need to be able to do things like that. To be the truth teller in the region to actually tell the region that there are alternatives to Chinese Communist Party authoritarianism I think that's what's needed with responding to this grey zone on threat. Is Actually to be the truth teller. In this part of the will and getting our system in Cambridge used to that reality to understanding what needs to be done. To starting at different type of conversation with our region. With our own people for that matter that that is a sort of a psychological change which I can see happening, but we're not quite yet. There's a bit of work still to be done to get to that point Melissa. Conley Tyler. Is, just responding on that. I agree entirely with what pitcher saying on on broadcasting. It's a small investment, such a an increasing influence. It should be Brian and I hope that did that's being seen. I think having defense voices. I will help a lot in a banks, seriously I'm but just went. When you ask Tom Balaton host government and what's happening there? There are some really good examples, so for example win. This Pacific step pop started an office of the Pacific was established in that apartment and tried and each job. He's to be that coordinating body, and it's bringing together the. The defense, the development and the diplomacy in a way that he's gone to maximize our influence. and I've noticed this a lot more discussion about that that three. How do you bring defense development diplomacy communities together? I'm involved in initiate the Pacific. Four Day and I think a lot of people not talking about what more we can do for that that joined up coordination to make the most about national instruments by skill. You're an expert on China. The elephant in the room of course is China doing need to be careful not to overestimate China's military strength. What about the weaknesses? Exactly right I mean you have to know your enemy's weakness as well as their strengths in the case of China, they are undertaking enormous reforming organization effort. They're pouring billions of dollars into new capabilities, but there's a lot of things we need to recognize I. Mean One is that the Chinese have not fought a shooting war and more than forty years. They are have no. They have zero experience in high end combat against a serious. Adversary, scenario, so that's not to downplay them, but to understand that they've got enormous obstacles to overcome that day. Themselves acknowledge that they themselves. No, they have to overcome, and that's why we had this window that we've been talking about. A fifteen to twenty years. to try and develop capabilities to get in front of the kinds of things that the Chinese want to bring to bear around. Around, twenty thirty or twenty, thirty, five, twenty, forty, paid-up Melissa to be continued. Thanks so much for being on our in. Thank you, tell my pleasure. Thank you, Tom. That was paid jennings. He's executive director of the Australian strategic pulsing suit by skill professor of Asia Pacific Security Studies at Macquarie University and Melissa Commonly Tyler. She's a research fellow at the Asia Institute at the University of Melbourne. These between the lines with Tom Switzer. Coming next, we're going to replay a version of a segment from between the lines. I 'cause commemorating the massacre of Bosnian Muslims at shredded Nitsa on the eleventh of July nodding ninety. Five twenty five years ago this week. More than eight thousand people were killed by Serb forces. It was the worst massacre. Europe had seen since the Holocaust. Serve softening up Trevor Nature for the army's final push into the town. Town of course was supposed to be a safe haven protected by the United Nations, but the civilians ended up being sitting ducks as I woke Larry. Hollingsworth Remembers I. Myself Feel Devastated and ashamed I was there with them? When we told them that it was a safe haven I watched. Many of these people walk in with the minimal possessions into shreds, knowing that it was a safe haven, and now they're fleeing out because we've let them down, let them down to the extent that within dies. About Twenty three thousand women and children were deported, and about eight thousand Muslim men and boys left behind where executed and buried in mass graves. Now, reports from the time described, frightening scenes stiffen overawed from medicines on frontier. Speaking he. Loading some of the children and women into buses, but there's no indication as to where it was buses, going with seen some horrifying streaming, going on women and children going into the buses being taken away from their family This was going on with a lot of crying a lot of panicking. The slaughter had been planned carefully and executed with precision. All the wall Dutch. Pace is literally stood by, and did nothing indeed even when the Serb assault on Srebrenica was imminent. in-command is still rejected Kohl's racetracks. Positions. Pope John Paul. The second declared ribbon Nitsa a defeat for civilization as media reports begins to reveal the scale of the unfolding tragedy. The UN says nine hundred thousand people are still unaccounted for. About some became clear as government soldiers emerging from the forest in central Bosnia, told of horrific massacres at the hands of the Serbs one young. People executing them on spot, but this didn't come out of the blue. By the time this massacre took place the civil war that tore the former Yugoslavia. Repot was heading into its fourth year. More than a million people have been displaced, and the world became familiar with a new term ethnic cleansing. So? Who is to blame for these well? Let's start with the United. Nations from ninety two to ninety, five shrivel Nitsa was the world's first union declared civilian syphon. It was supposed to to her aggression. It was supposed to aggression and set the scene for political negotiations to end hostilities between the Bosnian Serbs, and Muslims, but the UN soldiers in the SIPHONS. They were bedeviled by problems. If you declare an area safe haven in the name of the United Nations. Nations if you tell the people if they are safe in the name of the United Nations you have got to put the troops on the ground, and it's no good for politicians say yes, we go for safe havens, but we're not gonNA put the troops meanwhile the Europeans vacillated and equivocated failing miserably to cope with across at its own back door. America was also reluctant to get involved as then President George Bush senior explained in Nani Nani to. I? Something because I learned something from Vietnam. I am not going to commit US forces until I know what the mission is to the military. Tell me that it can be completed until I know how they can come out. You have ancient rivalries that have cropped up as as Yugoslavia's dissolved or getting dissolved, and it isn't going to be solved by sending in the eighty second airborne, and although on the campaign trail that Ye Bill Clinton pledged to reverse the appeasement of that bushes of Belgrade as President Clinton allowed the Balkans to bleed for three more years. French President Jacques Chirac was moved to declare quote, the position of the leader of the free world vacant. Trinite Sur changed all that having done nothing the before during the mass killings in Rwanda Clinton was galvanized into action, and crucially he cut the United Nations out of the Decision Chine on August thirty Washington led a night bombing campaign against the Serbs the NATO action began early this morning. The harsh light of fires and explosions coloring the night sky. Some people watched the bombardment from their houses, but after more than ten thousand deaths here in the last three years, most Sarajevans had given up any hope of outside intervention. Last night it came on a scale which could yet change the course of this war by the end of not ninety five sixty thousand nine hundred troops, including twenty thousand Americans were on the ground in Bosnia. Pace was declared. The BOEKEN's wars ended only because the US finally acted. He's President Clinton in November ninety five my fellow Americans in this new era there are still times when America and America alone can and should make the difference for peace. The terrible war in Bosnia is such a case nowhere. Today is the need for American leadership. More stark are more immediate than in. In Bosnia in the years since the Mexica Europe inaction was heavily criticised, and the US was held up for its global leadership in particular for its unilateral humanitarian intervention. This is when the US secretary. Of State. Madeleine Albright said America was the indispensable nation, and that idea would fade into the justification of the Iraq invasion in two thousand and three as a war of liberation, but he's a question with the US intervene. If the shrivel Nitsa massacre happened today from the standpoint of twenty twenty, we might ask if the era of US unilateral humanitarian intervention is well and truly over. Well, that's it for this week. Show remember if you'd like to hear the episode again or download segments since two thousand fourteen. Just go to ABC. Dot Net dot US slash aren and follow the prompts to between the lines, or you can listen via the ABC. Listen APP, or wherever you get your podcast. You can even subscribe, so you never miss an episode. I'm Tom Switzer continue next week.

Australia China United States Melissa Peter Jennings Pacific Tom Switzer Washington TOM Bosnia UN United Nations Prime Minister Europe Melissa Conley Professor Of Asia Pacific Secu Indonesia Asia Institute
Kishore Mahbubani says COVID-19 won't stop China's rise

Between The Lines

12:58 min | 3 years ago

Kishore Mahbubani says COVID-19 won't stop China's rise

"These days for China there's been an economic slowdown a trade and technology war with America. One of the few issues of bipartisanship in today's Washington then there have been protests in Hong Kong global criticism of Beijing's treatment of the Muslim minorities not to mention Western anxiety about the role of Y in those five G. networks and don't forget the allegations of Chinese interference in sovereign states across the region. Add to this. The outbreak of corona virus or covered nineteen and silently some pundits and they mainly in the West. They're asking whether we're witnessing communist China's Chernobyl moment what do you think well one distinguished intellectual who profoundly disagrees with all this skepticism. He's my guest today. Kishore Mahbubani is distinguished fellow. The Asia Research Institute at the National University of Singapore a former ambassador to the UN twice and a former foreign secretary of Singapore case. Your has risen several influential books on Asia and the rise of China the lightest one is called has China won the Chinese challenge to American Promessi as published by public phase in New York Keisha. Welcome back between the lines. My pleasure there'd be back now you've heard all these. These dial warnings about China and as I say they mainly come from listeners. What do you disagree well? I think it's absolutely certain that the return of China to his place as the number one economy in the world cannot be stopped because from the year one to the eighteen twenty or eighteen hundred of the last two thousand years the two largest economies of the world were always those of China and India so the past two hundred years of Western domination award. History have been an aberration. All aberrations come to a natural end and China's return cannot be stopped. And that's absolutely set. You say in your book that if Xi Jingping does not put in place San Succession mechanisms. America could win this geopolitical contest and bear in mind just a couple years ago. She overturned legislation on. Term Limits for presidents essentially might himself later for life. Some of these critics say that. How does that promote good governance for China and a sound succession mechanism? That will allow China to Rosza Unabated well I would say that the history of China has taught them when they have strong central government. The people benefit a lot. When this week government they suffer a lot and you look at a hundred years of humiliation. That China's suffered from the first opium war of Eighteen. Forty two right until the establishment of the People's Republic of China in nineteen forty nine. The main reason why they went through one hundred years of humiliation was because they had weak central government so what Xi Jinping has given to China is once again very strong central government this is an asset for China. I think he's going to be around as Vita for a long time. And as long as he's around. I think China will do very well. Okay will you say that this geopolitical contest that's broken out between America and China? That will continue marathon. Rice does that mean that Beijing and Washington a doomed to confrontation. Well the the reason why. I'm producing my book now. Has China one his precisely because I want to avoid a confrontation in my. I think it's absolutely unnecessary for the United States and China to get entangled in this confrontation because at the end of the day the primary goal of the United States government is to improve the wellbeing of the American people than the best way to improve the well being of the American people especially in this call. The crisis is to work with China and not work against China but of course unfortunately the United States has other goal and is the primary goal of the United States is to maintain primacy in the global order. Then that will lead to confront To leading American proponents of containing China. John Shaw. The University of Chicago Have Stephen. Walt whom you quoted approvingly in your book about the perils of American Hubris and exceptionalism but on China I disagree. They say I've been guests on this program and I've made this point Measham and casual. They say that a rising China does indeed threaten the regional status quo and Washington moreover will and should go to great lengths to ensure that China does not dominate the Asia. Pacific your response. Well I think the question is whether or not they can both live with each other In the region if if the United States by the way you know all the countries in this region many of them one the United States will remain strong player in this region. I think it'd be good for the region to have United States. Remain as strong Leah. By United States can remain a strong player without on fronting China. He can remain a strong player by working with China In in in many critical areas. And frankly if you ask the countries in the region What they would like to see they would like to see a strong China and they would like to see a strong United States. But they don't want to be forced to choose within China and the United States and we'll get to this question about choosing later on in the show but I want to stick with America. There is a consensus in the region. That America should stay but Foreign Affairs magazine. This is the Distinguished New York Journal to Achieve. Contributed this month. It faces a range of top. Foreign Policy Thinkers. They're all weighing on whether or not the. Us is in the process of global retrenchment The cover of Australia's leading Foreign Affairs Journal. This month is is called can trust America So Am I right in saying you? Don't think American showing any signs of withdrawing from Asia. Now I see no signs at all America retreating from the region and And I think that very strong as you know policy in America is to some extent made by the president but is also made by the deep state and the deep state has a very strong consensus that they got to remain very strongly Industry region. So I don't see an American of withdraw anytime in the near future but I do I do argue that the United States has got to behave differently. With China net once had One tenth the size of China's of America's GNP retailers but today China's be GNP BB. Dems is bigger than the United States. So you behave differently. Was this animal. What about that? Animals DASA more assertive. Now in your book and you listening to Katia Mahbubani. We're chatting about his new book. Has China one in your new book as show you dedicate a chapter to the question is China expansionist and you say basically China wants to respect global rules and norms but let's face it. It has ignored the ruling from the UN's Permanent Court of Arbitration. That was at The Hague in two thousand sixteen. The high concluded for those of you listening who've forgotten about this this is four years ago. Chana's conduct around the Scarborough Shoal and the Spratly islands it was illegal and let's remember Beijing has continued to build up a military prisons on artificial Alan's at drive out local fishermen and in the last few months case. Short Sean has been bullying Indonesia over the Natuna islands. How is all this respecting global order? Well you know one point. I emphasize said there were people talk of benevolent. Great Powers Turn Benevolent Grid. Power is an oxymoron. So as you know the United States today has not ratified the law. The Sea Convention. So in in some areas as China emerged behaving exactly the United States. The United States would never accept going to a tribunal to judge whether or not the United States valid or invalid claiming any area in that respect. China is behaving like the United States by just as the United States. Most of the time respects most international rules and conventions China. Also most of the time respects most of international rules in confections in many ways. China's behavior and America's behaviour is very similar in the international arena. Your critics would say that. China's maritime climbs a contested by the Philippines Malaysia Brunei Indonesia Vietnam Beijing has antagonized nations log New Zealand Australia with cyber attacks and and political interference. Nightside casual these. Not Diplomatic Wins for president. She hasn't he made some big mistakes. Well I it's it's it's interesting. It's always the rest. That is screaming very loud on this South China Sea When was the last time you heard a very strong statement from militia All of all of Philippines On the South China Sea. Why you're seeing behind. What is happening behind the scenes is a lot of diplomacy that is not reported in the Western media. Now I cannot comment on the side of the tax on Shelia and New Zealand but I I believe it was Edward Snowden revealed to us that if you live in today's world you can assume that anything you put up. There is being monitored completely by the National Security Agency of the United States. So I think what the world needs is new conventions in the cyber area and the world should work together do agree on some set of rules for what you can or cannot do in terms of cyber hacking spoke with the New Zealand professor. Anne Marie Bridie last week on this program and she told us about three investigations into Chinese interference in politics that a currently underway in New Zealand. But we WANNA go there now and finished your point. I was quite struck by a law in in your book. He sure well. You talked about the Chinese reluctance to conquer Australia quote. Future historians will marvel at the fact that even though Australia is geographically close to China. It was physically. It was physically occupied in conquered by far more distant British forces absolutely true. I mean if China was an expansionist power wrenching. Her travel all the way to Africa. He could have easily gone to Australia. Additional Australia. Remarkable accident of history. That Australia was colonized by British forces than not Chinese. I mean future. Historians will marvel. The anomaly visits Tom Switzer. On our in 'em I guess is Keisha Mahbubani the former foreign secretary of Singapore and President of the UN Security Council. He's now a distinguished fellow at the National University of Singapore. We're talking about his new book. Has China one now for some of Iran's listeners in Venice Matas whether your overstating China's rise and I WANNA put to you this very rule weakness in limitation surely because many analysts They argue that there's a ticking bomb in China it's low birthright and the aging population and this is the argument that will reduce the workforce and could potentially break social security system. How would you respond to those critics? Oh that's absolutely no question. That China faces a lot of serious Internal Challenges. Because you know it is to instill a developing country It's CABBIE DYING IF I get it right. It's still about ten thousand dollars. One-sixth debt of the United States has a long way to go before it becomes fully developed country. And that's precisely why China wants to focus on its internal development and not get dragged into an all-out geopolitical contests with the United States. So you notice that China wherever possible is trying to avoid getting entangled with the United States even though the United States clearly is challenging the United States challenging the United States charging China In many

China United States America People's Republic Of China South China Sea President Trump Asia Australia Beijing Washington Kishore Mahbubani UN National University Of Singapo Singapore New Zealand Secretary New York Xi Jinping Tom Switzer