Radio Interview, ABC Radio - Perth Drive

SUBJECT/S: Chinese Naval Vessels off the Coast of Australia 

GARY ADSHEAD, HOST: Straight away, let's go to the Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Richard Marles. The thanks very much for joining us. Minister, it's a pleasure.

RICHARD MARLES, DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER: Gary, how are you?

ADSHEAD: Ok, good. This situation then, in the Tasman Sea, when was the Australian government notified by China that it might be live firing in the ocean?

MARLES: Well, to be clear, we weren't notified by China. I mean, we became aware of this during the course of the day. What China did was put out a notification that it was intending to engage in live firing. By that I mean a broadcast that was picked up by airlines or literally planes that were commercial planes that were flying across the Tasman. So, perhaps to orientate people, we're talking essentially that the Chinese task group is kind of in the middle of the Tasman, halfway between Australia and New Zealand. They are in international waters, they're certainly allowed to do this. They have complied with international law. That said, when we engage in activities of this kind, in other words, when the Australian Navy does live firing, we would typically try to give 12 to 24 hours’ notice so that airlines are able to properly plan around what we're doing. That notice wasn't provided here and so I can understand why this was probably pretty, not probably, this was very disconcerting for the planes that were flying, but they were able to divert and of course, you know, there was never any prospect of anyone putting place in danger.

ADSHEAD: What do you think of the fact that they didn't notify the aviation authorities or the Australian Government of this?

MARLES: Well, what we would have, what we would do is perhaps the way to answer the question is to provide notice earlier across all the channels so that, and we would do that in a broadcast way. So, in that sense, it is in a sense similar, but we would be giving much greater notice. And the reason we do that is so that airlines are able to plan around the activities that we are undertaking. We certainly would have preferred that there would have been more notice given today, would have avoided the, in a sense, the more disruption that occurred in respect to the particular flights. We have, I should say, made representations to the Chinese Government both in Canberra and in Beijing. Firstly, in respect of what it is they are seeking to achieve in terms of the live fire exercises in this particular place, but also why more notice was not provided such that less disruption would have occurred. Having said all of that, I mean, I think the fundamental point to make is this, yes China is acting in accordance with international law. They are abiding by the rules of the sea. That's important. But so are we in making sure that in an unprecedented way we are surveilling what the Chinese task group is doing. We're doing that with Australian Navy assets and Air Force assets. We're doing that in combination with our friends and in this instance, New Zealand. A New Zealand frigate Te Kaha was in the vicinity shadowing the task group. So, a lot of the information that we have in relation to this comes from them. And I've been in contact with Judith Collins, who's the New Zealand Defence Minister, during the course of the day and the Prime Minister has been in contact with Prime Minister Luxon as well. So, there's a very coordinated effort here between Australia and New Zealand to make sure that we're monitoring all that the Chinese Task group are doing, so long as they are in our vicinity. And we'll keep doing that until the task group leaves. And whenever their mission is over, we will fully assess exactly what it is that they've been trying to achieve.

ADSHEAD: I'm talking to the Defence Minister, Richard Marles. Minister, was this an act of aggression by China?

MARLES: Well, I think again, it's important to say they were acting in accordance with international law. And the reason why I emphasise that is we, we talk often about the rules based order, we talk often about the sanctity of that and why it's in Australia's national interest. Because as a smaller country relative to China, you know, we get agency as a nation in the world, when the world operates on the basis of a set of rules and not simply by reference to power and might. And that's why we talk often about it. And as a country, and Western Australia knows this better than any part of the country, as a country which has a growing proportion of its prosperity built upon trade, there is a physical manifestation to that and it is effectively our sea lines of communication, it's the sea lanes. And freedom of navigation on the high seas is a fundamentally important principle to Australia's security, but also to our national prosperity. Now, if we're going to assert that, then we have to be upfront and say China in this instance is abiding by that, but we've got rights here as well. And that's why in an unprecedented way, we are monitoring everything that they are doing. You know, there have been instances where we have been asserting the rules based order to our north in places like the South China Sea, we frequently do that. That's important. Where we have witnessed actions which we've described as being unsafe and unprofessional. And indeed we made public one of those incidents in the last couple of weeks. In this instance, China has complied with international law. We would have preferred they had given greater notice that would have avoided the disruptions that occurred today. And we've made representations to them in respect of that. But we do acknowledge that, you know, they are complying. My advice is that they are actually complying with international law in terms of what they're doing.

ADSHEAD: Has China ever done this before so. Well, in the proximity of Australia and New Zealand in this way, live firing?

MARLES: Well, again, I should probably say they notified the live firing. We still await confirmation as to exactly what live firing occurred. To this point in time, we've not been able to independently verify there was live firing. But facts may emerge going forward in respect of that. I think again it's important to say we do light firing on the high seas and which is our right. And it's an important part of how our navy operates and trains. The presence of a Chinese task group in this part of where they are right now is unusual. And that's probably the most direct answer to your question. And it's because of that and really because of the prospect of that. Well, a week or so ago now, when the task group was traversing the north of Australia, in fact more than that, further longer than that I instructed that we should be engaging in, you know, more surveillance than we would normally do. Precisely because, you know, I was concerned that we might be seeing quite an unusual event. And in that, and in those circumstances, even if it is compliant with international law, we should exercise our rights under international law and make sure that we as much about this as possible. And that's what we're doing.

ADSHEAD: Well, it's actually developed, hasn't it, since, since just monitoring the vessels? Given that the reports that they were or they're reporting that they were due to live fire. Yeah. So, I mean it has developed. Only yesterday your shadow, Andrew Hastie described this as sort of an act of gunboat diplomacy. What would you say to that?

MARLES: I think we need to be careful about the language that we use. We want again make sure that we are exercising all of our rights in terms of monitoring this as closely as possible. And we also, you know, exercise our rights to our north in terms of asserting the rules based order, meaning asserting freedom of navigation. And we do that in, in the South China Sea. And it's very important that we continue to do that because, and that's, that's not gratuitous. That's because a significant part of Australia goes through the South China Sea and those waters. So, it's very important that we have the ability to do that. And when we do that and we do interact with the Chinese military in those circumstances, which we completely expect, what we seek is that they engage and interact with us in a professional way. And when they don't, we make that very clear and we make representations to them and we make those instances public. Now, I guess the point I'm making is that in doing that we acknowledge other countries have a right to do the same. The rules based order is ultimately what lies in our interests in this circumstance where this task group is in our waters. I think the right course for us is to acknowledge that they can be there, but we can also be there to make sure that we are monitoring all that they do and to fully understand what it is that they are trying to achieve with a mission of this kind.

ADSHEAD: Penny Wong is due to by chance sit with her counterpart in South Africa. I think it's tonight our time. Can I just ask you whether you or the Prime Minister would consider picking up the phone to Beijing on an incident like this?

MARLES: Well, we've made representations to Beijing already, as I said, and we've done that in Canberra as well. You're right, that the Foreign Minister will be meeting with her counterpart later tonight Australian time. And that's an opportunity, I think, in this instance. I mean, the point that we have raised with China is firstly, what it is that they are seeking to achieve with the task group and this particular element of the exercise of the task group. But secondly, why it was that greater notice could not have been provided because had they done that, which is what we would have done, less disruption would have occurred. They're the representations that we're making here and we will continue.

ADSHEAD. So, can I just ask you, you just said Canberra. Does that mean that there has been a discussion directly with China's ambassador, for example?

MARLES: Well, we won't go into the level, but we have spoken with their embassy in Canberra and we have also made representations by our embassy in Beijing. So, representations in respect of today have been specifically made now in both Canberra and Beijing.

ADSHEAD: Okay, and are the representations for the Chinese warships to stop live firing?

MARLES: Well, it's to, I mean, navies have a right to engage in activities on the high seas. We do that. And it's important to understand Australia does it. 

ADSHEAD: And we do that under Chinese airspace do we?

MARLES: Well, we're not talking about this being under Australian airspace and I think that, again, that's important to understand as well, that this is well outside of Australia's exclusive economic zone and we're talking about it being in international waters and the airspace above it is international airspace. We do do live firing exercises in those circumstances, but what we do when that occurs is we provide notice and more notice than what occurred here. And we do that so that if there are airlines which are traversing that particular airspace, they've got an ability to plan in respect of it. And that's, you know, that's normal behaviour. I mean, militaries do this. And so, again, it's really important that we act in a considered way here precisely because, you know, we are a country which sees that rules matter. And so it's not about trying to say that, you know, there's something that we think we can do and they can't. It's really about saying we should be all abiding by the same set of rules. That's actually why we engage in the activities that we do in the South China Sea. And so we acknowledge the right of navies, and in this case the Chinese Navy, to be present in international waters and to engage in exercise in international waters. But what happened today is that in doing it, yes, they complied with international law in terms of providing notice, but it was very short notice and it did put commercial planes in a disconcerting circumstance where, you know, they were needing to divert pretty quickly. And it's really that that we are raising with the Chinese and the representations that we're making.

ADSHEAD: Ok, just before I let you. It's been noted that the Prime Minister is not attending the WA Labor campaign launch for the state election on the weekend. Is that because on Sunday he'll be going to the Governor's House to announce the federal election? Minister, what are you laughing at?

MARLES: Because every interview I do right now, people ask the question.

ADSHEAD: I'm armed with facts, though, Minister. On Sunday we have a state election campaign launch. He won't be here and I'm told it's because he has an important engagement.

MARLES: Well, if you're told that, you're ahead of me here. I mean, I'd say two things. One is, I don't know, this lies in one person's head and that's the Prime Minister. But the second thing is, were I to speculate and to suggest that he was going to do one thing or another this Sunday, I reckon that's a career limiting move for me. So, I'll probably avoid answering it.

ADSHEAD: All right, that's a frank answer. Thank you very much for that, Minister. Good on you. Richard Marles, the Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister. 

ENDS