Media
|
Transcripts
March 3, 2026
RAFAEL EPSTEIN: The Shadow Defence Minister is James Paterson, one of the Liberal Senators for the great state of Victoria. Good morning.
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Good morning.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN: How long do you think it's going to last?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Look, it's a dangerous game to predict these things but President Trump has said that from his point of view the campaign and could last for four to five weeks. The Iranian regime, although weakened, still is a formidable military force and will have significant stocks of ballistic missiles and drones and they will continue fighting, I suspect as long as they maintain effective control in Iran. So certainly if I had a flight to Europe via the Middle East in the next couple of days, I don't like the chances of getting on it.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN: Should Australia be involved in this?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: No, I don't think there's any need for us to be directly involved at this stage, as far as I'm aware from public statements made by the government, there's been no requests and they're not anticipating any requests. This U.S. administration is unlike previous administrations which sought to build broad international coalitions for actions like these. They're quite happy to use force alone or with a small group of allies.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN: Is the Coalition happy with that?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Yeah, well, there's been no request...
RAFAEL EPSTEIN: Sorry, forgive me. The point of my question, I guess, is whether the Coalition ok with the U.S. going it alone? It's a pretty significant war. It's now involving 10 countries.
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: We support the actions taken by the United States and Israel because we assess it's in Australia's national interest to further degrade the ballistic missile and nuclear weapons program of Iran. And because Iran is a malignant state actor, it is the world's largest state sponsor of terror, not just through its proxies in the Middle East, like Hamas, and Hezbollah, and the Houthis, but also here in Australia, our intelligence agencies have assessed that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps of Iran was responsible for at least two of the antisemitic attacks we had in our country, including the Adass Israel synagogue firebombing.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN: James Paterson is the Shadow Defence Minister. Senator, Australia found out about this war, not from diplomats, but from the President's own social media company. There was no Oval Office address. He wasn't in the Situation Room when it was launched. He's boasting about killing leaders more quickly than expected. It is called, the name of the operation is Operation Epic Fury. Is that the way the opposition wants a global leader to run a war?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well, we support the action that the United States and Israel have taken, for the reasons that I just outlined...
RAFAEL EPSTEIN: I appreciate that, but that's a very different way to run a war. Is the opposition concerned about that at all?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well, I think we should accept the reality of the world that we live in. We can't control what great powers do. And it's very clear, particularly in recent years, that great powers are not going to be restrained in the way that they previously appeared willing to be. And that's not just true of the United States, but other powers as well. I think we should deal with the world as it is, not as some kind of fantasy of what it might have used to be.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN: Is the war legal?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: I'm not an international law expert. There are others who are better qualified to make...
RAFAEL EPSTEIN: Do you care? Does it matter if it's legal?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well, Australia is not a party to the conflict. We're not a participant of the conflict, so if we were to be, then we would have to make our own assessments about whether it's consistent with our obligations. But because it is a conflict initiated by other parties, I think we should make a dispassionate analysis of whether we think it's in Australia's national interest or not. And again, for the reasons that I outlined, I think it is.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN: I have heard you say that Russia's invasion was illegal. I'm pretty sure I've heard you use the phrase rules-based order when it comes to China's naval operations. Why do the laws matter then, but not now?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: The most important thing about what Russia's doing is not whether it's lawful or unlawful under international law. The most important thing about that it's wrong and what they're doing to the Ukrainian people is wrong, and we support them. In relation to China and the South China Sea, I think that is a good example of the way in which great powers are unwilling to be constrained by international law or UN conventions. And whether or not Australia abides by it or not, or indeed whether you're not the United States abides by it or not, won't influence the behaviour of a power like the People's Republic of China. We are a regional power that has global interests. It is in our national interest to have the rules-based order upheld. But actually, we can't independently enforce that on our own. And we do have to accept the reality. I mean, this week, the Canadian Prime Minister is coming to speak to the Australian Parliament. And he gave a much heralded speech at Davos a few months ago, where he basically called this out. He said, we are not living in the post-Cold War environment anymore. This is not the unipolar moment. We're living in a very different world. It's multipolar or bipolar, and great nations that have the power to do what they want to do are doing what they want to do, and we have to adjust to that reality.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN: So does adjusting to that reality mean that the laws of war, they are only a nice to have, they are no longer a must have? Is that what it means?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well, regardless of whether you think that they're a must-have or a nice-to-have, we're in no position to impose it on others...
RAFAEL EPSTEIN: No, but I'm asking, you're the potential alternative government, I'm asking what your position is, because you do seem to say that the rules are important, but you also seem to be saying the days of the rules are over.
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: No, what I'm saying is they are important, and Australia should conduct ourselves consistent with our own laws and conventions and principles, that's important. But Australia is in no position to impose them on the world. That's the reality of the world that we live in and we could wish and hope for a 1990s post-Cold War unipolar moment where it looked like those institutions were robust and strong. But actually, really what was happening is they were being enforced by an unchallenged global superpower. That's not the world we live in at the moment. All that we can control are our own actions. And so I think it is important that we act ethically and consistent with our own laws and principles, but also it's important that we invest in our own adequate defence and national security to secure our interests. Because ultimately the real currency of international relations is power, hard power. And if we aren't able to protect ourselves and protect our interests, then appeals to international law are not going to save us.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN: So might makes right now?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: It's not whether it's right or not. It is just the reality of the world we live in...
RAFAEL EPSTEIN: No, no, I understand. I'm trying to work out if your position is, and I appreciate you saying that Australia should do what it can to try to make sure some laws are enforced, but you do seem to be saying, look, it's 2026, whether or not we like it, might makes right.
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: No, I'm not saying it makes it right, but I'm just saying it's the reality of the world we live in. And we may wish to live in a different world, we may even work with other like-minded partners to try and construct that world. But ultimately, actually, we live in the real world, we can't impose ourselves on great powers, we don't have any means by which to do so. Because they choose when they get to comply with these conventions and rules when it's convenient for them to do so. And when they don't want to be restrained by those, then they're not. Look at what the PRC has done in the South China Sea. It's very clearly a violation of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. It's been found to be so by many international tribunals. There's been no consequences for them. Even Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which may well be illegal, as you say, there has been not meaningful consequences for Russia for breaching those laws, other than countries rallying around Ukraine and supporting their military defence, which is what we should do, because we have an interest in protecting their territorial integrity.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN: I appreciate all of your very frank answers to the questions. So one more question. If you were the Defence Minister, does that mean that we would then be able to choose when Australia complies with international law? Because that's the reality we live in. Sometimes we'd have to choose not to comply?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: No, I'm not suggesting that, but the most important thing for Australia to do is to comply with our own laws. And we do have very strong laws about how we participate and when we participate in international conflicts. And actually, we've demonstrated a willingness to hold ourselves, including our own soldiers, to the law. And I think we should continue to do so.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN: What is the chance we will see regime change?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: I'm not aware of any historical example where regime change has been achieved by air power alone. If regime change does occur, it will only occur because the Iranian people are able to and choose to stand up. And from the comfort of thousands of kilometres away in Australia in a radio studio, it's very easy for us to opine about that. But these are life or death decisions for the Iranian people, as we've seen in recent months. Tens of thousands of them appear to have been murdered by the regime, based on credible media reports. And so it is a diabolical dilemma for them to face, but it does appear there is significant support for a change of direction within Iran.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN: Thanks for your time this morning.
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Thanks, Raf.
ENDS