Why US Interference in Australia Must Stop.
May 21, 2025 AIMN Editorial By Denis Hay https://theaimn.net/why-us-interference-in-australia-must-stop/
Description
US Interference. Discover how U.S. propaganda, led by the National Endowment for Democracy, manipulates global politics, including in Australia. Is our democracy truly sovereign?
Introduction: Are We the Masters of Our Destiny?
Picture this: Canberra, late 2023. A backbencher quietly raises concerns about Australia’s hawkish stance on China. He’s quickly silenced by a chorus of talking points – suspiciously uniform across think tanks, media panels, and government briefings. Behind the curtain? A well-funded global influence machine with links to Washington.
This isn’t a conspiracy, it’s a documented, multi-decade campaign spearheaded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a U.S.-funded entity once described as the CIA’s “soft power arm.” As revelations surface that the NED may soon be defunded, the world, including Australia, has a rare window to reflect.
The Problem: US Interference Hidden in Plain Sight
The Rise of the National Endowment for Democracy
Created in 1983, NED appeared from a CIA-backed vision to continue covert operations under the guise of democracy promotion. Its founder, CIA director William Casey, appointed former CIA staff to lead it, turning it into a powerhouse of global opinion-shaping.
According to the NED, it funds over 2,000 organisations annually. These include media outlets, advocacy groups, and political movements – all carefully aligned with U.S. foreign policy interests. But where transparency was once claimed, secrecy now prevails.
Australia: A Silent Target?
While countries like India, Iran, and Egypt have expelled or restricted the influence of the NED, Australia has yet to take any such action, leaving us vulnerable to foreign interference.” While there’s no official list of NED-backed groups working here, patterns appear:
• Think tanks echoing U.S. security narratives.
• Media outlets pushing Sinophobic content.
• NGOs subtly shaping Australia’s international alignments.
Certain Australian non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and think tanks have been identified as aligning closely with U.S. foreign policy interests, which may influence Australia’s sovereignty.
NGOs and Think Tanks Influencing Australia’s Alignment with U.S. Interests
1. Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI)
ASPI has received funding from the U.S. State Department and is known for its critical stance on China. Critics argue that ASPI’s work often reflects U.S. strategic interests, potentially impacting Australia’s independent foreign policy decisions.
2. Lowy Institute
Founded by Frank Lowy, the Lowy Institute receives funding from Australian government departments and major corporations. It advocates for a proactive Australian foreign policy, often aligning with U.S. perspectives, which may influence Australia’s international alignments.
3. Australian Council for International Development (ACFID)
ACFID coordinates the efforts of Australian NGOs involved in international development, with activities often reflecting Australia’s strategic interests in the Indo-Pacific region. Its alignment with U.S. foreign policy goals may subtly influence Australia’s international relations.
Implications for Australia’s Sovereignty
US interference with its close alignment to organisations with U.S. interests can have several implications:
- Policy Influence: Their research and advocacy may shape Australian foreign policy in ways that prioritise U.S. strategic goals over Australia’s independent interests.
- Public Perception: By framing international issues through a U.S.-aligned lens, these organisations can influence public opinion, potentially limiting diverse perspectives on foreign policy matters.
- Sovereignty Concerns: Integrating U.S. perspectives into Australian policy discussions may challenge Australia’s ability to formulate and implement policies that fully reflect its national interests and values.
Moving Forward: Away from US Interference
To safeguard Australia’s sovereignty, it is essential to:
- Promote Diverse Perspectives: Encourage a range of viewpoints in foreign policy discussions to ensure balanced decision-making.
- Enhance Transparency: Ensure that funding sources and affiliations of influential organisations are transparent to assess potential biases.
- Strengthen Independent Policy Development: Invest in independent research and policy development, prioritising Australia’s national interests.
By critically evaluating the influence of NGOs and think tanks on Australia’s foreign policy, steps can be taken to ensure that national sovereignty is upheld, and that policies reflect the diverse interests and values of the Australian people.
How Australia Is Losing Control
Normalising Hostility, Undermining Diplomacy
Since 2020, public sentiment against China has spiked. What changed? A surge in media narratives framing China as a threat, many linked to foreign-funded analysis.
Thoughts: “Why do we always follow Washington’s lead?” asked a young policy adviser who remained anonymous. “Every time we try to de-escalate, there’s pressure – think tanks, pundits, even donor influence.”
The True Cost of Obedience
This foreign narrative dominance has consequences:
• Foreign policy subservience: Lockstep alignment with U.S. wars and AUKUS.
• Economic fallout: Trade tensions with China are harming Australian exporters.
• Public trust erosion: Citizens increasingly distrust institutions that parrot foreign lines.
Reclaiming Australia’s Political Sovereignty
1. Demand Transparency and Oversight
• Create a public register of all foreign-funded organisations.
• Require disclosure of media and think tank funding sources.
2. Commission a Royal Inquiry
• Investigate the influence of U.S. foreign policy agents in Australian politics.
• Examine the links between domestic policies and foreign think tank agendas.
3. Embrace Australia’s Monetary Sovereignty
With our sovereign currency, the government can:
• Fully fund independent media.
• Support civic education that strengthens democratic resilience.
• End reliance on corporate-funded foreign narratives.
4. Shift to Peace-Based Foreign Policy
• Withdraw from U.S.-led military coalitions that don’t serve Australia’s interests.
• Build diplomatic and trade ties based on mutual respect, not rivalry.
Sovereignty Starts with Awareness
The potential defunding of the NED signals a pivotal moment. For too long, Australia has been a proxy for U.S. geopolitical ambitions. But it doesn’t have to stay that way.
Australians can reclaim policy independence by exposing foreign influence, demanding transparency, and using our monetary sovereignty.
Q&A: Common Reader Concerns
Q1: Isn’t the NED just promoting democracy?
No. Numerous academic studies and U.S. journalists have exposed NED’s role in funding regime change operations, often supporting authoritarian regimes aligned with U.S. interests.
Q2: Has Australia really been influenced by foreign propaganda?
Yes. While evidence is carefully veiled, indirect ties through foreign-funded think tanks and media campaigns are clear. Unlike India or Venezuela, Australia has not pushed back.
Q3: What can we do as citizens?
Support independent media, call for transparency, contact your MP, and educate others about Australia’s monetary power and the need for sovereign policymaking.
Call to Action: Take Back Australia’s Voice
If you found this article insightful, visit Social Justice Australia to learn more about political reform and Australia’s monetary sovereignty.
Share this article with your community to help drive the conversation toward a more just and equal society.
Click on our Reader Feedback menu. Please let us know how our content has inspired you. Submit your testimonial and help shape the conversation today!
Support Social Justice Australia – Help Keep The Platform Running.
This article was originally published on Social Justice Australia
Nothing to See Here: Australia’s Hidden Arms Trade With Israel
May 19, 2025, Stefan Moore, Consortium News,
Despite the risks of colluding in Israel’s war crimes, Australia’s leaders remain wedded to the business of selling weapons and weapons parts to Israel, writes Stefan Moore.
Australian politicians will go to extraordinary lengths to obfuscate, excuse and lie about their country’s arms trade with Israel but recent investigations by human rights groups, independent media and the Australian Greens reveal that Australia is in breach of every international law prohibiting the sale of arms to countries committing war crimes.
Among the most egregious examples is Australia’s contribution to Israel’s Lockheed-Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter — the most technologically advanced and lethal fighter jet in the world. Each plane can carry a payload of up to 10 massive bombs — four internally and six mounted on the wings – each capable of obliterating apartment buildings, schools and hospitals and atomising the bodies of hundreds of Palestinians. Every day in Gaza, survivors of these attacks comb through the rubble for the remains of their loved ones.
Australia plays a critical role in the global supply chain of parts for Israel’s F-35 fighter jets. As reported by Declassified Australia, the “update actuators” that open the bomb bay doors are supplied by Rosebank Engineering in Melbourne. The “weapons adaptors” that release the bombs are supplied by Ferra Engineering in Brisbane.
Australia’s insistence that it does not sell weapons to Israel is both false and nonsensical. When questioned about the sale of F-35 parts by Greens Sen. David Shoebridge in Parliament, Deputy Defence Secretary Hugh Jeffrey claimed that the mechanisms used to open the F-35 bomb bay doors are not weapons because weapons are “whole systems” and not parts like a bomb door opener which he ridiculously compared to a pencil that can either be used to write or as a weapon.
Despite the deputy defence secretary’s claim that Australia’s sale of F-35 parts does not violate international law, it is clearly prohibited by the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (to which Australia is a signatory) that stipulates in Article 6(3) “arms transfers should be prohibited if the state knows that the weapons will be used for genocide, crimes against humanity, or war crimes.” Specifically, the Treaty restricts the export of weapons “parts and components.”
For Australian politicians, any discussion of Australia’s arms trade with Israel hits a raw nerve. When Foreign Affairs Minister Penny Wong was asked about the F-35 parts sales by Sen. Shoebridge in parliament, instead of answering the question truthfully (that either she didn’t know or that she was aware that Australia is part of the F-35 supply chain) she aggressively attacked Shoebridge for spreading “misinformation and disinformation” that was being spread on social media.
But Australia’s sale of weapons parts to Israel is not restricted to the F-35……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………https://consortiumnews.com/2025/05/19/nothing-to-see-here-australias-hidden-arms-trade-with-israel/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=a5119662-8aaa-4113-b7c5-e057e49d1f20
David Littleproud cites nuclear energy disagreement as major factor in Coalition split
The Conversation, John Quiggin , Professor, School of Economics, The University of Queensland, May 20, 2025
Nationals’ leader David Littleproud has singled out nuclear energy as a key reason for his party’s spectacular split from the Liberals, as both parties seek to rebuild following the Coalition’s devastating election loss.
Speaking to the media on Tuesday, Littleproud said:
our party room has got to a position where we will not be re-entering a Coalition agreement with the Liberal Party […] Those positions that we couldn’t get comfort around [include] nuclear being a part of an energy grid into the future.
The junior partner had long held strong sway over the Coalition’s climate and energy stance, including the plan to build nuclear reactors at seven sites across Australia using taxpayer funds.
After public sentiment appeared to go against nuclear power during the election, the Nationals had reportedly been weighing up changes to the policy. It would have involved walking away from the plan to build reactors and instead lifting a federal ban on nuclear power.
But some quarters of the Nationals remained deeply wedded to the original nuclear plan. Meanwhile, Nationals senator Matt Canavan had called for the net-zero emissions target to be scrapped, and Nationals senator Bridget McKenzie insisted renewable energy was harming regional communities.
Now, with the Nationals unshackled from the binds of the Coalition agreement, the future of its energy policy will be keenly watched.
A graceful way out of nuclear
Littleproud on Tuesday did not confirm where exactly he expected the Nationals to land on energy policy. But he rejected suggestions his party was unwise to stick with the nuclear policy after the Coalition’s poor election result, saying public opinion had been swayed by a “scare campaign”.
Even if the Coalition had won the election, however, the policy was running out of time.
CSIRO analysis showed, contrary to the Coalition’s claims, a nuclear program that began this year was unlikely to deliver power by 2037. But up to 90% of coal-fired power stations in the national electricity market are projected to retire before 2035, and the entire fleet is due to shut down before 2040.Now, the earliest possible start date for nuclear is after the 2028 election. This means plugging nuclear plants into the grid as coal-fired power stations retire becomes virtually impossible.
This very impossibility provided the National Party with a graceful way out of the policy. It could have regretfully accepted the moment had passed.
With nuclear out of the picture, and coal-fired power almost certain to be phased out, that would have left two choices for the Coalition: a grid dominated by gas, or one dominated by renewables.
However, expanding gas supply frequently requires the controversial process of fracking, which is deservedly unpopular in many regions where it’s undertaken.
What’s more, gas is an expensive energy source which can only be a marginal add-on in the electricity mix, used alongside batteries to secure the system during peak times.
Logically, that would have left renewable energy as the only feasible energy policy option for the Nationals – but it wasn’t to be…………………………….
The Nationals’ hostility to renewables may in part be driven by pressure from anti-renewable activist groups.
The Institute of Public Affairs, for example, has sought to promote rural opposition to renewables and emissions reduction and focused its efforts on Nationals-held seats
And the now-defunct Waubra Foundation, named after the small town in northwest Victoria, opposed wind farms and claimed they caused health problems. The group was created by an oil and gas executive with no apparent links to the town…………………………………………………………………………..
Renewables can be good for the bush
Nationals Senate leader Bridget McKenzie last week said her party was concerned that renewable energy targets are “impacting rural and regional communities”. The party has long voiced concern about the impact of large-scale wind and solar projects in the bush.
However, many farmers and other rural landowners benefit financially from hosting solar and wind farms, which, in many cases, do not prevent the land from also being used for farming.
Concerns that wind farms and solar panels might slash the value of neighbouring properties have been shown to be ill-founded.
And importantly, the increasing frequency of extreme climate events is already a challenge to Australia’s agriculture sector and will become more difficult. Tackling the problem is in regional Australia’s interests.
The Nationals’ hostility to renewable energy comes at a cost to rural and regional Australians. But Littleproud clearly could not balance competing views within the Nationals on energy policy while inking a deal with the Liberals. Instead, the party will now go it alone. https://theconversation.com/david-littleproud-cites-nuclear-energy-disagreement-as-major-factor-in-coalition-split-256904
Treaty the planet’s best chance to get rid of its worst weapons
By Dave Sweeney | 19 May 2025, https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/treaty-the-planets-best-chance-to-get-rid-of-its-worst-weapons,19758
From Jakarta to the Vatican, Prime Minister Albanese’s journey underscores a global call to ban the world’s most destructive weapons, writes Dave Sweeney.
ON HIS FIRST overseas trip since his sweeping election victory, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese made for two very different destinations.
The first stop was steamy Jakarta, the capital of Indonesia, the world’s most populous island nation and home to the world’s largest Muslim population with around 240 million or 13 per cent of the globe’s believers.
After Indonesia, the PM switched time zones and belief systems and headed to the Vatican, the world’s smallest sovereign state in terms of area and population, and the (sacred) heartland of the Catholic faith.
These two places are very different worlds, with very different worldviews, but both have an active desire to protect our shared world from its most avoidable existential threat: nuclear war.
Prime Minister Albanese also holds this view.
In December 2018, he championed Federal Labor’s support for the newly adopted UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), stating:
“Nuclear weapons are the most destructive, inhumane and indiscriminate weapons ever created. Today we have an opportunity to take a step towards their elimination.”
The TPNW, adopted by the UN in 2017 with more than 120 nations voting in favour, grew from an Australian initiative by the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN).
ICAN was launched in Melbourne in 2007 and was awarded the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of the group’s work ‘to draw attention to the catastrophic humanitarian consequences of any use of nuclear weapons’ and its ‘groundbreaking efforts to achieve a treaty-based prohibition of such weapons’.
The TPNW entered into force in January 2021, an act which has finally and formally seen nuclear weapons be declared unlawful under international humanitarian law.
Supporters of the TPNW have described the Treaty as our planet’s best way to get rid of its worst weapons.
The fragile and fractured global situation starkly highlights the urgency of this task.
Two nuclear weapon states, Israel and Russia, are actively involved in hot wars.
Two more, India and Pakistan, are engaged in risky posturing that could dramatically escalate, while two others, China and the United States, are shaping up for a trade war with hints of worse to come.
Against this grim background, the TPNW is a star that provides some light and hope and a navigation point to help chart a safer and saner course for our shared future.
Nations are embracing this path with half of the world’s countries having signed, ratified or acceded to the Treaty, including Indonesia and the Vatican/Holy See.
When it ratified the TPNW last September, Indonesia – a leading player in the global Non-Aligned Movement – made clear that ‘the possession and use of nuclear weapons cannot be justified for any reason’
Speaking at the time, then Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi posed the fundamental question and delivered the humane answer:
Should fear of nuclear weapons be our guarantee for peace? Indonesia’s answer will forever be no.
Indonesia reaffirms its commitment to a nuclear weapon-free world.
The late Pope Francis was a strong supporter of the TPNW and gave expression to the principle of “blessed are the peacemakers” with the Vatican’s championing and early adoption of the Treaty. The Pope described the very existence of nuclear weapons as “an affront to heaven”. In his final Easter Sunday sermon, shortly before he died, he made a powerful call for peace and weapons abolition.
These calls for nuclear abolition and for ways of addressing conflict that do not risk all that ever was, is or could be on our shared planet are finding a resonance and echo in many other nations.
Labor’s National Platform is clear:
Labor acknowledges the growing danger that nuclear weapons pose to us all and the urgent need for progress on nuclear disarmament.
Labor will act with urgency and determination to rid the world of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons.
Commits itself to redoubling efforts towards a world without nuclear weapons…
Labor in government will sign and ratify the Ban Treaty…
In this year that marks 80 years since the unveiling of the age of Armageddon with the first atom bomb test in New Mexico and the first atom bombings of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it is time to turn a political platform into a prescription for a habitable world.
It is time for Australia to follow the example of Indonesia, the Vatican and many other nations and to show that the pen is mightier than the sword by signing the TPNW.
As they say, Prime Minister, when in Rome…
Nuclear power blows up coalition’s political marriage
Canberra Times, By Dominic Giannini, May 20 2025
Nuclear energy has blown up a political agreement between the Nationals and the Liberals after leaders failed to reach common ground, but left the door open for a reconciliation.
The traditional political marriage couldn’t be consecrated following a disastrous result for the coalition at the federal election with the Nationals standing firm on wanting to retain four key policies.
These included remaining committed to nuclear energy, divestiture powers to break up big supermarkets, a $20 billion investment fund that would disperse $1 billion a year on regional infrastructure and universal phone services……………………………….
The change in opposition doesn’t have a substantial impact on the government’s ability to pass legislation with Labor commanding a major majority in the lower house and only needing the Greens in the Senate.
The Liberals still have the numbers to pass legislation in the Senate with Labor without the Nationals.
Without a coalition agreement, Labor has a significant electoral advantage with the Liberals holding fewer than 30 of 150 lower house seats and the Nationals 15.
The Nationals won’t sit in shadow cabinet, meaning they won’t hold sway over policies and the half-dozen MPs who were around the table will take a paycut………………………………………. https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/8971350/nuclear-power-blows-up-coalitions-political-marriage/
This week’s antidotes to the corporate-nuclear-military-industrial-media-complex
Some bits of good news – The lengths to which health workers go to reach every child with vaccines. Clean energy just put China’s CO2 emissions into reverse for first time.
In the Netherlands, Anyone Can Turn a Slice of Sidewalk Into a Garden
TOP STORIES .
The real reason politicians back nuclear power instead of renewables –ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2025/05/18/2-a-nuclear-in-decline-edf-accumulates-excesses-the-state-takes-the-hit-and-the-french-pay-the-bill-without-flinching/
Nuclear in decline: EDF accumulates excesses, the State takes the hit and the French pay the bill without flinching– ALSO AT
https://nuclear-news.net/2025/05/18/2-a-nuclear-in-decline-edf-accumulates-excesses-the-state-takes-the-hit-and-the-french-pay-the-bill-without-flinching/
Ontario’s Costly Nuclear Folly.
Why small modular reactors do not exist – history gives the answer.
Status and Trends of the Global Nuclear Industry: A Cruel Reality Check.
The Balance of Power in the Russo-Ukraine War– Russia is in the driving seat –
ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2025/05/18/2-a-the-balance-of-power-in-the-russo-ukraine-war-russia-is-in-the-driving-seat/k
Climate, Want to know how the world really ends? Look to TV show Families Like Ours – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aRYRz6-shE.
Global sea levels are rising faster and faster. It spells catastrophe for coastal towns and cities. Techno-optimism alone won’t fix climate change.
Noel’s notes. Let’s give Trump credit where credit is due.
AUSTRALIA. Treaty the planet’s best chance to get rid of its worst weapons. Can Australia pay off Turkey to host COP31? The Brits did. Labor’s got a new mandate to act.- Still condones war crimes. Why? More Australian nuclear news at https://antinuclear.net/2025/05/19/australian-nuclear-news-12-19th-may/
NUCLEAR ITEMS
ECONOMICS. Critics Slam Cost of Ontario SMR Plan, Question Dependence on U.S.
Uranium. What does the Cour des Comptes Report mean for Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C?
Airlines update nuclear war insurance plans as escalation threats grow – ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2025/05/19/1-b1-airlines-update-nuclear-war-plans-as-escalation-threats-grow/
French nuclear company Orano explores sale of Niger uranium assets.
| ENERGY. Solar and wind make up 98 pct of new US generation capacity in Trump’s first three months. |
| ETHICS and RELIGION. Never, Ever Let Anyone Forget What They Did To Gaza. Chris Hedges: The New Dark Age Pope Leo Breaks Silence on Ukraine, Gaza, and Middle East Violence | DRM News | |
| EVENTS Petition to Deny LANL’s Request to Release Radioactive Tritium into the Air. |
| HUMAN RIGHTS. Nuclear veterans hand ‘evidence dossier’ to police. |
| LEGAL. Hinkley Point C court hearing over complying with UK environmental information law begins. |
| MEDIA. US mainstream media still censoring US enabled Israeli genocide in Gaza. Multiple Western Press Outlets Have Suddenly Pivoted Hard Against Israel. |
| PODCAST. NUCLEAR HOTSEAT podcast – Nuclear Radiation Cancer Zone: Piketon Ohio’s Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant. |
| POLITICS. Can the UK’s 24GW of new nuclear by 2050 target be met? Revisiting the Nuclear Roadmap. Why SNP national council must pass this motion on nuclear weapons – ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2025/05/19/2-b1-why-snp-national-council-must-pass-this-motion-on-nuclear-weapons/ |
POLITICS INTERNATIONAL and DIPLOMACY.
Iran proposes partnership with UAE and Saudi Arabia to enrich uranium. Beyond Iran: a new nuclear doctrine for the Persian Gulf.
False promises, real costs: The nuclear gamble we can’t afford.
Trump should not threaten sanctions when he talks to Putin. Zelensky now needs to shut up and let his negotiating team get to work. The stakes are high for these important Ukraine-Russia-US talks. Zelenskyy says he is willing to meet Putin in Istanbul for peace talks. Peace For Ukraine – The disastrous derailment of early peace efforts to end the war.
Donald Trump Decouples the United States from Israel. Trump, Planes and the Arabian Gulf Tour.
| PLUTONIUM. Sellafield Plutonium treatment plant moves a step closer to completion |
| PUBLIC OPINION. Ontarians overwhelmingly say no to new nuclear. 80% of Ontarians want the province to cancel its contract for GE-Hitachi nuclear reactors. |
| SAFETY. A home guard to protect British nuclear power plants against enemy attacks -ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2025/05/19/1-b1-a-home-guard-to-protect-british-nuclear-power-plants-against-enemy-attacks/ Safety failures reported at Hinkley Point C days before environmental trial begins. Too Great a Risk. Hinkley Point C site served notice after crane ‘component failure’. Inspection at the Flamanville EPR: the nuclear watchdog points out serious shortcomings. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) secures contribution from France to help restore site safety at Chornobyl. Don’t vent tritium gas |
| SECRETS and LIES. How Donald Trump’s Crypto Dealings Push the Bounds of Corruption- ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2025/05/19/1-b1-how-donald-trumps-crypto-dealings-push-the-bounds-of-corruption/ |
| SPACE. EXPLORATION, WEAPONS. US loosens some rules for offensive counterspace ops, wargaming.China and Russia plan to build nuclear power station on moon. |
| SPINBUSTER. New York Governor Kathy Hochul’s Major Nuclear Power Push. |
| TECHNOLOGY. AWS says Britain needs more nuclear power to feed AI data center surge. |
| URANIUM. Uranium enrichment to 93% is Iran’s right under Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty , lawmakers tell UN watchdog |
| WASTES. The US buried millions of gallons of wartime nuclear waste – Doge cuts could wreck the cleanup.Andra updates French repository cost estimate |
WEAPONS and WEAPONS SALES
Emmanuel Macron open to stationing French nuclear weapons in other European nations.– ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2025/05/16/2-b1-emmanuel-macron-open-to-stationing-french-nuclear-weapons-in-other-european-nations/
Sussan Ley, David Littleproud caught in coalition rift over net-zero and nuclear deal
The Nightly 19 May 25
A senior Liberal frontbencher has urged the party not to abandon its net-zero target as divides over climate and nuclear energy policies threaten the coalition’s election rebuild.
Liberal leader Sussan Ley and Nationals counterpart David Littleproud continue to hammer out a power-sharing agreement, with the number of ministers assigned to each party central to negotiations.
But outspoken blocs within each party are urging their leaders to ditch the coalition’s support of reaching net-zero emissions by 2050, while some Nationals want a commitment from the Liberals to keep their nuclear power policy before signing a new agreement.
Liberal senator Jane Hume said policies were a matter for each party room, but her personal opinion was to keep net-zero.
“The electorate has sent us a very clear message about what it is that they want in their government,” she told Sky News on Monday.
“Abandoning net zero, I don’t necessarily think is consistent with that.”…………………………………………………… https://thenightly.com.au/politics/sussan-ley-david-littleproud-caught-in-coalition-rift-over-net-zero-and-nuclear-deal-c-18739795
Australian nuclear news 12 – 19th May.
Headlines as they come in:
- Treaty the planet’s best chance to get rid of its worst weapons .
- Sussan Ley, David Littleproud caught in coalition rift over net-zero and nuclear deal.
- Australian Financial Review readers want nuclear plan scrapped, climate ambition raised.
- The fallout of Dutton’s nuclear approach.
- Nuclear future off the agenda in Port Augusta, as locals turn to renewables and mining.
- ‘Campaign led by anti-nuclear groups had its intended effect’
Labor’s got a new mandate to act. Still condones war crimes. Why?
by Michael Pascoe | May 19, 2025 https://michaelwest.com.au/labors-got-a-new-mandate-still-condones-war-crimes-why/
The Palestine elephant remains in the room. It’s putrid, stinking of death while our government holds its nose and looks away, ignoring the war crimes, writes Michael Pascoe.
Yesterday, The Guardian reported another 140 people killed in Gaza, while Israel continues its blockade of all aid from coming in, now entering its 11th week.
Let’s keep this very simple: Is depriving the civilian population of food, water and medicine a war crime? Yes, it is.
So, what is the penalty for this crime? The Australian Government says there is none. You can blockade a couple of million people, use starvation as a weapon of war, and Australia will look the other way.
The old “the standard you walk past is the standard you accept” line means we effectively condone this crime. That we have willingly imposed sanctions for lesser crimes makes us arch hypocrites by ignoring this crime against humanity.
We are made fools when we have given more than $100 million in humanitarian aid to Gaza, but such aid is now blocked without meaningful protest.
We are made jokes of by having imposed sanctions on seven Israeli individuals over settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank, but dare not mention.
even thinking of action over starving and killing tens of thousands of children.
“We call on Israel to hold perpetrators of settler violence to account and to cease its ongoing settlement activity,” Foreign Minister Wong said last year while announcing sanctions on the token individuals.
All words and no action
“The Albanese Government has been firm and consistent that Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories are illegal under international law and a significant obstacle to peace,” Penny Wong said, but the Albanese Government is game to do nothing more than to mouth those words.
Apply financial and travel sanctions against all Israeli West Bank settlers – a reasonable course of action against those breaching international law – and I might begin to believe the government means it.
But the colonisation of the West Bank pales in comparison with the Gaza blockade.
We know exactly who is responsible, who is committing this catastrophic crime: Benjamin Netanyahu and his Cabinet. And we do nothing.
Australia actively maintains sanctions against a long list of individuals and organisations. You can read all their names, date and place of birth and last known address on what DFAT calls the Consolidated List.
They range from targeted financial sanctions and travel bans on members of the Myanmar military and companies and banks that deal with them to the three individuals held directly responsible for shooting down MH17 over Ukraine, but there’s not even a wrist slap for those ordering malnutrition, disease and death for Palestinians in Gaza.
Double standards
In mitigation for the Russian and Ukrainian MH17 killers, it is possible they did not realise they were destroying a civilian aircraft. On the other hand, there is no lack of knowledge about what Israel is doing to Gaza, no doubt about the murder of aid workers, about the hunger and the denial of medical supplies.
The Jewish Council of Australia has called out genocide, has underlined the International Court of Justice orders, and has repeatedly called on our government to impose sanctions. The government has ignored it.
The grubby politicisation of the Gaza war in the lead up to the federal election, the dog whistling, has run its course. It ended up doing little more than increasing antisemitism and Islamophobia.
Now Albanese has a government so secure it can afford to burn senior Cabinet ministers. Now it has the political capital to stand on principle or continue to effectively condone war crimes.
There are two simple questions to be asked of every government member, and especially the Prime Minister.
The first is the one this started with: Is depriving the civilian population of food, water and medical supplies a war crime?
The second: What are you going to do about it?
Australian Financial Review readers want nuclear plan scrapped, climate ambition raised
Paul Karp AFR, 18 May 25
Most readers of The Australian Financial Review want the Coalition to scrap its nuclear power policy and believe the re-elected Albanese government has a mandate to be more ambitious on its climate policies.
A fortnightly poll of readers found overwhelming support for Opposition Leader Sussan Ley over her vanquished Liberal rival Angus Taylor, but a deep split about whether the Coalition should recommit to net zero emissions by 2050 under her leadership.
As Ley faces calls from the Nationals to include nuclear power in the Coalition agreement, the poll found most readers (57 per cent) want the Coalition to scrap nuclear.
The nuclear policy should be dumped, the business case does not stack up,” said one reader.
“The problem with the Coalition’s nuclear policy is that there are no [small modular reactors] currently working anywhere and the one being built is already over budget,” said another.
A third reader noted that Australia “is not an established player, we have no industry and experience” in nuclear power, meaning that “even if a plant was started today it would be many years off operating. The policy was a furphy.”
Another said: “The nuclear policy [Peter] Dutton took to the election was seen by the electorate as a ploy to kick the emissions abatement can down the road.”……………………………………………………………… https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/afr-readers-want-nuclear-plan-scrapped-climate-ambition-raised-20250516-p5lzv2?utm_content=heres_what_else_happened_today&list_name=4CC7DE0B-EBBE-4073-9A9C-F421CED270D0&promote_channel=edmail&utm_campaign=afr-need-to-know&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_term=2025-05-18&mbnr=MzA5MjY3OTA&instance=2025-05-18-20-06-AEST&jobid=31478047
The complex truth about gas and renewables
ReNewEConomy, Kane Thornton, May 16, 2025
Energy policy in Australia has long suffered at the hands of a simple lie being easier to accept than a complex truth. The federal election was remarkable in all sorts of ways, but one of those was that the Australian public backed a complex truth and they overwhelmingly rejected a simple lie.
They rejected nuclear power and a massive campaign to hoodwink Australia into backing a solution riddled with risk and uncertainty, likely to have enormous costs and be decades away. Instead, they provided a strong mandate for Australia to proceed with renewables, backed up by batteries, pumped hydro and a small amount of gas.
At the start of this year, amidst waves of misinformation and anticipating another contentious election campaign, the clean energy industry launched a new campaign to ensure the Australian public got the facts. We wanted to make sure the Australian public had access to the facts about clean energy and the alternatives. It’s working.
As the dust settles on the election, we have a lot more to do to ensure the public understand the complexity and nuance of Australia’s energy transition. One of those areas is about the role of gas in the electricity system. So let’s get it straight.
Firstly, the fact is that a small amount of gas-fired electricity generation is playing an important role today, and according to the experts will be necessary for the foreseeable future. That might be an inconvenient truth for some people, but it is the reality for now. It’s a small role, compared to the massive role renewable energy and energy storage is already playing and is expected to in the future.
The Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) states that “As coal-fired power stations retire, renewable energy connected with transmission and distribution, firmed with storage, and backed up by gas-powered generation is the lowest-cost way to supply electricity to homes and businesses through Australia’s transition to a net zero economy”
They saw through unprecedented misinformation and a ferocious campaign against renewable energy and for nuclear power. More than anything, Australian’s demonstrated they wanted the truth and could handle that truth. No one said that replacing Australia’s aging coal generation fleet over a decade or so would be easy, or straight forward. But the election showed that it’s time for more honesty with the Australian public.
Importantly, AEMO also projects that gas generation capacity (MW) will produce much less energy (MWh – actual output) than it does today, with a reduced capacity factor for any gas generation of around 7% on average.
AEMO projects gas generation will play a narrower and more focussed role, providing rare but important coverage of seasonal shortfalls, as opposed to its current role in regularly providing peaking support. AEMO is currently forecasting that gas-fired generation capacity will increase from 11.5 GW now to 15 GW in 2050, including replacement of 9.3 GW of the current capacity that is expected to retire over coming decades.
This 15 GW is a relatively small amount of gas capacity when considered alongside the 135 GW of new large-scale renewable generation and the 56 GW of combined utility and distributed energy storage needed by 2050.
The experts tell us that energy storage will play a much bigger role than gas generation in the long term. Energy storage represents a cleaner, lower cost alternative to gas generation and investors are pouring billions into developing more of these assets – last year alone we saw a record 4,000 MW of new energy storage projects, with more than double that due to connect in the next few years. The faster we can deploy clean energy and a range of storage solutions, the faster we can reduce our reliance on gas…………………………………………….. https://reneweconomy.com.au/the-complex-truth-about-gas-and-renewables/
Let’s give Trump credit where credit is due
18 May 25 https://theaimn.net/president-trump-on-ukraine-in-pursuit-of-peace-or-glory/
Yes, he’s a narcissist, yes he’s racist, misogynist, crooked in business, and with no regard for civil institutions and laws. AND he’s just been sucking up to the nastiest most murderous Arabian Gulf regime, in order to make $billions for American business interests, including, notably his own.
BUT even Trump can do some good things. And in the case of the Ukraine war, this is apparent.
In early 2022, Ukraine’s President Zelensky was on the brink of signing a peace agreement with Russia. There’d be no loss of Ukraine territory, and no Ukraine NATO membership. Key Western leaders opposed this negotiation. On April 9, 2022, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson arrived unannounced in Kiev and told the Ukrainian president that the West was not ready to end the war. Then in April, in Kiev, U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said the U.S. wants to use the opportunity to permanently weaken Russia militarily and economically. He went on , at a meeting of Western leaders in Germany, to declare a Ukrainian victory over Russia as a strategic goal for Europe and the USA.
Zelensky promptly switched policy, and this turned into his peripatetic jaunts to the USA and Europe, to drum up weaponry for this determination to defeat Russia. In this, he had the mindless, and never flinching, support from Joe Biden, and NATO. All of which was most acceptable to America’s warhawks, and manna from Heaven to Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman, Boeing and General Dynamics.
The West then launched a propaganda campaign about Ukrainian forces defeating Russian forces. English language media continued to show only the Ukrainian perspective. Media scholars have studies this, but I can be sure just from my own experience of the Australian media.
I’ve noticed not only a constant theme that Ukraine can militarily defeat Russia, but that Ukraine IS winning the war. This has been accompanied by copious emotional stories about the Ukrainian civilian victims of Russia’s war. Terrible atrocities done by the Russians. And some atrocity reports are faked. In reality, atrocities have been committed also by Ukrainians, but these are rarely reported on.
With that unflinching support from the West, Russia’s steady progress in the war has been disregarded and downplayed. Now Russia now has the military upper hand on the battlefield and that seems unlikely to change.
From 2022 until 2025, Biden and NATO would not countenance any serious suggestion of a negotiated end, such was their hatred of Russia. Near the end of his office, President Biden signed off on a huge number of weapons to Ukraine.
Donald Trump promised to end the war. In March this year, he stopped all military aid to Ukraine, including weapons already in transit. He’s against NATO membership for Ukraine – as just “not practical”, and does not expect that Ukraine will get back all of its land.
Ukraine has extended martial law until 6 August following Zelensky’s request This will prevent elections from being held before then, and enable Zelensky to stay in power. However, Zelensky could use fraudulent voter lists as a means of gaining re-election.
Critics , (including myself) have stressed Trump’s aim to make money for American companies out of a peace agreement. Well, so what? American weapons companies have been making $billions out of the war.
The thing is, despite all Trump’s negative aspects, he really does not like war. And with the Trump presidency, there is at last the opportunity to end this pointless slaughter, and avoid a wider war – something that was not possible under a Democrat administration.
As to Trump “not liking war” – that is another story to be explored. He likes to bully people with the threat of war. And that may turn out to be a dangerous way to go.
Zelensky’s plan for peace involves Ukraine getting back all the Russian-occupied land, including Crimea, (formally part of Russia since 2014) , and Ukraine headed to become a NATO member.
Europe, and all Westerners who buy into the Joe Biden view of Ukraine seem now still holding onto the idea of a military victory by Ukraine, over Russia. Zelensky’s unrealistic plan for a ceasefire can be disregarded. At least Trump offers a realistic way towards peace. And for that, he deserves acknowledgment.
The fallout of Dutton’s nuclear approach
Gladstone Bulletin, Dave Sweeney, Australian Conservation Foundation, 16 May 25,
When he unveiled the Coalition’s nuclear ambitions last June, Peter Dutton said:
“I’m very happy for the election to be a referendum on energy, on nuclear”
It was, and the result was a resounding rejection of high cost, high risk, nuclear power.
The election result is clear, as is the wider lesson: When the Coalition pushes nuclear, Australia pushes back.
In 2007 John Howard too nuclear to an election, where he lost government and his own seat.
In 2025 Dutton said nuclear, and Australia said “No” and “goodbye”.
Thanks to those in the community , who identified and acted on the risk of potential nuclear, – thanks for making a positive difference.
Australians have spoken, and it’s now time to draw a line under this unproductive distraction, and get on with real action to meet our nation’s climate and energy challenges.
Nuclear future off the agenda in Port Augusta, as locals turn to renewables and mining
ABC News, By Kathryn Bermingham, Stateline, 15 May 25
In short:
Port Augusta was thrust into the spotlight when it was announced as one of several sites earmarked, under a Coalition election pledge, to host a nuclear reactor.
While the Coalition has not formally abandoned the plan, its resounding defeat at the recent federal election suggested voters did not embrace the idea.
What’s next?
As Port Augusta looks ahead, locals say its future could lie in several directions, including renewables and mining…………………………………………………………………………………………….
Nuclear off the agenda
Port Augusta was thrust into the national spotlight last year when it was announced as one of the sites earmarked to host a nuclear reactor under a Coalition election pledge.
While the Coalition has not formally abandoned the plan, its resounding defeat at the recent federal election suggested voters did not embrace the idea……………………….
………………………. A future in power generation
Greg Bannon felt the region had scarcely settled one nuclear debate — the now-scrapped proposal to build a low-level nuclear waste dump near Kimba — when the Coalition’s plan was put forward.
“It was really like a punch in the guts,” he said.
Mr Bannon, who lives 40 kilometres from Port Augusta at Quorn and had campaigned against the dump, said Port Augusta has had to reinvent itself in the past and could do so again.
“We also had a very big railway workshop here, it was a huge employer with lots of apprenticeships,” he said.
“Railways built everything. So that was a big loss when that was taken away and of course the most recent large employer has been the coal-fired power station.”
He said the transition to renewables had been more economically beneficial than some gave it credit for — and maintained that Port Augusta’s future was still in energy generation.
“Renewables have provided jobs,” he said.
“We’ve got Sundrop Farm down there, which … grows tomatoes from gulf water that’s been desalinated and solar mirrors.”………………………………………………….. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-05-15/nuclear-off-the-table-for-port-augusta/105285976
Can Australia pay off Turkey to host COP31? The Brits did.
A previously unreported package of investment pledges and U.N. support got Turkey to back down last time.
May 8, 2025 By Karl Mathiesen and Zia Weise
LONDON — Australia’s bid to host next year’s climate conference depends on convincing Turkey to step aside.
If they need tips, there’s a British playbook — the details of which are previously unreported — that worked before, involving investment wheel-greasing and support for Turkey’s international priorities.
Riding high on his May 3 election landslide, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese wants to use the 2026 climate talks to drive clean energy investment and win a decades-old political battle with his right-wing rivals over efforts to cut greenhouse gases.
“Renewable energy is an opportunity we must work together to seize for the future of our economy,” Albanese said in his victory speech, capping an election where the prime minister backed Adelaide as the COP31 host city.
But to host the climate summit, Australia needs Turkey to drop its rival bid.
Australian officials flew to Turkey last year, but failed to secure a deal. Instead, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan reiterated his intention to bring COP to his country.
Some believe it’s only a matter of time before Turkey crumbles. Australia’s bid has backing from the European Union and other Western countries. More support is expected from the Pacific, given Canberra has offered to cohost the summit with an island nation.
Australia “should hold out until the world forces a deal,” said Richie Merzian, the CEO of the Clean Energy Investor Group and a former Australian diplomat. “The biggest impediment to the COP31 Australia-Pacific bid was the Australian election. With that sorted, it should organize accordingly.”
But Turkey has a track record of extracting more than just diplomatic pain in return for acquiescence. Facing a similar impasse with Erdoğan over the COP26 conference, U.K. officials offered a package of incentives to Turkey in order to host the talks in Glasgow in 2021.
The annual U.N. talks rotate through five groups of countries, loosely based on global regions and countries’ development stages. The “Western European and Other States” group is scheduled to host the 2026 summit. Choosing a host requires consensus.
Turkey is the only developing country in this group, which includes Australia and the U.K. And it has a track record of using the U.N. talks’ location for leverage.
In the lead-up to COP26, British officials courted Ankara intensively. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Erdoğan had a “good relationship on this topic in particular,” said Dominick Chilcott, the former British ambassador to Turkey who negotiated the arrangements.
But ultimately, Turkey was transactional in its demands.
Chilcott said Britain’s incentives package included a promise to host a Turkish investment conference in London, as well as U.K. backing of Turkish candidates for several international and U.N. posts. He declined to say which posts.
The U.K. also promised to speak to other countries about classifying Turkey as a “developing country” under the U.N. climate convention — allowing it to receive climate aid. “Although,” Chilcott said, “we didn’t think there was much chance of it going anywhere.”
1 This month
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 