SENATOR JOHN FAULKNER Minister for Defence

www.defence.gov.au

Tuesday, 13 April 2010

Senator John Faulkner speaking to press at the Nuclear Security Summit

13 April 2010

E&OE

Ladies and Gentleman, I think I should begin by congratulating President Obama for proposing and hosting this summit on Nuclear Security. Building on the positive momentum already generated this year by the release of the US Nuclear Posture Review, and the signing of the strategic arms reduction treaty, between the United States and Russia, the summit has provided a great opportunity, for the international community to send a strong and a clear message that its committed to working together to prevent terrorist from ever accessing a nuclear weapon, or, the materials needed to make a nuclear explosive device.

Al-Qaeda has made no secret of its desire to acquire nuclear weapons, and I think we need to be very clear about this, if nuclear weapons got into the hands of terrorists, the results would be catastrophic.

One enduring consequence of the cold war is that nuclear material is spread across the globe, some if it not held as securely as the international community would like. Now, of course, this summit, as you appreciate, is not yet over, and although that is the case, I can say to you, that the discussions from last night and the sessions today, demonstrate the level of concern in the international community around these issues and the shared understanding that further, urgent action is required on these issues.

I can say to you of course that Australia recognizes its obligations as a major uranium exporter, to ensure that its uranium is used for peaceful purposes only, and of course we take that responsibility seriously. As I said to colleagues around the table in the summit just a few moments ago, we control uranium exports through vigorous safeguards agreements - Australia has a longstanding and active international involvement in supporting nuclear non-proliferation initiatives and regulatory issues. We’re represented on the board of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Australia was amongst the first to ratify the convention on the physical protection of nuclear material and its 2005 amendment. We have converted our research reactor and production of radioisotopes, from high enriched uranium to low enriched uranium fuel.

We’ve got a strong program of regional outreach and capacity building in training in nuclear and radioactive source security, and I think you’re aware that recently in 2008 together with Japan, we established the International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament, co-chaired by Professor Gareth Evans from Australia, and Yoriko Kawaguchi from Japan. Of course, as you’d appreciate, the issues explored by the commission require international solution. The commission of 15 nations included representatives from Russia, China, the US, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, India, amongst a host of others. In fact, Gareth Evans addressed a Nuclear NGO summit on the recommendations of the ICNND. He’s also attending this summit, as you may be aware.

So we welcome this new opportunity to engage further with other countries on how we can improve our nuclear security standards internationally. We welcome the opportunity to examine how we might toughen regulatory regimes around nuclear security and strengthen the roles and powers of the International Atomic Energy Agency. I’m very confident ladies and gentleman that this summit will deliver results and bring about long term improvements in the security of nuclear material. I’m certainly pleased to have been able to represent Australia at the summit, together of course with our new Ambassador to the United States of America Kim Beazley.

So ladies and gentlemen I’m very happy to answer your questions. In around 20 minutes or so, I have to shoot back into the summit, but I’ll stay with you for as long as I can.

Q: (…talk about what concrete things you think might come out of the Summit? inaudible)

A: You’ve probably asked me the most difficult question that I can receive at this news conference at this time because you’d appreciate in the afternoon session the conference will be formally considering both a communiquÃÂ©, and a detailed work plan, but as we speak at the moment, that hasn’t gone to the summit for formal endorsement. What I can say to you is that you will find, I’m certain, that the summit is going to agree to a communiquÃÂ© that contains significant political commitments, on behalf of the countries that are represented at this summit. I can also say to you with absolute confidence that in relation to the work plan, it will contain tangible and concrete steps to enhance nuclear security.

Q: Do you think the four year time frame is achievable?

A: I certainly do think the four year time frame is achievable, and I think I can say to you there is very strong commitment to that time frame from the countries represented at the summit. You’d appreciate that President Obama’s historic speech in Prague in April of last year, called for all vulnerable nuclear material around the world to be secured within that four year time period.

So what we have here at this summit is 47 countries along with the European Union, the IAEA, the United Nations, and that represents an absolutely unique opportunity for the international community to take very practical action towards achieving that goal. I can say to you categorically there is a strong commitment in the summit to do that, and also I think its fair to say to build on the positive momentum that’s already been generated this year by the US nuclear posture review, and of course the signature of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty between the United States and Russia. So, I think the clear purpose of this summit is promoting awareness of the serious threat of nuclear terrorism and the importance of effective prevention, very much underpinned by the goal that President Obama has set, and the commitment around the table at this summit to achieve that goal.

Q: In the context of this summit, is the Australian government more concerned about the risk of nuclear weapons being obtained by terrorist per se, or is the Australian government more concerned nuclear materials, dangerous materials, that might, for instance be used in a conventional weapon to wreak damage?

A: Well, I think what you need to do Brad, is look at what the purpose of this summit is, which is very much focussed on, if you like, the threat of nuclear terrorism. I think we ought to be frank about what the risks are in relation to this, we know that the demand for getting a nuclear device amongst terrorist groups is real. We know that of course, some terrorist groups - I’ll use Al-Qaeda as an obvious example - are well-resourced. We know that as I mentioned a little earlier, that the consequence of such a nuclear attack would be catastrophic. We must ensure obviously that terrorists can’t ever exploit any weaknesses in our controls; we know there are no constraints on terrorists, something I’m sure you appreciate. Obviously there’s a concern in the international community that terrorists would use such weapons if they ever acquired them.

So this focus, the focus of this summit is very much on the issue of the threat posed by nuclear terrorism. That doesn’t diminish in any sense that there are many other issues of concern that the international community faces, but I think President Obama is right to have identified the significance of this issue and I can say to you that Australia strongly supports President Obama’s goal to secure vulnerable nuclear materials globally, within the four year framework that we’ve spoken about. The critical thing here is that what this summit is doing, is establishing practical, international cooperation, a practical way forward to achieve the goal that President Obama had set.

Q: Did you come here with anything specific from an Australian point of view? (inaudible) Is there anything, for example, President Obama highlighted the IAEA, is there anything in that area that is important to Australia?

A: Well you might, if you haven’t already, get a copy of the contribution I made a few moments ago in the summit about the sorts of contributions that Australia has made in relation to this area. I think that it is fair to say that Australia has long been a leading player in global disarmament, and in nuclear non-proliferation efforts. I mentioned also of course as an example, the fact that together with Japan we established the International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament. Gareth Evans was the co-chair of that commission.

I think I can say to you without fear or favour that Australia has a very long and proud record in relation to global disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation, and we have a great deal of comfort in working closely with President Obama in his goals to reduce the role of nuclear weapons, and while ensuring of course, that a safe and secure deterrent for the US and its allies is maintained.

Australia has always had the perspective that it wants to see deep and irreversible reductions in the number of nuclear weapons that are held by all nuclear arms states, and I think it is well understood in the international community the longstanding position Australia has had, and the real commitment that we’ve shown in a range of ways; which I won’t go through for you unless you’d like me to, but that I outlined in some detail in the recent contribution I made in the summit itself.

Q: Is there a tricky aspect to the issues of nuclear security in the sense that there’s no real sort of international body that can ensure that countries can ensure that countries (inaudible)

A: I’m very reluctant to comment on anything that occurred within the summit, but I would stress with you, I’m obligated, I have a great deal of comfort in talking about what I have said, I have a great deal of discomfort talking about what others might have said within the summit, but I’m sure it might be appropriate, you may well hear more about that over the hours ahead. But, the critical thing is, you will see in short order, literally, I can say to you, within a matter of hours, two things emanating from this summit. The first will be a communiquÃÂ© that is going to contain very significant commitments on the part of those participating in this summit, and I think going to the point that you’ve raised with me, you are also going to see a work plan, and the key thing about the work plan is that it will outline the action plan if you like, the steps that are being taken, the tangible and concrete elements that are going to be agreed by this summit to enhance nuclear security. I think that’s the critical thing I should say in response to your question. There will be such a work plan, and I think you’ll have confidence that this represents both significant and concerted action in this area.

Q: (Are you saying the work plan will ….inaudible)

A: No, I didn’t go the content of it, I deliberately didn’t, I’m not able to go to the content of it, what I have said is that the are two things to come forward from this summit, a communiquÃÂ© and a work plan and that the work plan will make clear the commitment of those at this summit, the tangible and concrete steps to enhance nuclear security in the international arena.

Q: Do you agree with Julie Bishop’s reported remarks that there was little reason for the Prime Minister to attend?

A: Well look, I haven’t heard Julie Bishop’s comments, I won’t comment on that specifically, but you’d appreciate, I think its important that Australia is represented at a summit like this, I heard a suggestion made that it wasn’t important that Australia was represented at the summit, but given that I’m here in Washington, and that you are probably better connected on these public statements, those nuances, I perhaps won’t comment on.

Let me say this, from the point of view of Australia, attending a summit like this, we’ve traditionally been, as most would acknowledge, a strong supporter of nuclear security and non-proliferation initiatives, from the perspective of the Australian government, the summit recognizes, it’s a re-enforcement of the government’s recognition of the significance of the nuclear terrorism threat. It is a clear signal about the importance of international action to counter the nuclear terrorism threat. I said in the summit, and I said a little earlier today, I think it’s a statement of the obvious to talk about our obligations as a major uranium supplier, I think we’ve got a particular interest, and I’ll go further and say a particular responsibility in relation to the security of nuclear materials. And Australia is very keen to support the leadership that has been shown by President Obama on these issues. Keen to share his commitment to securing vulnerable nuclear material worldwide within four years and I think the arguments for Australia being represented at this summit are very strong.

Q: What is your opinion about not inviting Iran and North Korea? (inaudible)

A: You’d appreciate that the invitations to this summit, as I understand it, were issued by the President of the United States, President Obama. It’s certainly more a matter you might care to raise with him in terms of how decisions were made about those countries that were invited to the summit, that’s a decision the US has made, its taken initiative in terms of hosting the summit, and I can just say from Australia’s perspective, we are delighted that President Obama has invited Australia to attend this summit, and we are delighted to be able to participate in what we think is its extremely important work.

I mean as far as Australia is concerned, we have expressed over a considerable period of time, concerns about both Iran and North Korea,

and I’m happy to go through that in some detail with you. But in terms of attendance of the summit, I’m happy to check this with our embassy officials, but I’m quite confident they’re decisions that are made by the host of the summit, which is the US, and I don’t believe there is any role in relation to the participants. Australia was invited to attend; we’re delighted to accept the invitation, because of the importance of the work of the summit.

Q: Given the record of Australia on the issue of non-proliferation, what do you say to the … of my colleague Peter van Onselen’s that this is one summit where the Prime Minister should have been… (inaudible)

A: I wouldn’t say much directly to Peter, but on the issue that you’ve raised about the Prime Minister’s attendance, I haven’t yet seen your colleague’s comments, so Brad, let me just make a general comment in response to your question. My understanding is that the Prime Minister advised President Obama last week that he wouldn’t be able to attend this summit, that of course the Prime Minister recognizes, appreciates and understands the importance of the summit. He congratulated President Obama on his leadership in convening it.

The Prime Minister of Australia has consistently made clear that he believes his job this week is to be in Australia, to deliver to health and hospital reform for Australians. I think the Prime Minister as I understand it, my recollection is that he stated in the lead up to the Council of Australian Governments meeting that he obviously needs to work closely with the State Premiers and the Chief Ministers to bring about agreement in order to deliver health and hospital reform, and as a result that’s why yours truly is standing here.

Thanks very much.

Media contacts: Michael Nguyen (John Faulkner): 02 6277 7800 or 0429 571 843 Defence Media Liaison: 02 6265 3343 or 0408 498 664

