September 25, 2025 • 23 mins
Today we are bringing you a special international episode of the pod. The prime minister has spent the week in New York addressing the United Nations, recognising Palestinian statehood and chasing Donald Trump around Manhattan trying to get a meeting.
We talk about all these capers with host Jacqueline Maley and our chief political correspondent Paul Sakkal, who are joined by foreign affairs and national security correspondent Matthew Knott from New York.
Subscribe to The Age & SMH: https://subscribe.smh.com.au/
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
S1 (00:01):
From the newsrooms of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.
This is inside politics. I'm Jacqueline Maley. It's Friday, September 26th.
Today we're bringing you a special international episode of The Pod.
The Prime Minister has spent the week in New York
addressing the United Nations, recognising Palestinian statehood and chasing Donald
(00:23):
Trump around Manhattan, trying to get a meeting. Here to
tell us all about these capers. We have our chief
political correspondent, Paul Satchell, as usual, and live from New York.
We have foreign affairs and national security correspondent Matthew Knott. Hi, guys.
S2 (00:36):
Hi, Jack. Hi.
S3 (00:38):
Hi. Nice to be here.
S1 (00:47):
Now, I want to go straight to you in New York.
Anthony Albanese had a lot on his schedule this week,
but his big sort of ticket event, I suppose, was
that he spoke to the UN General Assembly as a
debut speaker. It was kind of the first time he'd
done that. It was probably the biggest deal for him
as a leader to address the UN. What did he
sort of try to convey in that speech? What was
(01:07):
the what was the job of that speech?
S3 (01:09):
Yeah, this was a significant moment for the Prime Minister,
as you say, since he was elected in, uh, 2022.
He hasn't appeared at the UN, he hasn't spoken. He
hasn't been a part of this world. So. So this
was a significant moment for him.
S4 (01:26):
Shared mission and purpose of the United Nations is not
merely to contain the threat of war. It is to
create the conditions for peace, to provide a framework for
settling our disputes. To foster the dialogue that enables us
to manage our differences and deepen our understanding, and to
(01:47):
nourish his speech.
S3 (01:48):
I contained some newsy elements, I think particularly the fact
that Australia is going to make a serious bid for
a non-permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council.
S4 (02:01):
Colleagues. It is not the Australian way to try and
impose our values on other nations, but when we deal
with the world, we bring our values with us and
we strive to back our words with actions. Australia.
S3 (02:15):
He was also pitching Australia's bid for the Cop climate summit.
S4 (02:20):
Australia is acting to meet the environmental challenge of climate change,
while working to seize and share the economic opportunities of
renewable energy.
S3 (02:32):
So I think when you put those two together, what
you can see is that he wants Australia to have
a more influential role in these big global forums. He
believes that the United Nations needs to be reformed and improved,
but he believes in it. You know, he's coming at
it from a place of someone who believes in multilateralism.
(02:52):
His speech was very much about the UN as an
important body that needs to be made better, particularly for
a country like Australia. That's not a superpower. And also
thinking about countries in our region like the Pacific, we
need the United Nations to be working. Uh, so it
was quite a dark speech in some ways about the
(03:13):
times we live in, uh, in which, uh, dictators are
on the rise. Uh, there's terrible wars happening around the world. Uh,
we're battling, uh, disinformation. Uh, so, so he was really
pitching Australia as a progressive middle power that's that can
play a constructive, productive role in the world. And there
(03:34):
was a big focus on climate change in this speech,
which is noticeable because it's a very different, uh, take
than Donald Trump's speech the day before.
S1 (03:44):
Yeah. Look, it was an interesting speech, wasn't it, because
he did make references, very non-specific references to tyranny and
sort of the rise of anti-democratic forces.
S4 (03:53):
In 2025, 25. We are confronted by all manner of
these challenges in old forms and new. Dictators whose hold
on power derive solely from their capacity for cruelty to.
Their own citizens. Tyrants who invade sovereign nations to further
their own ambitions. Regimes willing to crush their own people
(04:18):
beneath the weight of oppression.
S1 (04:21):
Or, you know, all the stuff that we're really worried
about coming out of America. Let's be honest. Was that
a bit of a sort of controversial thing to do,
right in the home of Donald Trump himself?
S3 (04:31):
I must say, I read those passages more, thinking about
Vladimir Putin. That's how I was interpreting them. Uh, perhaps even, uh, Jinping.
I think it's clearly in the recent days, the climate
issue where there's this big difference with Donald Trump. I mean,
Donald Trump has never believed in climate change at all.
(04:53):
He hasn't changed his view, but he was really passionate
about it in his speech. For example, Australia and the
US also disagree on recognition of Palestine, but Trump spent
much more time just berating nations who believe in climate change,
who think renewable renewable energy is a good thing. Just
speaking about it as a complete joke.
S5 (05:14):
It's the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world,
in my opinion. Climate change, no matter what happens, you're
involved in that. No more global warming, no more global cooling.
All of these predictions made by the United Nations and
many others, often for bad reasons, were wrong. They were
(05:35):
made by stupid people that have lost their country.
S3 (05:38):
Now, that's such a big contrast with Albanese, who's arrived
here with new ambitious climate targets, and a lot of
his time has been taken up with meetings about climate change.
You went to speak to a New York Times event
today on climate change. This has been his focus. So
I think that's where we're seeing such a big difference
with the US and a big difference between the Trump
(06:01):
administration and the Biden administration, which just a year ago,
you know, there was an administration in power in Washington
that really believed in climate change and was willing to
make something happen.
S1 (06:11):
Yeah. Okay. So you mentioned Palestine. Obviously, the other major
thing that happened this week was that Albanese joined in
this conference, which was co-hosted by French President Emmanuel Macron,
and they officially recognized Palestine.
S4 (06:24):
Recognizing the aspirations of the Palestinian people is about more
than a seat, a voice and a vote in the
councils of the world. It is about real hope for
a place to call home. This is the same.
S1 (06:38):
Paul, I want to go to you. Um, down to
the nitty gritty, real politic in Canberra. Do you think
that act of diplomacy, what will it do for the
government's sort of domestic standing to people care? Will they
give him credit for it? Will they deduct credit for it?
S2 (06:53):
Well, I think it's worth asking. Would the Prime Minister
have spent a week in New York talking about the
Palestinian question before the last election? The answer's probably not.
He's more unencumbered. There's a totally different dynamic with the
federal opposition now. Peter Dutton was much more fierce on
this issue. He set the Palestine question up as a
test of Albanese's Medal on National Security and Social Cohesion.
(07:16):
The politics around that have largely been stripped away. Also
worth noting that the international wins on this issue have
changed significantly over recent months. Albanese is now freer with
his big win and big mandate to reflect the kind
of mainstream position among Western democracies now, which is that
what's going on in Gaza should come to an end.
The atrocities are have been in our faces for a
(07:38):
long time, and he feels freer to go and do that,
I think could easily be pitched by his opponents as
a little bit of virtue signalling on the Palestine issue.
On the more pragmatic side, as not-I mentioned, the climate
change question is something that the government sees as a real,
tangible win they can extract from this trip. Climate change
is not pitched as a solely environmental issue. When the
(08:01):
government speaks about it on the world stage, it's pitched
as an economic issue. And to meet those climate targets,
which we've announced last week, which are quite ambitious, despite
some critics saying otherwise, we need a huge amount of
private capital to be invested in Australia, and the green
transition is really the biggest game in town in financial markets.
So Chris Bowen going over there, meeting with investors, Albanese
(08:24):
spruiking Australia's transition and our intent in that space is
as much about attracting capital and making Australia an attractive
place to invest as it is about any environmental concern.
S1 (08:37):
Sussan Ley also put her $0.02 in on the Palestine question,
so she wrote to a bunch of Republicans and said, basically,
this is not the bipartisan partisan position in Australia to
recognise Palestine, and I think she even said that it
was not. It didn't necessarily reflect the will of the
Australian people. Penny Wong was really cross about that. She
(08:59):
was evidently very annoyed. She almost tried to make out
that it was somehow seditious of Susan Lee to to
go against the official foreign policy. Knotty, what did you
make of that? Was it was it really that big
of a deal?
S3 (09:09):
Uh, it is extremely unusual. It was a little strange
to be here at the UN headquarters, with all these
heads of state and leaders weighing in on the big
issues of our time, and then hearing about what an
opposition leader who has incredibly little power or influence or
prospect of being elected anytime soon, and a tenuous grip
(09:31):
on power in an old party, are giving her and
the coalition's view on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But Penny Wong
is annoyed because this isn't the way foreign policy usually operates.
You know, sometimes there are disagreements. But for Susan Lee
to be writing to Republican members of Congress to undercut
(09:55):
and undermine the government's official position is really unusual. But
the government and Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, yeah, they've appeared
very confident in their position. I was thinking as we
saw them. Penny Wong and Albanese standing at a press
conference and confirmed that this change, which was really announced
a month ago, was going into official effect. Just how
(10:18):
much they presented this as a totally common sense, unremarkable
move that anyone would approve of. He was talking about,
you know, there's Israel and Palestine. It's not Israel and Marrickville,
of course we're going to recognise them both, whereas this
has been an issue that has been agonised over and
and the government has agonised how to do this and
(10:40):
when and how to make a difference. And will it
just be a gesture or will it not? All those
doubts have been washed away, and I think of it
in the same way the government talks about, uh, taking
climate change seriously as the price of admission in the Pacific.
I think they now see recognising Palestine as the price
of admission, really, to play a productive role in that
(11:01):
part of the world, in the Middle East that so
many countries now are moving. We're not doing this in
an isolated way. Canada, France, the UK, uh, there's talk
about what is going to happen in Gaza after the war.
Emmanuel Macron is talking about an international Stabilisation Force. There's
a lot of discussion about how the world will help Gaza.
(11:23):
And Anthony Albanese is putting Australia in a position where
we can play some role while as they always come
back to we're not a central player in that part
of the world.
S1 (11:33):
So, Paul, I want to ask you about that, because
when we were talking earlier this week, you sort of
made the point that for the better part of two years,
Albanese has fended off both left and right on this
question of Palestine by basically saying that whatever we do,
recognizing Palestinian statehood or not, it won't make much difference
because we're not a major player. So has he. Why
has he changed his tune? Has he changed his tune?
(11:54):
What's going on?
S2 (11:55):
I think there is an inherent contradiction in what's happened
this week, in terms of how he's put this at
the center of his travel to New York. As you
said from our conversation earlier in the week, he's his
key line to critics on the left and right, both
of which were very vociferous in their criticism of him
for the past 18 months, was that, no, we're not
going to to to do more to support Israel. Peter Dutton,
(12:17):
because we're not a central player there. We can support
the Jewish community in Australia without making noises internationally to
do more on the Israeli side and to the Greens
on the left, who wanted greater sanctions, who have made
all kinds of calls for Australia to make tangible action
to end the war effort in Gaza. His argument is
(12:37):
that we have no economic ties to Israel and an
important but not hugely influential voice diplomatically in the Middle
East as well. So that's been his key retort. Back
to arguments to do more here this week, putting at
the center of his travel this, uh, Australian role in
this emerging peace plan, I think contradicts that political line
(13:01):
that he used. It perhaps shows that that political line
was nothing more than a political line, that there actually
was potentially more Australia could have been doing the whole
way through. It also probably reflects what I mentioned earlier,
that the international winds have changed. There is now nearly
global consensus in the West, putting the US to one
(13:21):
side that the only way to get Netanyahu to change
course is to put maximum pressure on. So the circumstances
have changed. I think the Prime Minister's probably also searching
for in his second term, a way to boost his
image as a bit of a statesman, to make a
big international pitch that elevates himself from just purely a
(13:43):
domestic politician. And I think he sees what Macron and
Starmer are doing on the world stage as attractive. There
are really different circumstances for Macron and Starmer, though. They're
both facing terrible turmoil domestically and are in very parlous positions,
the two of them. Whereas Albanese is in a terrific
position domestically and as he has made the point many times,
(14:04):
privately and publicly, most Australian people, even though there is
a significant group of people who are worried about what's
happening in Gaza, his judgment has been that most Australians
don't want to see an active Australian role here. Uh,
yet in spite of that, he's now tied himself rhetorically
and in a in a potentially tangible way through what
not he mentions about this peacekeeping role. He's tied himself
(14:26):
to this potentially doomed process that may not succeed given
the circumstances on the ground are going in the other direction.
Potential annexation of the West Bank, escalation in Gaza. So
I think there is risk there and also contradiction there.
S3 (14:40):
Yeah, we've even seen a penny. Wong talking about how
Australia is going to partner with Indonesia? Really to help
rewrite the curriculum in Palestine. So we're getting involved to
that level of detail. And this also comes on the
back of some, uh, at least short term failures in
the Pacific, in our very own part of the world
(15:01):
to strike agreements. So that's been very obvious that we're
getting very involved in the Middle East while things aren't
going so well in our region. And just when you're
talking about Susan, uh, so the most recent polling we did,
which was a straightforward question, you get different results depending
how you ask it. But our polling found that around 30%
of Australians supported recognition, around 30% opposed, and the rest
(15:26):
were undecided or didn't have a strong view. So that
really shows, I think, a split population. It doesn't show
that there's overwhelming opposition to it, like Susan might be suggesting.
S1 (15:38):
I felt that she misrepresented that polling, because the way
that I read it was, yeah, that 30%, as you
just said. But the group in the middle were sort
of like open to Palestinian recognition.
S3 (15:47):
Interest in it. It's not the main issue for them.
For them.
S1 (15:50):
Yeah. Which is, you know, as, as the government has
judged it, I suppose. So basically you're saying with, with Albanese, he's,
he's trying to sort of evolve or grow into this
role where he takes a greater interest or a greater,
a greater role in international affairs and take up some
of these huge international issues that we're dealing with, like Palestine,
like climate change. So there's a risk and a reward
(16:11):
there for him, I suppose. But how has he seemed
this week being in the United Nations? Like you will
have seen him at close quarters. Can you just set
the scene for us a little bit? Does he seem relaxed?
It must be very daunting. I would have thought, for
most people to meet these huge world leaders like Macron,
and even not to mention Trump. He got a selfie
with Trump, which was interesting. Yeah. How's his demeanour been?
S3 (16:36):
Well, yes. And I think to understand what it's been
like being on this trip and covering it is that
there's two parallel universes operating at once. The reality of
being here in the United Nations and what's actually happening
in terms of those meetings and and the conference. Then
there's been the story of whether he's going to meet
(16:56):
Donald Trump and when that's going to happen. So the
two things have been running at the same time and
interacting with each other. So a big story has been
will he get a meeting with Trump or will he not?
Will that make the trip a failure or not? Uh,
is it going to happen now or is it going
to happen at the white House? We had confirmation yesterday
(17:17):
that there's going to be a separate, uh, trip in
October to the white House. And so even throughout all that, uh,
the Prime Minister has appeared really relaxed. Uh, and really,
it is really comfortable in, uh, what he's been saying.
He hasn't seemed under pressure. And that was interesting to
several of us When it was unclear what was going
(17:39):
on with this Trump meeting. He didn't seem anxious about that.
And I think that's because they knew, obviously working on
it behind the scenes, that this was probably going to
come off. But he does have a meeting locked in.
So he's yeah, I think he's happy. He's he's happy
about that.
S1 (17:54):
Yeah. He's feeling he's feeling relaxed about that. I mean
it could go either way for him I suppose on
October 20th when he goes to the white House to
meet Trump, that's.
S3 (18:01):
An issue for them. Yeah.
S1 (18:02):
Yeah. That's that's tomorrow Elbow's problem.
S2 (18:05):
I think the, the political calculus on how he sees
the US relationship is probably revealed by the decision to post.
S1 (18:12):
Let's talk about the selfie. I'm sure a lot of
our listeners would have would have seen it. But but
Albanese you know amid all this speculation, is he going
to get a meeting? Is he not? He posted on
his social media a selfie of him with Trump. Trump
has this startling white teeth. And how did you see
that selfie as a kind of image?
S2 (18:28):
Well, so the Prime Minister might be grumpy in public
when asked about this meeting with Trump. He's clearly sick
of the line of questioning. There's no doubt that at
some points the media have looked a bit obsessed with it.
It is. It is important. His view is that there's
hysteria around it. Okay. That's understandable. He likes to criticise
the media. He's been comfortable, as you say, Naughtie this week,
(18:49):
knowing that there probably is a white House meeting down
the track and that this week in New York has
not been crucial. Yet despite that, he still feels the
need to get into this room with dozens of other
world leaders where journalists and and photographers were not allowed.
Wait for this selfie and post this selfie on social media.
Donald Trump is one of the most unpopular politicians among
(19:09):
Australians of any global leader, so there's no domestic benefit
for him in being seen posing in a kind of superficial,
slightly odd looking selfie with Donald Trump. But he clearly
sees some benefit in proving to both his critics in
Australia to potentially sceptical Republicans and people in the Trump
(19:30):
orbit who Kevin Rudd is dealing with over there, that
a he's comfortable being with Donald Trump and the Bay,
he secured the meeting that was deemed of greater significance
than any downside of being in a smiley photo with
Donald Trump, and I think that's revealing.
S3 (19:44):
We don't know exactly what went on in that room.
As you said, there was no access to journalists. But
the relationship has begun from that moment, as if they'd
never met in person before. And Donald Trump is clearly
a big believer in first impressions, this instant idea of
whether he likes someone or not. He spoke about this
in his very long speech to the UN General Assembly.
(20:05):
He followed the president of Brazil, who always starts, and
Trump has imposed huge tariffs on Brazil. He's really furious
at the current Socialist president of Brazil because Donald Trump's
friend and the former leader of Brazil, who was a
right wing populist, just like Trump, is going to go
to jail for trying to subvert the election. There's a
(20:26):
lot of parallels between Trump and Bolsonaro, so he's not
been a fan of the current president of Brazil. But
then they had a brief handshake. And Donald Trump said
in his speech, oh, we only spoke for 50s, but
I think this guy is actually great. We got along
really well. We had this instant rapport, and I want
him to come and have a meeting next week. This
was all just in the space of less than a minute.
(20:47):
So that's the way he sees people as so. It
seemed to be a friendly photo with Albanese. He said
before that he thinks he's a good man and he's
described him as a good guy.
S1 (20:58):
So yeah, they've chatted on the phone.
S3 (21:00):
So they're clearly huge ideological differences between them. Just they
view the world in such different ways. They don't seem
like people who would naturally go along. But Albanese has
had a good record of having good interpersonal style with
fellow world leaders, and he'll be hoping that he can, uh,
(21:20):
you know, subtly flatter Trump in some ways.
S1 (21:24):
I wonder if that's what the selfie was about was
I mean, it was a little bit of a fu to.
I think you're right. The Australian press corps and all
his critics at home like, you know, look, here I
am rubbing shoulders literally with this guy that you all
said was shunning me. But wasn't it also like showing
to Trump and Trump's inner circle that he's a fan?
(21:44):
You know, he's a fan boy. And so, you know.
S2 (21:47):
Yeah we're comfortable.
S1 (21:47):
Yeah. So you should treat me well when I come
to greet you and meet you and, you know, kiss
your ring. Um, at on October 20th at the white House.
S2 (21:56):
And the PM's got a got a. If you talk
to the people who've known him for a long time,
who've served with him in Parliament and some of his friends,
he's one of his great abilities is to strike up
rapport with characters who he doesn't necessarily get along with politically.
He's had a lot of long, long lasting relationships with
News Corp executives in Australia, with conservative politicians. He actually
had a good personal relationship with Peter Dutton, despite obviously
(22:19):
not seeing eye to eye at all. It's one of
his skills as a politician.
S1 (22:23):
Yeah, and he was. That's why he resoundingly outcampaigned Peter Dutton,
because he is one of those politicians who's able to
walk into any room, I think, and and pretty much
make friends and be warm and affable with most people.
All right, guys, thanks so much. And we'll talk to
you both again soon.
S2 (22:39):
Talk to you soon.
S3 (22:40):
Thank you.
S1 (22:47):
Today's episode was produced by Kea Wong with technical assistance
from Debbie Harrington. Our executive producer is Tammy Mills, and
Tom McKendrick is our head of audio. To listen to
our episodes as soon as they drop, follow Inside Politics
on Apple, Spotify or anywhere else you listen to your
podcasts and to stay up to date with all the politics,
(23:07):
news and exclusives, visit The Age or The Sydney Morning
Herald websites to support our journalism. Subscribe to us by
visiting The Age or smh.com.au. Subscribe. I'm Jacqueline Maley. Thank
you for listening.
From the newsrooms of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.
This is inside politics. I'm Jacqueline Maley. It's Friday, September 26th.
Today we're bringing you a special international episode of The Pod.
The Prime Minister has spent the week in New York
addressing the United Nations, recognising Palestinian statehood and chasing Donald
(00:23):
Trump around Manhattan, trying to get a meeting. Here to
tell us all about these capers. We have our chief
political correspondent, Paul Satchell, as usual, and live from New York.
We have foreign affairs and national security correspondent Matthew Knott. Hi, guys.
S2 (00:36):
Hi, Jack. Hi.
S3 (00:38):
Hi. Nice to be here.
S1 (00:47):
Now, I want to go straight to you in New York.
Anthony Albanese had a lot on his schedule this week,
but his big sort of ticket event, I suppose, was
that he spoke to the UN General Assembly as a
debut speaker. It was kind of the first time he'd
done that. It was probably the biggest deal for him
as a leader to address the UN. What did he
sort of try to convey in that speech? What was
(01:07):
the what was the job of that speech?
S3 (01:09):
Yeah, this was a significant moment for the Prime Minister,
as you say, since he was elected in, uh, 2022.
He hasn't appeared at the UN, he hasn't spoken. He
hasn't been a part of this world. So. So this
was a significant moment for him.
S4 (01:26):
Shared mission and purpose of the United Nations is not
merely to contain the threat of war. It is to
create the conditions for peace, to provide a framework for
settling our disputes. To foster the dialogue that enables us
to manage our differences and deepen our understanding, and to
(01:47):
nourish his speech.
S3 (01:48):
I contained some newsy elements, I think particularly the fact
that Australia is going to make a serious bid for
a non-permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council.
S4 (02:01):
Colleagues. It is not the Australian way to try and
impose our values on other nations, but when we deal
with the world, we bring our values with us and
we strive to back our words with actions. Australia.
S3 (02:15):
He was also pitching Australia's bid for the Cop climate summit.
S4 (02:20):
Australia is acting to meet the environmental challenge of climate change,
while working to seize and share the economic opportunities of
renewable energy.
S3 (02:32):
So I think when you put those two together, what
you can see is that he wants Australia to have
a more influential role in these big global forums. He
believes that the United Nations needs to be reformed and improved,
but he believes in it. You know, he's coming at
it from a place of someone who believes in multilateralism.
(02:52):
His speech was very much about the UN as an
important body that needs to be made better, particularly for
a country like Australia. That's not a superpower. And also
thinking about countries in our region like the Pacific, we
need the United Nations to be working. Uh, so it
was quite a dark speech in some ways about the
(03:13):
times we live in, uh, in which, uh, dictators are
on the rise. Uh, there's terrible wars happening around the world. Uh,
we're battling, uh, disinformation. Uh, so, so he was really
pitching Australia as a progressive middle power that's that can
play a constructive, productive role in the world. And there
(03:34):
was a big focus on climate change in this speech,
which is noticeable because it's a very different, uh, take
than Donald Trump's speech the day before.
S1 (03:44):
Yeah. Look, it was an interesting speech, wasn't it, because
he did make references, very non-specific references to tyranny and
sort of the rise of anti-democratic forces.
S4 (03:53):
In 2025, 25. We are confronted by all manner of
these challenges in old forms and new. Dictators whose hold
on power derive solely from their capacity for cruelty to.
Their own citizens. Tyrants who invade sovereign nations to further
their own ambitions. Regimes willing to crush their own people
(04:18):
beneath the weight of oppression.
S1 (04:21):
Or, you know, all the stuff that we're really worried
about coming out of America. Let's be honest. Was that
a bit of a sort of controversial thing to do,
right in the home of Donald Trump himself?
S3 (04:31):
I must say, I read those passages more, thinking about
Vladimir Putin. That's how I was interpreting them. Uh, perhaps even, uh, Jinping.
I think it's clearly in the recent days, the climate
issue where there's this big difference with Donald Trump. I mean,
Donald Trump has never believed in climate change at all.
(04:53):
He hasn't changed his view, but he was really passionate
about it in his speech. For example, Australia and the
US also disagree on recognition of Palestine, but Trump spent
much more time just berating nations who believe in climate change,
who think renewable renewable energy is a good thing. Just
speaking about it as a complete joke.
S5 (05:14):
It's the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world,
in my opinion. Climate change, no matter what happens, you're
involved in that. No more global warming, no more global cooling.
All of these predictions made by the United Nations and
many others, often for bad reasons, were wrong. They were
(05:35):
made by stupid people that have lost their country.
S3 (05:38):
Now, that's such a big contrast with Albanese, who's arrived
here with new ambitious climate targets, and a lot of
his time has been taken up with meetings about climate change.
You went to speak to a New York Times event
today on climate change. This has been his focus. So
I think that's where we're seeing such a big difference
with the US and a big difference between the Trump
(06:01):
administration and the Biden administration, which just a year ago,
you know, there was an administration in power in Washington
that really believed in climate change and was willing to
make something happen.
S1 (06:11):
Yeah. Okay. So you mentioned Palestine. Obviously, the other major
thing that happened this week was that Albanese joined in
this conference, which was co-hosted by French President Emmanuel Macron,
and they officially recognized Palestine.
S4 (06:24):
Recognizing the aspirations of the Palestinian people is about more
than a seat, a voice and a vote in the
councils of the world. It is about real hope for
a place to call home. This is the same.
S1 (06:38):
Paul, I want to go to you. Um, down to
the nitty gritty, real politic in Canberra. Do you think
that act of diplomacy, what will it do for the
government's sort of domestic standing to people care? Will they
give him credit for it? Will they deduct credit for it?
S2 (06:53):
Well, I think it's worth asking. Would the Prime Minister
have spent a week in New York talking about the
Palestinian question before the last election? The answer's probably not.
He's more unencumbered. There's a totally different dynamic with the
federal opposition now. Peter Dutton was much more fierce on
this issue. He set the Palestine question up as a
test of Albanese's Medal on National Security and Social Cohesion.
(07:16):
The politics around that have largely been stripped away. Also
worth noting that the international wins on this issue have
changed significantly over recent months. Albanese is now freer with
his big win and big mandate to reflect the kind
of mainstream position among Western democracies now, which is that
what's going on in Gaza should come to an end.
The atrocities are have been in our faces for a
(07:38):
long time, and he feels freer to go and do that,
I think could easily be pitched by his opponents as
a little bit of virtue signalling on the Palestine issue.
On the more pragmatic side, as not-I mentioned, the climate
change question is something that the government sees as a real,
tangible win they can extract from this trip. Climate change
is not pitched as a solely environmental issue. When the
(08:01):
government speaks about it on the world stage, it's pitched
as an economic issue. And to meet those climate targets,
which we've announced last week, which are quite ambitious, despite
some critics saying otherwise, we need a huge amount of
private capital to be invested in Australia, and the green
transition is really the biggest game in town in financial markets.
So Chris Bowen going over there, meeting with investors, Albanese
(08:24):
spruiking Australia's transition and our intent in that space is
as much about attracting capital and making Australia an attractive
place to invest as it is about any environmental concern.
S1 (08:37):
Sussan Ley also put her $0.02 in on the Palestine question,
so she wrote to a bunch of Republicans and said, basically,
this is not the bipartisan partisan position in Australia to
recognise Palestine, and I think she even said that it
was not. It didn't necessarily reflect the will of the
Australian people. Penny Wong was really cross about that. She
(08:59):
was evidently very annoyed. She almost tried to make out
that it was somehow seditious of Susan Lee to to
go against the official foreign policy. Knotty, what did you
make of that? Was it was it really that big
of a deal?
S3 (09:09):
Uh, it is extremely unusual. It was a little strange
to be here at the UN headquarters, with all these
heads of state and leaders weighing in on the big
issues of our time, and then hearing about what an
opposition leader who has incredibly little power or influence or
prospect of being elected anytime soon, and a tenuous grip
(09:31):
on power in an old party, are giving her and
the coalition's view on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But Penny Wong
is annoyed because this isn't the way foreign policy usually operates.
You know, sometimes there are disagreements. But for Susan Lee
to be writing to Republican members of Congress to undercut
(09:55):
and undermine the government's official position is really unusual. But
the government and Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, yeah, they've appeared
very confident in their position. I was thinking as we
saw them. Penny Wong and Albanese standing at a press
conference and confirmed that this change, which was really announced
a month ago, was going into official effect. Just how
(10:18):
much they presented this as a totally common sense, unremarkable
move that anyone would approve of. He was talking about,
you know, there's Israel and Palestine. It's not Israel and Marrickville,
of course we're going to recognise them both, whereas this
has been an issue that has been agonised over and
and the government has agonised how to do this and
(10:40):
when and how to make a difference. And will it
just be a gesture or will it not? All those
doubts have been washed away, and I think of it
in the same way the government talks about, uh, taking
climate change seriously as the price of admission in the Pacific.
I think they now see recognising Palestine as the price
of admission, really, to play a productive role in that
(11:01):
part of the world, in the Middle East that so
many countries now are moving. We're not doing this in
an isolated way. Canada, France, the UK, uh, there's talk
about what is going to happen in Gaza after the war.
Emmanuel Macron is talking about an international Stabilisation Force. There's
a lot of discussion about how the world will help Gaza.
(11:23):
And Anthony Albanese is putting Australia in a position where
we can play some role while as they always come
back to we're not a central player in that part
of the world.
S1 (11:33):
So, Paul, I want to ask you about that, because
when we were talking earlier this week, you sort of
made the point that for the better part of two years,
Albanese has fended off both left and right on this
question of Palestine by basically saying that whatever we do,
recognizing Palestinian statehood or not, it won't make much difference
because we're not a major player. So has he. Why
has he changed his tune? Has he changed his tune?
(11:54):
What's going on?
S2 (11:55):
I think there is an inherent contradiction in what's happened
this week, in terms of how he's put this at
the center of his travel to New York. As you
said from our conversation earlier in the week, he's his
key line to critics on the left and right, both
of which were very vociferous in their criticism of him
for the past 18 months, was that, no, we're not
going to to to do more to support Israel. Peter Dutton,
(12:17):
because we're not a central player there. We can support
the Jewish community in Australia without making noises internationally to
do more on the Israeli side and to the Greens
on the left, who wanted greater sanctions, who have made
all kinds of calls for Australia to make tangible action
to end the war effort in Gaza. His argument is
(12:37):
that we have no economic ties to Israel and an
important but not hugely influential voice diplomatically in the Middle
East as well. So that's been his key retort. Back
to arguments to do more here this week, putting at
the center of his travel this, uh, Australian role in
this emerging peace plan, I think contradicts that political line
(13:01):
that he used. It perhaps shows that that political line
was nothing more than a political line, that there actually
was potentially more Australia could have been doing the whole
way through. It also probably reflects what I mentioned earlier,
that the international winds have changed. There is now nearly
global consensus in the West, putting the US to one
(13:21):
side that the only way to get Netanyahu to change
course is to put maximum pressure on. So the circumstances
have changed. I think the Prime Minister's probably also searching
for in his second term, a way to boost his
image as a bit of a statesman, to make a
big international pitch that elevates himself from just purely a
(13:43):
domestic politician. And I think he sees what Macron and
Starmer are doing on the world stage as attractive. There
are really different circumstances for Macron and Starmer, though. They're
both facing terrible turmoil domestically and are in very parlous positions,
the two of them. Whereas Albanese is in a terrific
position domestically and as he has made the point many times,
(14:04):
privately and publicly, most Australian people, even though there is
a significant group of people who are worried about what's
happening in Gaza, his judgment has been that most Australians
don't want to see an active Australian role here. Uh,
yet in spite of that, he's now tied himself rhetorically
and in a in a potentially tangible way through what
not he mentions about this peacekeeping role. He's tied himself
(14:26):
to this potentially doomed process that may not succeed given
the circumstances on the ground are going in the other direction.
Potential annexation of the West Bank, escalation in Gaza. So
I think there is risk there and also contradiction there.
S3 (14:40):
Yeah, we've even seen a penny. Wong talking about how
Australia is going to partner with Indonesia? Really to help
rewrite the curriculum in Palestine. So we're getting involved to
that level of detail. And this also comes on the
back of some, uh, at least short term failures in
the Pacific, in our very own part of the world
(15:01):
to strike agreements. So that's been very obvious that we're
getting very involved in the Middle East while things aren't
going so well in our region. And just when you're
talking about Susan, uh, so the most recent polling we did,
which was a straightforward question, you get different results depending
how you ask it. But our polling found that around 30%
of Australians supported recognition, around 30% opposed, and the rest
(15:26):
were undecided or didn't have a strong view. So that
really shows, I think, a split population. It doesn't show
that there's overwhelming opposition to it, like Susan might be suggesting.
S1 (15:38):
I felt that she misrepresented that polling, because the way
that I read it was, yeah, that 30%, as you
just said. But the group in the middle were sort
of like open to Palestinian recognition.
S3 (15:47):
Interest in it. It's not the main issue for them.
For them.
S1 (15:50):
Yeah. Which is, you know, as, as the government has
judged it, I suppose. So basically you're saying with, with Albanese, he's,
he's trying to sort of evolve or grow into this
role where he takes a greater interest or a greater,
a greater role in international affairs and take up some
of these huge international issues that we're dealing with, like Palestine,
like climate change. So there's a risk and a reward
(16:11):
there for him, I suppose. But how has he seemed
this week being in the United Nations? Like you will
have seen him at close quarters. Can you just set
the scene for us a little bit? Does he seem relaxed?
It must be very daunting. I would have thought, for
most people to meet these huge world leaders like Macron,
and even not to mention Trump. He got a selfie
with Trump, which was interesting. Yeah. How's his demeanour been?
S3 (16:36):
Well, yes. And I think to understand what it's been
like being on this trip and covering it is that
there's two parallel universes operating at once. The reality of
being here in the United Nations and what's actually happening
in terms of those meetings and and the conference. Then
there's been the story of whether he's going to meet
(16:56):
Donald Trump and when that's going to happen. So the
two things have been running at the same time and
interacting with each other. So a big story has been
will he get a meeting with Trump or will he not?
Will that make the trip a failure or not? Uh,
is it going to happen now or is it going
to happen at the white House? We had confirmation yesterday
(17:17):
that there's going to be a separate, uh, trip in
October to the white House. And so even throughout all that, uh,
the Prime Minister has appeared really relaxed. Uh, and really,
it is really comfortable in, uh, what he's been saying.
He hasn't seemed under pressure. And that was interesting to
several of us When it was unclear what was going
(17:39):
on with this Trump meeting. He didn't seem anxious about that.
And I think that's because they knew, obviously working on
it behind the scenes, that this was probably going to
come off. But he does have a meeting locked in.
So he's yeah, I think he's happy. He's he's happy
about that.
S1 (17:54):
Yeah. He's feeling he's feeling relaxed about that. I mean
it could go either way for him I suppose on
October 20th when he goes to the white House to
meet Trump, that's.
S3 (18:01):
An issue for them. Yeah.
S1 (18:02):
Yeah. That's that's tomorrow Elbow's problem.
S2 (18:05):
I think the, the political calculus on how he sees
the US relationship is probably revealed by the decision to post.
S1 (18:12):
Let's talk about the selfie. I'm sure a lot of
our listeners would have would have seen it. But but
Albanese you know amid all this speculation, is he going
to get a meeting? Is he not? He posted on
his social media a selfie of him with Trump. Trump
has this startling white teeth. And how did you see
that selfie as a kind of image?
S2 (18:28):
Well, so the Prime Minister might be grumpy in public
when asked about this meeting with Trump. He's clearly sick
of the line of questioning. There's no doubt that at
some points the media have looked a bit obsessed with it.
It is. It is important. His view is that there's
hysteria around it. Okay. That's understandable. He likes to criticise
the media. He's been comfortable, as you say, Naughtie this week,
(18:49):
knowing that there probably is a white House meeting down
the track and that this week in New York has
not been crucial. Yet despite that, he still feels the
need to get into this room with dozens of other
world leaders where journalists and and photographers were not allowed.
Wait for this selfie and post this selfie on social media.
Donald Trump is one of the most unpopular politicians among
(19:09):
Australians of any global leader, so there's no domestic benefit
for him in being seen posing in a kind of superficial,
slightly odd looking selfie with Donald Trump. But he clearly
sees some benefit in proving to both his critics in
Australia to potentially sceptical Republicans and people in the Trump
(19:30):
orbit who Kevin Rudd is dealing with over there, that
a he's comfortable being with Donald Trump and the Bay,
he secured the meeting that was deemed of greater significance
than any downside of being in a smiley photo with
Donald Trump, and I think that's revealing.
S3 (19:44):
We don't know exactly what went on in that room.
As you said, there was no access to journalists. But
the relationship has begun from that moment, as if they'd
never met in person before. And Donald Trump is clearly
a big believer in first impressions, this instant idea of
whether he likes someone or not. He spoke about this
in his very long speech to the UN General Assembly.
(20:05):
He followed the president of Brazil, who always starts, and
Trump has imposed huge tariffs on Brazil. He's really furious
at the current Socialist president of Brazil because Donald Trump's
friend and the former leader of Brazil, who was a
right wing populist, just like Trump, is going to go
to jail for trying to subvert the election. There's a
(20:26):
lot of parallels between Trump and Bolsonaro, so he's not
been a fan of the current president of Brazil. But
then they had a brief handshake. And Donald Trump said
in his speech, oh, we only spoke for 50s, but
I think this guy is actually great. We got along
really well. We had this instant rapport, and I want
him to come and have a meeting next week. This
was all just in the space of less than a minute.
(20:47):
So that's the way he sees people as so. It
seemed to be a friendly photo with Albanese. He said
before that he thinks he's a good man and he's
described him as a good guy.
S1 (20:58):
So yeah, they've chatted on the phone.
S3 (21:00):
So they're clearly huge ideological differences between them. Just they
view the world in such different ways. They don't seem
like people who would naturally go along. But Albanese has
had a good record of having good interpersonal style with
fellow world leaders, and he'll be hoping that he can, uh,
(21:20):
you know, subtly flatter Trump in some ways.
S1 (21:24):
I wonder if that's what the selfie was about was
I mean, it was a little bit of a fu to.
I think you're right. The Australian press corps and all
his critics at home like, you know, look, here I
am rubbing shoulders literally with this guy that you all
said was shunning me. But wasn't it also like showing
to Trump and Trump's inner circle that he's a fan?
(21:44):
You know, he's a fan boy. And so, you know.
S2 (21:47):
Yeah we're comfortable.
S1 (21:47):
Yeah. So you should treat me well when I come
to greet you and meet you and, you know, kiss
your ring. Um, at on October 20th at the white House.
S2 (21:56):
And the PM's got a got a. If you talk
to the people who've known him for a long time,
who've served with him in Parliament and some of his friends,
he's one of his great abilities is to strike up
rapport with characters who he doesn't necessarily get along with politically.
He's had a lot of long, long lasting relationships with
News Corp executives in Australia, with conservative politicians. He actually
had a good personal relationship with Peter Dutton, despite obviously
(22:19):
not seeing eye to eye at all. It's one of
his skills as a politician.
S1 (22:23):
Yeah, and he was. That's why he resoundingly outcampaigned Peter Dutton,
because he is one of those politicians who's able to
walk into any room, I think, and and pretty much
make friends and be warm and affable with most people.
All right, guys, thanks so much. And we'll talk to
you both again soon.
S2 (22:39):
Talk to you soon.
S3 (22:40):
Thank you.
S1 (22:47):
Today's episode was produced by Kea Wong with technical assistance
from Debbie Harrington. Our executive producer is Tammy Mills, and
Tom McKendrick is our head of audio. To listen to
our episodes as soon as they drop, follow Inside Politics
on Apple, Spotify or anywhere else you listen to your
podcasts and to stay up to date with all the politics,
(23:07):
news and exclusives, visit The Age or The Sydney Morning
Herald websites to support our journalism. Subscribe to us by
visiting The Age or smh.com.au. Subscribe. I'm Jacqueline Maley. Thank
you for listening.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.