Australia's united response to Russia puts US, UK to shame
Peter Hartcher2 April 2018 — 8:49pm
Illustration: Dionne Gain
Vladimir Putin was hosting a summit of the G20 nations in St Petersburg and Australia's leader decided he'd have to pull out. So Kevin Rudd, then prime minister, phoned Putin to apologise.
Rudd had just called the 2013 federal election and the dates clashed. He'd need to stay home to campaign, he explained to the Russian President. After chatting, Putin suggested that Australia and Russia should deepen their cooperation. "We have no fundamental contradictions between our countries," he told Rudd.
Rudd replied that he'd be delighted, and that the countries had a number of areas where they could cooperate, including the shared annual forums of the East Asia Summit and the G20 itself. But then came the kicker: "Mr President, the reason Australia and Russia have gotten along so well and have no fundamental contradictions is that we've hardly had anything to do with each other for the last 70 years," said Rudd. Putin's response to this undeniable truth was a belly laugh.
That same sort of realism continues in the Australian political parties' responses to Russian behaviour - and misbehaviour - today. The Coalition government and the Labor opposition are in close agreement in clearly seeing and naming Russian outrages and resisting them.
Unremarkable, you think? Think again. Compared to the countries that it has looked to for leadership traditionally, Australia stands out as robust and cohesive. The political systems of the US and Britain are staggering under the pressure of Russia's roguery.
The united verdict of the US intelligence agencies was that the US elections of 2016 were the victim of simple Russian cyber-subversion. You don't need to form a view on the vexed question of any possible collusion between the Russian government and the Trump campaign - that's the job of the Mueller special investigation. Put that aside.
The Russians meddled with the American political system yet the US President refuses to confront the problem. In Congressional testimony in February, the head of US Cyber Command, Admiral Mike Rogers, said he had not been given authority by President Donald Trump to disrupt the at their points of origin.
Yet Russian interference is doing daily harm to American interests. In the last fortnight US intelligence officials have reportedly said that Russia is running continuing cyber operations into the US electricity grid and other vital systems, presumably planting software time bombs to be set off in case of future crisis.
Donald Trump has not authorised action to disrupt Russian hacking at its point of origin.
Photo: AP
The supreme commander of NATO, American General Curtis Scaparrotti, says that: “Russia aggressively uses social media and other means of mass communication to push disinformation, test the resolve of the United States, and erode our credibility with European partners.” And a range of top US officials says that Russian hacking remains a danger to the US congressional elections due in November.
Why, with its actions exposed, is Russia continuing this blatant campaign? Admiral Rogers drew the obvious conclusion: "President Putin has clearly come to the conclusion that there’s little price to pay." Quite simply, the US is failing to deter Russian intrusions into its most important systems.
British Prime Minister Theresa May has firmly named Russia as the culprit in the nerve agent attack on Sergei Skripal and his daughter on British soil. But the UK, too, is struggling to deal with Russian provocation.
The British response of expelling Russian diplomats, and marshalling a coalition of nations to do the same, is a "message" to Moscow, as many of the governments involved have said. But it is not a deterrent to Moscow. It is a one-off stamp of the diplomatic foot that will not harm any vital Russian interest or inflict any serious ongoing penalty.
Perhaps London is working on other responses, yet to emerge. If not, the British government will have failed to deter Putin from further adventurism. One of May's biggest difficulties has been that Britain's opposition leader, Jeremy Corbyn, refused to breathe a word of criticism against Russia.
Corbyn undermined Britain's response by questioning the basis for the government's verdict. He gave greater credence to Putin's denials than to the case mounted by British officialdom.
The weight of probability was enough to convince 29 countries around the world to expel Russian diplomats, but not enough to convince the Labour leader.
The old-style socialist apparently retains some outmoded ideological attachment to a long-defunct entity called the Soviet Union. By putting misdirected socialist solidarity above Britain's national interest, he called down a firestorm of criticism. One of his frontbenchers said that Corbyn had "diminished his position on a warped anti-Western ideology", according to The Financial Times.
Corbyn relented somewhat after days of pressure, yet he still gave Putin an out by saying that Russia was responsible "directly or indirectly".
By contrast, Australia's response has been cohesive and consistent. The Coalition government has been decisive and the Labor opposition fully supportive.
As the former Australian diplomat Allan Gyngell describes the US and UK, "our old friends are self-absorbed and distracted" by their intense internal polarisations while "there is an essential bipartisanship in the Australian responses".
Australia has not been a major target of Russian antagonisms. But the downing of a passenger jet, MH17, and the deaths of 298 civilians including 38 who called Australia home, was a searing moment of illumination for Australians.
The Russian-made missile that killed them was fired by Russian-backed rebels who were waging war against the Ukrainian government. Putin has never acknowledged any Russian involvement, either in the war in eastern Ukraine nor the mass murder of civilians from 10 nations on the jet flying high above the battlefield.
When Malaysia asked the UN Security Council to set up a tribunal to investigate and prosecute the culprits, it was vetoed by Russia.
But Australia has shown national unity and seriousness of purpose under challenge from other, bigger challenges in recent years, too. Both major parties have responded firmly to China's flagrant disregard of international law in grabbing disputed maritime territory from its neighbours, for instance.
"You would have to say it's a pretty sophisticated and assured response to the world, or to the problems that the world is continually throwing up to us," says Gyngell, former head of the Office of National Assessments, onetime Keating adviser and author of Fear of Abandonment: Australia in the World Since 1942.
Malcolm Turnbull and Julie Bishop have to get credit for leadership, naturally, as must Bill Shorten. But so do the other key Labor figures.
The current and former Labor shadows on foreign affairs, Penny Wong and Tanya Plibersek, are both drawn from Labor's left faction. It's a tribute to them that both have held to a principled defence of the national interest, neither tempted to play politics on the vital issues nor show Corbyn-esque inclinations to play to outmoded constructs of socialist solidarity. The shadow defence minister, Richard Marles, of Labor's right faction has been similarly firm.
The notable exception was the case of the Labor right's Sam Dastyari, but "that simply reinforced the blindingly obvious - we have to protect the interests of democracy", says Gyngell. And we did. Dastyari was forced out of Parliament and both major parties support tougher laws against foreign interference, though differing on details.
For all the failures of Australia's political class, in foreign affairs, by and large, it has been robust and realistic, even as America and Britain stumble. It's a realism that Putin would understand.
Peter Hartcher is international editor.
Peter Hartcher is the political editor and international editor of The Sydney Morning Herald. He is a Gold Walkley award winner, a former foreign correspondent in Tokyo and Washington, and a visiting fellow at the Lowy Institute for International Policy.
Morning & Afternoon Newsletter
Delivered Mon–Fri.
RUSSIA/РОССИЯ THREAD—ASSANGE CHRGD W/ SPYING—DJT IMPEACHED TWICE-US TREASURY SANCTS KILIMNIK AS RUSSIAN AGNT
- Thread starter ☑︎#VoteDemocrat
- Start date
Schindler knew 14 months ago
Even the son was dirty
@DonKnock @dza @88m3 @wire28 @smitty22 @fact @Hood Critic @ExodusNirvana @Blessed Is the Man @dtownreppin214 @JKFrazier @BigMoneyGrip @Soymuscle Mike @.r. @Dorian Breh @Dameon Farrow @TheNig @VR Tripper @re'up @Blackfyre_Berserker @Cali_livin
Even the son was dirty
@DonKnock @dza @88m3 @wire28 @smitty22 @fact @Hood Critic @ExodusNirvana @Blessed Is the Man @dtownreppin214 @JKFrazier @BigMoneyGrip @Soymuscle Mike @.r. @Dorian Breh @Dameon Farrow @TheNig @VR Tripper @re'up @Blackfyre_Berserker @Cali_livin
88m3
Fast Money & Foreign Objects
This shyt was actually decent 
Had his foot on his neck
Had his foot on his neck
@DonKnock @dza @88m3 @wire28 @smitty22 @fact @Hood Critic @ExodusNirvana @Blessed Is the Man @dtownreppin214 @JKFrazier @BigMoneyGrip @Soymuscle Mike @.r. @Dorian Breh @Dameon Farrow @TheNig @VR Tripper @re'up @Blackfyre_Berserker @Cali_livin
:shakingdamn:
:conceitedsideeye:
:conceitedsideeye:
UK locates source of novichok nerve agent used in Salisbury
jason clarkeApril 5 2018, 12:01am,
Security services pinpoint secret Russian lab
It is understood that Britain knew about the Russian facility where novichok poison was made before the Salisbury attack a month agoBen Stansall/AFP/Getty Images
Security services believe that they have pinpointed the location of the covert Russian laboratory that manufactured the weapons-grade nerve agent used in Salisbury, The Times has learnt.
Ministers and security officials were able to identify the source using scientific analysis and intelligence in the days after the attempted murder of Sergei and Yulia Skripal a month ago, according to security sources.
Britain knew about the existence of the facility where the novichok poison was made before the attack on March 4, it is understood. A Whitehall source added: “We knew pretty much by the time of the first Cobra [the emergency co-ordination briefing that took place the same week] that it was overwhelmingly likely to come from Russia.”
President Putin seized on remarks by a Porton Down scientist to sow doubt over where the nerve agent came fromBurhan Ozbilici/AP
Security sources do not claim 100 per cent certainty but the source has insisted that they have a high degree of confidence in the location. They also believe that the Russians conducted tests to see whether novichok could be used for assassinations.
The disclosure is the latest part of Britain’s intelligence case against Russia, which has been undermined this week by a series of blunders.
On Tuesday Gary Aitkenhead, head of the defence laboratory at Porton Down in Wiltshire, said it was unable to verify that the nerve agent came from Russia. His comments were seized on by President Putin. Yesterday the Foreign Office faced further embarrassment when it was revealed that after Mr Aitkenhead’s comments it deleted a tweet from an official account reading: “Porton Down made clear that this was a military-grade novichok nerve agent produced in Russia.”
Russia’s embassy in London said: “Why would @foreignoffice delete this tweet from 22 March?”
A Foreign Office spokesman said the original tweet had been an inaccurate summary of comments made by Laurie Bristow, the British ambassador to Russia, at a briefing in Moscow.
Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, also faced accusations from Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, that he engaged in “a bit of exaggeration” over the source of the novichok nerve agent. Mr Corbyn highlighted comments by Mr Johnson two weeks ago appearing to suggest that Porton Down scientists were “absolutely categorical” that the poison came from Moscow. Mr Johnson’s aides maintain he was referring to their certainty that it was novichok.
Mr Corbyn said: “He claimed categorically, and I think he used the words 101 per cent, that it had come from Russia . . . Either the foreign secretary has information that he’s not sharing with Porton Down or it was a bit of exaggeration. I don’t know which it is but I think we need a responsible, cool approach to this.”
Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, said she hoped that Labour would “get some credit for taking a more thoughtful approach and asking the right questions”.
Mr Johnson said: “It is lamentable that Jeremy Corbyn is now playing Russia’s game and trying to discredit the UK over Salisbury attack . . . Twenty-eight other countries have been so convinced by UK case [that] they have expelled Russians. In contrast, Jeremy Corbyn chooses to side with the Russian spin machine.”
Ben Wallace, the security minister, rejected claims that the government had contradicted itself. He pointed to the chemical analysis and intelligence indicating that Russia had created and stockpiled novichok. “It is Russia that is putting forward multiple versions of events and obfuscating the truth,” he said. Yesterday Russia lost a vote 15-6 at the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in the Hague seeking a joint investigation into the poisoning. China, Azerbaijan, Sudan, Algeria and Iran backed the motion, according to diplomatic sources.
Russia has demanded a UN security council meeting be convened today to discuss Britain’s accusations. John Foggo, acting British envoy to the OPCW, called Russia’s attempts to blame Britain for the attack “shameless, preposterous statements”. Dan Coats, the US national intelligence director, told reporters to “stay tuned” for further retaliatory measures.
Russia suggested yesterday that a lack of information about Mr Skripal’s pets — he is believed to have had two cats and two guinea pigs — could be regarded as suspicious and that they could provide clues to the poisoning.
@DonKnock @dza @88m3 @wire28 @smitty22 @fact @Hood Critic @ExodusNirvana @Blessed Is the Man @dtownreppin214 @JKFrazier @BigMoneyGrip @Soymuscle Mike @.r. @Dorian Breh @Dameon Farrow @TheNig @VR Tripper @re'up @Blackfyre_Berserker @Cali_livin
Hood Critic
The Power Circle
The Pentagon wasn't aware of Trump's National Guard at the border apparently until it hit the media.
NaijaProdigy Redux
Veteran
This dude Mueller running up on dudes at airports like they're Tekashi69 
Hood Critic
The Power Circle
Paul Manafort's Lawyers Are Trying To Block Mueller's Office From Indicting Him Again
He should be worried because there are a lot more charges in the bag for him and that pardon he's waiting on isn't going to save him, it's just going to f*ck him on the next indictment(s).
He should be worried because there are a lot more charges in the bag for him and that pardon he's waiting on isn't going to save him, it's just going to f*ck him on the next indictment(s).
DonKnock
KPJ Gonna Save Us
This shyt was actually decent
Had his foot on his neck
@DonKnock @dza @88m3 @wire28 @smitty22 @fact @Hood Critic @ExodusNirvana @Blessed Is the Man @dtownreppin214 @JKFrazier @BigMoneyGrip @Soymuscle Mike @.r. @Dorian Breh @Dameon Farrow @TheNig @VR Tripper @re'up @Blackfyre_Berserker @Cali_livin
That network gets no points EVER.
Especially not less than a week after fukking Carlson was promoting immigrant genocide on their airwaves..
88m3
Fast Money & Foreign Objects
This shyt was actually decent
Had his foot on his neck
Yeah, I think everyone has turned on him amazingly.
FORMER CIA DIRECTOR:
resurrection
By Way of Deception, Thou Shalt Do War
Dotard Jr, Scavino, Rudy.. all their wives filing for divorce. Sorry but this isn’t coincidence. These idiots are preparing for what’s to come