THE HON ANDREW HASTIE MP

SHADOW MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS

TRANSCRIPT
INTERVIEW WITH SALLY SARA, ABC RADIO NATIONAL

MONDAY 23 JUNE 2025

Topics: Israel-Iran conflict, US strikes on Iran nuclear facilities.

E&OE

SALLY SARA: The Federal Opposition has offered strong support for the US strikes against Iran yesterday, accusing the Albanese Government of being ambiguous in its response. Joining me now from WA is Andrew Hastie, the Shadow Minister for Home Affairs and currently the Acting Shadow Foreign Affairs Minister. Andrew Hastie, welcome back to Radio National Breakfast.

ANDREW HASTIE: Good morning, Sally.

SALLY SARA: You’ve just heard from Foreign Affairs Minister Penny Wong. She’s saying that the Federal Government supports actions to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. Are you satisfied with the Federal Government’s response?

ANDREW HASTIE: I’m glad to see that Penny Wong has essentially endorsed our position, and I’m glad we have bipartisanship of this—that the world, as she said, has agreed Iran cannot be allowed to get a nuclear weapon. We support action to prevent that, which is why we supported the US strikes yesterday. I think, though, what yesterday demonstrated was that the Prime Minister is flat-footed. His instincts aren't great on this, and he should have called an NSC meeting yesterday for an event of such significance. Instead, it's happening this morning.

SALLY SARA: Have you had any briefings from the Government since these US strikes on Iran?

ANDREW HASTIE: No, I have not.

SALLY SARA: Have you requested one?

ANDREW HASTIE: Not yet, no.

SALLY SARA: Will you be requesting one this week, do you think?

ANDREW HASTIE: Yes, I will be. I'll be heading to Canberra this week, so I hope to have a briefing, and that’s in the hands of the Opposition Leader. So, we're hoping for a briefing sometime around Wednesday this week. I was briefed last week by Penny Wong, which was helpful, of course, about the closure of our Embassy in Iran. But look, this is a very difficult time. Obviously, the Coalition does not want to see any further war. We want to see Iran come to the negotiating table to verify where that 400 kilos of enriched uranium is. And we'd like to see peace in the region, because there are a lot of innocent people being affected by this.

SALLY SARA: You know Australia's defence capabilities quite well. What role, if any, do you think Australia played in these strikes?

ANDREW HASTIE: I don't know, Sally, what role we played, if at all. And I'd hesitate to speculate. And hopefully any of those questions will be answered in a briefing.

SALLY SARA: The Coalition has expressed support specifically for the strikes that took place at the weekend from the United States. Would you support further US strikes, and if so, under what conditions or parameters?

ANDREW HASTIE: Look, our position always was that Iran couldn't be allowed to get a nuclear weapon. We wanted to see Iran come to the negotiating table, open itself up to a full inspection by the International Atomic and Energy Agency. They didn't, and President Trump took action to strike those three facilities. We support those strikes, and now we want to see dialogue and diplomacy. We want to see a peaceful settlement from here, and I'm just not going to speculate on what steps might be taken next.

SALLY SARA: So just to clarify, you would prefer a peaceful path from here rather than further military action from the US. Am I understanding you?

ANDREW HASTIE: Absolutely. What we want to see is Iran submit to the full verification process by the IEA. That's really important, because no one wants to see Iran get a nuclear weapon. They support terrorism, they support Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis. They've fired missiles into Israel in April and October of last year, and there's also been threats made to the US and other allies. So, look, we want to see this resolved, and we hope that yesterday has brought the Iranian leadership to their senses.

SALLY SARA: You're listening to Radio National Breakfast, and I'm speaking with Andrew Hastie, Shadow Minister for Home Affairs, and Acting Shadow Foreign Affairs Minister. Andrew Hastie, experts on international law and foreign policy say the US strikes were illegal and should be condemned. Is that something you're comfortable with? 

ANDREW HASTIE: Well, Penny Wong this morning didn't say that. She said that the Australian Government does not want to see Iran get a nuclear weapon, and they support the strikes, and that's our position as well. International lawyers can parse the strikes, but our position is that it needed to happen because Iran would not come to the table, and the risk of them getting a nuclear weapon was huge, and it was a direct threat to regional stability and world peace.

SALLY SARA: Is the legality of these strikes, is that not of concern to the Opposition?

ANDREW HASTIE: Of course it's, all these things will be debated in the coming days. But what's happened has happened. And the question is, do we support the US in their strikes? Yes, we do. Why? Because we don't want to see Iran getting a nuclear weapon.

SALLY SARA: Respected international law expert Don Rothwell says it's quite virtually impossible, in his opinion, to mount a case that these US strikes were legal under international law, and he's raised concerns that they could set a precedent for other countries to use self defence arguments as a cover for pre-emptive attacks. Does Australia have a duty to defend the rules-based order, which includes international law?

ANDREW HASTIE: Well, I don't think this was so much a pre-emptive strike. We've seen Israel under attack since October 7 by Hamas, which has been sponsored by Iran, by Hezbollah, which has been sponsored by Iran, and by the Houthis, which has been sponsored by Iran. And Iran itself fired rockets into Israel last year in October and April. And I think of the risk of a nuclear weapon, because the Iranians had enriched uranium to 60% which is the precursor for getting a nuclear weapon. Now, intelligence intelligence agencies will debate when Iran planned to break out and put all the componentry together and have an actual nuclear weapon. But the risk was there, and that's why action was taken, and I think that's the context in which we need to see the strikes that took place yesterday.

SALLY SARA: We've had the former Head of Nuclear Verification from the International Atomic Energy Agency on Radio National Breakfast. He says Iran was one to three years away from developing a nuclear weapon. In your view, was that an imminent threat?

ANDREW HASTIE: I just have to take what the current Director General, Rafael Grossi, has said, and on the 12th of June, the Board of Governors at the IAEA passed a resolution condemning Iran for being in breach of their Non Proliferation Treaty obligations. They had 400 kilos of 60% uranium stockpiled. The IAEA has a ceiling of 20% enrichment for military fuels. So, Iran had no explanation for this 60% enrichment, other than they were working towards a nuclear weapon. So, I’m going to go with Director General Grossi’s comments, and he obviously made a comment to the United Nations Security Council on Friday, where he outlined the ongoing risk posed by Iran. And he went out of his way to say there is a diplomatic solution, that Iran has to submit itself to verification and has to be open with the IEA, and they weren't. And unfortunately, this is where we're at.

SALLY SARA: Andrew Hastie, thank you for your time this morning.

ANDREW HASTIE: Thanks so much, Sally.

[ENDS]