THE HON ANDREW HASTIE MP

SHADOW MINISTER FOR INDUSTRY AND SOVEREIGN CAPABILITY FEDERAL MEMBER FOR CANNING

TRANSCRIPT

DOORSTOP, CANBERRA

Tuesday 3 March 2026

Topics: Iran conflict; ISIS brides; fuel security.

E&OE……………………………………

JOURNALIST: Given your background in defence, what are you making Australia, one, not having prior knowledge of the attacks on Iran? And then also whether we should be providing any sort of supporting role depending on how this drags out?

ANDREW HASTIE: As a close ally, it's concerning that we weren't briefed as a government. As to what support we provide going forward, that would be a decision for the National Security Committee of Cabinet, and I want more information before I make a judgment.

JOURNALIST: We've heard a couple of different ideas from Donald Trump about how long this war will last. He said four weeks yesterday, now it seems a little bit longer. From your personal experience, do you think this is something that could be finished in four weeks, or is this one of those forever wars that you've spoken about?

ANDREW HASTIE: I think anyone who puts a time limit on war doesn't actually understand the nature of war, which is inherently escalatory, which is what we're seeing at the moment with the involvement of the Gulf states – we saw Jordan having intercept missiles overhead. So this could expand very quickly, and I think the larger play here is that President Trump is re-establishing deterrence. You've got to remember Iran, as well is very close ally of China. China buys 80 per cent of Iran's crude oil. They entered into a 2021 Comprehensive Strategic Partnership: China was investing $400 billion into the Iranian economy. There's a lot at play here and it’s not just in the Middle East, it is also in the Indo Pacific, right in our region here as well.

JOURNALIST: On that, you had described yourself as a veteran of forever wars, and then just on Sky, you were talking about how all options should be on the table for Australia – I mean, with more information – for Australian military involvement. Are you comfortable with the idea of Australians potentially being sent into Iran, or sent into the Middle East, for a period that we have no idea how long it could last for?

ANDREW HASTIE: If we deploy the ADF into harm's way, I always want to know, what's the end state we're aiming for? And at the moment, President Trump has said the end state is, we're going to strike Iran and then leave it up to the Iranian people to do regime change. In four or five weeks time, what's going to be left of a functioning government? At least in Iraq and Afghanistan, you had coalition troops there to establish some sort of law and order. But who's to say in Iran, in a couple of weeks, it's going to be very messy and you can just see the rise of another Islamist regime that continues oppressing the Iranian people. So I'm just very circumspect about war as a blunt instrument for regime change. It's very, very difficult, and having done nation-building at gunpoint myself, that's why I'm very circumspect about this whole thing.

JOURNALIST: Should the government consider using the military to repatriate stranded Australians?

ANDREW HASTIE: I think we should be focused on repatriating Australians – that should be our focus. We shouldn't be repatriating ISIS sympathisers, we should be doing whatever we can, using all elements of government power, to get more than 100,000 Australians stranded in the Middle East.

JOURNALIST: Do you think it's the right move, at the moment, to rely on commercial flights reopening? The government, multiple ministers, have been saying that's the priority, and that's what they think is the quickest way.

ANDREW HASTIE: If there's been U.S. casualties, there's been casualties in places like Dubai, flying in an Australian C-17 or C-1 30 to fly home Australians, that, in itself, is risky. So I think we're going to be relying very heavily on the US, Israel and other countries who have intercept capabilities, which I'm not sure that we have, to get our people out. That's why I imagine Australians can expect to be stranded for some time.

JOURNALIST: On the term ISIS sympathisers, do you believe that also includes people under the age of 18 that are in this situation?

ANDREW HASTIE: My concern is that those who are ISIS sympathisers, those who have married ISIS fighters, they showed ideological commitment to Islamic State at its height. And we have no evidence whatsoever that they have repudiated those beliefs, that they haven't passed those beliefs on to their children. And so, if they want to come back to Australia, to have any level of confidence that they're going to be able to integrate, they need to demonstrate that they have repudiated those things. We have no visibility on that at all, which is why the government should be using the temporary exclusion order, which doesn't require security advice, to put a pause on this until we can work all these things out. There are consequences if you betray your country and I'm sorry to say, but decisions of parents have consequences for children. I'm not suggesting that the children had a choice in this matter, but if they've been radicalised themselves, then we need to know that – we need to identify that. The shooter at Bondi, he was born here. So there is radicalisation happening in our communities, and I think it's really important that we make sure that it doesn't continue, and that people who have fought with Islamic State aren't celebrated back here in Australia, in those communities.

JOURNALIST: Do you think that kind of radicalisation can be rehabilitated? Like if you were, at one point, an ISIS sympathiser, or you went to that part of the world to follow ISIS, do you think it is possible to change their mind?

ANDREW HASTIE: Hope springs eternal for me – I'll never write anyone off. But I think if we're going to talk about repatriation of Australians who fought with ISIS, been part of the larger ISIS movement, supported ISIS, I'd need to see a full repudiation and a change of heart. Until we see that, why should we take the risk?

JOURNALIST: Do you share concerns with some of the crossbench MPs that the current attacks in Iran from the U.S. sets a dangerous precedent for some nations like China and Russia who may use military force in the near future?

ANDREW HASTIE: I think the world is governed by power, and I prefer a powerful U.S. reestablishing deterrence, rather than other countries, like Russia using might to advance its national interest. So look, it's nice to talk about the world that once existed post-World War, the global rules-based order. I don't think that exists anymore, and anyone who says it does is living in a fantasy land. This is a new world order, that's why I'm so insistent on Australia, re-industrializing, taking care of itself, making sure that we have depth in our supply chains, and liquid fuel security is one of those things we must look at. We don't even have a sovereign fleet anymore. So let's just say those ships bringing refined oil to Australian shores get diverted – we don't have control over them because they're not flagged Australian. These are sorts of things that the government should be thinking about, and we're going to push them to think about in the coming weeks.

JOURNALIST: Just how vulnerable do you think Australia is at the moment to potential oil shocks and fuel shortages?

ANDREW HASTIE: Very vulnerable. Chris Bowen, yesterday in Parliament, rattled off the current stocks that we have. The International Energy Agency mandates 90 days of liquid fuel stocks, I think he mentioned something like 30-plus – it's barely enough. If you go back to 1940, we went straight to fuel rationing because we didn't have refining capacity when we went to war in 1940. So it's a real risk, and it's something that we need to be thinking about and taking action to remediate.

[ENDS]