Malcolm Fraser and Gough Whitlam both warned against surrendering Australian sovereignty to US military and intelligence interests, but AUKUS and the Albanese government’s foreign policy have deepened that dependence.

 

John Menadue

Fraser, Whitlam, Albanese and national sovereignty

 

“Even if America was a benign power and it had the capacity to make good diplomatic decisions, I would not want to give that power, any power, the capacity to take Australia to war because they go to war,” Malcolm Fraser said in a 2015 address to the Australian Institute of International Affairs. Gough Whitlam would have agreed wholeheartedly, but not Anthony Albanese.

After publishing his book Dangerous Allies, Malcolm Fraser was asked at the same meeting why it (Dangerous Allies) got so little publicity. He replied “there is one short answer…74 per cent of Australia’s daily newspapers are owned by somebody whose main business activities are American. You’ve only got to read the articles that come out of their flagship, if you like, to know how pro-American they are."

Let’s look at key issues and compare Malcolm Fraser with Gough Whitlam and Anthony Albanese.

Sovereignty and foreign bases

In government Malcolm Fraser was initially a strong supporter of the US alliance. But that changed. In March 1981 as Prime Minister he said: “the Australian government has a firm policy that aircraft carrying nuclear weapons will not be allowed to fly over or stage through Australia without its prior knowledge and agreement. Nothing less than this would be consistent with the maintenance of our national sovereignty.”

In 2015 he said: “Australia’s position is so close to that of the United States that its capacity to make independent decisions is severely limited…we are now totally captive and interoperability has become, if you like, America’s new imperialism…If we wanted to strengthen the kind of arguments the old President Bush would use…..telling America: take your troops out of Darwin, close down Pine Gap, and I’d give them three, four or five years to do that because it’s a highly complex facility – but I would pull Australians out of it within six months and make it perfectly plain that it was just an American facility."

From the time I worked with Gough Whitlam from 1960 he was very clear that it was unacceptable for foreign bases to operate in Australia.

In Parliament on 3 April 1974, he said: “The Australian government takes the attitude that there should not be foreign military bases, stations or installations in Australia. We honour agreements covering existing stations. We do not favour the extension or prolongation of any of those existing ones.”

US Defence Secretary James Schlesinger and a former CIA head recommended in 1974 “to attenuate certain ties in the Australia- US relationship ..and this will induce the Whitlam government to reverse those major elements of its foreign policy which are inimical to US interests." If this was unsuccessful the US could “undermine the Labor government with the Australian people, setting the stage for opposition victory.”

Whitlam had been misled that Pine Gap was run by the Pentagon. He was very angry that he had been deceived when he found out that Pine Gap was run by the CIA. In a speech at Port Augusta nine days before the dismissal he threatened to expose details of the CIA operations at Pine Gap. The CIA was then instructed by Henry Kissinger that a demarche be sent to ASIO threatening that the US would take retaliatory action. This demarche was shared with the Australian intelligence community and John Kerr. This fortified Kerr in the action he planned to dismiss the Whitlam government.

Whitlam knew nothing of the demarche. As Secretary of Prime Minister and Cabinet at the time I was also not informed.

The Dismissal informed future Labor governments that they should be very careful not to offend the US. We see the result with Anthony Albanese. His actions tell a story of capitulation.

The Gillard government had foolishly agreed to a rotational deployment of US Marines in Darwin. It now looks like a permanent deployment. In turn, the Albanese Government embarked on an unprecedented surrender to the US. The base at Tindal is undergoing substantial upgrades to serve the purpose of US aircraft capable of carrying nuclear weapons to attack China. The government is spending over $12 billion for the upgrading of the nuclear submarine base near Perth to serve US and UK interests. There is also a substantial upgrading of the airstrip on Cocos Keeling to facilitate US and RAAF operating in the South China Sea. And more.

NATO and Ukraine

In 2015 Malcolm Fraser spelled out the risks of NATO expanding eastwards. He said: “Gorbachev believed he had a deal that if he agreed to the reunification of Germany, NATO would not move east. And the whole of Russia believes that America and NATO have broken their word. It was a most stupid move. The west is responsible for Ukraine, simple as that”.

The Albanese government has supplied military equipment in support of Ukraine. Foreign Minister Wong attends NATO foreign ministers’ meetings. The Albanese government sees its future with like-minded western governments, mainly in Europe.

Middle East and Palestine

Malcolm Fraser in 2015 said that “the Middle East is more finely poised, more in turmoil, the problems between Israel and Palestine probably greater than they’ve ever been. This is very largely because of the foolishness of American policy.”

In relations with Israel and Palestine Gough Whitlam asserted the importance of even-handedness. He criticised Israel’s violation of international law and its “arrogance and intransigence”. In his autobiography he said that Israel’s standing is “too often undermined by the crude blackmail of spokesmen and letter writers from the Jewish community”. He described Bob Hawke as a “pro-Israeli fanatic”.

As I have written before, the Albanese government is complicit in the genocide, apartheid, violence and ethnic cleansing in Palestine.

Both Malcolm Fraser and Gough Whitlam would have taken a much more even-handed approach.

AUKUS and military self-reliance

Fraser, Whitlam and Albanese all espoused self-reliance, but with AUKUS we have been locked into dependence on the US and the unreliable and deranged Donald Trump. AUKUS has little to do with Australian defence. I believe that neither Whitlam nor Fraser would have agreed to such an absurdity as AUKUS.

The Whitlam Government embarked on a self-reliant defence policy in its 1973 Defence Review. In 1976 the Fraser government endorsed that approach in its Defence White Paper. For 50 years we had a viable self-reliant defence posture. It was bipartisan. It was not shaped for the benefit of the US.

The Marles 2023 Defence Strategic Review was effectively written by a senior principal of the US Study Centre in Sydney. Not surprisingly we are now locked even more into US defence interests.

The ALP platform states “Labor’s defence policy is founded on the principle of self-reliance. Australia’s armed forces need to be able to defend against credible threats without relying on the combat forces and capabilities of other countries.”

A Labor government has effectively destroyed the possibility of a self-reliant defence posture.

Intelligence services

In his 2015 speech Malcolm Fraser said: “during seven and a half years of government I cannot think of one decision of government that was altered by any highly classified top secret intelligence that came from (Five Eyes) sources. Very often those sources you can read about in the newspapers.”

Judge Hope in his Intelligence Review for the Whitlam government improperly told MI6 that Whitlam was seeking ways to reduce dependence on the CIA and MI6. That leakage played a vital part in the US determination to have Whitlam dismissed.

About three months before Gough Whitlam died, Malcolm Fraser called to see him in his Sydney office. He presented Gough with his book The Political Memoirs. He had inscribed in the book – “Dear Gough, with great respect and affection, Malcolm.” My eyes misted over.

Shortly after Gough Whitlam died, Malcolm Fraser commented: “Whitlam was a most formidable opponent in political terms but was someone I considered a friend. He had a sense of Australia’s identity and purpose as a nation, not as an appendage to other nations.”

https://johnmenadue.com/post/2026/06/fraser-whitlam-albanese-and-national-sovereignty/

 

PLEASE VISIT:

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT — SINCE 2005.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

         RABID ATHEIST.

         WELCOME TO THIS INSANE WORLD….