The Australian government’s $110 million (US$73 million) military support for Ukraine is not effective enough in addressing Ukraine’s needs, the federal opposition says.
Defence Minister Richard Marles unveiled the new assistance package on June 26, which includes 70 military vehicles, a supply of 105mm artillery ammunition, and $10 million to the Ukraine Humanitarian Fund.
Australia will also extend duty-free access for goods imported from Ukraine for a further 12 months to aid the country’s trade opportunities.
But Shadow Foreign Minister Simon Birmingham argued the package is “not really directly responding to Ukraine’s requests for the Hawkei vehicles, or the Abrams tanks, nor the D mining equipment they’ve asked for.”
Speaking to ABC’s radio program RN Breakfast on Tuesday, he said the Labor government’s humanitarian support was $10 million compared with the $65 million provided by the former Coalition government.
“This is a concern that … [Australia’s] status as the leading non-NATO contributor to Ukraine has slipped away and the type of support being offered now doesn’t seem to be either meeting Ukraine’s requests, providing the modern equipment that they want or need, nor the type of scale that would seem to keep Australia commensurate support of our other parts.”
The shadow foreign minister suggested that the government should look at what Ukrainians have “specifically requested” rather than “going to military vehicles or equipment that some of them go back to the Vietnam era.”
Asked whether the government should prioritise Ukraine’s request over the Defence Department, Birmingham said the main concern was that “defence is not being replenished for any of these contributions.”
“So the government stands up and says it’s making a $110 million contribution, but that’s not $110 million more on the budget bottom line,” he said.
“It’s simply a valuation of some ageing vehicles that are being taken out of the existing defence fleet and sent over there. So the real question here is if defence were being given commitments of replenishment.”
Opposition Leader Peter Dutton echoed the sentiment, saying Hawkeis could have been made available.
“The Ukraine defence minister and the advisors there understand the vehicle very well,” he told reporters in Perth.
“They’ve said that that vehicle will provide them with significant benefit in their fight against Russia—why not take their advice?
Labor Defends Its Military Support
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese defended his government’s assistance package, noting that Australia was continuing to send equipment, having already provided $790 million in military assistance since the invasion of Ukraine.“It doesn’t [help] ... to send them a piece of equipment that will not provide for the best assistance,” he told ABC Radio.
Defence Minister Richard Marles said while the package did not offer Hawkeis, the equipment would make an impact.
“We do feel there were issues around Hawkeis, which is hard to go into publicly,” he told ABC Radio.
“We took the Ukrainians through what we believed were the issues there and what we wanted to do was make sure the equipment we were giving to Ukraine would make a difference for them on the battlefield.”
A Senate committee in May heard an issue with the vehicle’s braking system meant it would not achieve “full operating capability” until mid-2024 and no root cause had yet been identified.
