GREG JENNETT: Penny Wong, we now have this strategy switch from Donald Trump. From an Australian point of view, what is the mission there? Is it nation-building, or to use the President's word, killing terrorists?
SENATOR PENNY WONG, LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION IN THE SENATE: Well, look, first I want to be very clear, there is a bipartisan commitment to our presence in Afghanistan. That's been the case since the commitment began, and I think it's correct to say that an element of our strategy there has always been about creating peace and stability in Afghanistan. So that continues to be an issue of bipartisan support.
JENNETT: But can it be, if the American forces are recasting their efforts purely into, to use that word again, killing terrorists or what others might more sensibly call counter-terrorism?
WONG: Well, we are in Afghanistan in order to deny terrorists a safe haven. That is clear, and denial of safe haven to terrorist groups does involve targeting of terrorists, does involve military conflict. I think everybody understands that.
But I wouldn't create this as a false binary. President Trump also pointed out that military action alone will not bring peace and stability, that a political solution is required. That is correct. And if our strategy is to ensure, not just for the present but in the longer term, that we deny terrorists, whatever group, a safe haven, that does require peace and stability in the region and in Afghanistan.
JENNETT: Now there has also been some confusion out of the US about what the ultimate military objective is, is it actually achieving a win, which is what the President said, or Rex Tillerson's version, which is that it is to bring perhaps the Taliban forth into some form of negotiation? What might a victory or what might success look like to you?
WONG: It seems to me that success looks like denial of safe haven to terrorist activity in Afghanistan and on an ongoing basis, peace and stability in Afghanistan and the region.
Now, that is tough to achieve, and I think Secretary Tillerson is referencing the fact that the President also alluded to in his speech, that military action takes you so far, but ultimately if you want ongoing stability, that has to include a political solution, and I think that is a self-evident fact.
JENNETT: Now, Australia, for its part, has been in lock-step with the United States, since 2001 in Afghanistan, or perhaps, to borrow the Prime Minister's phrase, joined at the hip militarily. Does it follow that, in your view, Washington is likely to come asking for yet more commitments by Australia?
WONG: I notice the Prime Minister was asked a similar question just a short while ago, and he made the very good point, we are already a substantial contributor to the mission in Afghanistan. We have almost 300 Australians working in training and support and advisory roles there, and, as he referenced, we are the largest non-NATO contributor already to that operation. So Australia is already contributing.
I also note that Minister Payne has said that no such request has been forthcoming as yet, and I don't think it's helpful to speculate on hypotheticals.
JENNETT: Right, but listening to you, it sounds as if you might be outlining the case that we are at or near the limits of our all in commitment to the broader Middle-East - not just Afghanistan, but factoring in Iraq as well?
WONG: Iraq and Syria as well. I think any sensible analysis of the commitments Australia has engaged in, not just currently, but over the last decade and a half, would suggest, or demonstrate that we have well and truly been prepared to shoulder our burden, our fair share of this fight. And I do want to again thank those members of the ADF who have and are serving in these theatres at great risk to themselves.
JENNETT: I presume America wouldn't ask unless they knew the answer, but in your view, and if in office, is saying no to such requests ever a viable choice for Australia?
WONG: I'm not going to get engaged in hypotheticals here, Greg, as much as you try to do so. I think any military commitment a government always assesses on its merits, and in accordance with our national interests, including as an Alliance partner, and including recognising our shared interest in denial of safe havens for terrorists and in confronting terrorists wherever they are.
But I again make the point the Prime Minister made which is we are the largest non-NATO contributor to Afghanistan.
JENNETT: Can I take you to a domestic matter now? The rolls for the postal survey, same-sex marriage, close tomorrow night and I think a general interpretation of those who have sought to update their details is that new enrolments are lagging somewhat. What's your interpretation of that? What's its significance?
WONG: Well, new enrolments are lower than I would like, and what I would say to people is if you're not on the roll, you can't vote for marriage equality, and we risk handing too much of an advantage to those on the other side who will stop at nothing to deny equality to same-sex couples in this country.
JENNETT: So what's needed?
WONG: So get on the roll.
JENNETT: What sort of response, a campaign?
WONG: Young people who need to get on the roll. People who support marriage equality need to get on the roll. They've got until midnight tomorrow night to do it and I encourage everyone to do it, otherwise we risk handing too much of an advantage to those who don't want equality.
JENNETT: The clock is ticking. Penny Wong, we'll leave it there.
WONG: Good to speak to you.