Minister Wong and the Albanese Government need to outline the pathway for re-establishing Australia’s diplomatic presence in Ukraine.

‍

This follows evidence revealed at Senate Estimates that there are no plans to return the Australian Ambassador to Ukraine back to Kyiv any time soon.

‍

In early 2022, Australia was one of 81 countries to close their embassies in Ukraine after Russia’s invasion. Over two years later, we are one of less than 10 countries yet to return.

‍

The cost, financial and reputational, to Australia is growing each day we refuse to outline a clear pathway back to Ukraine.

‍

Australia’s Ambassador and Deputy Ambassador to Ukraine remain stationed in Poland, at a rental cost of $150,000 a year , while we continue to pay rent on our vacant diplomatic premises in Ukraine ($250,000 per year ). We continue to pay the salaries of the Ambassador and Deputy Ambassador and three full-time local staff.

‍

It was also revealed that $200,000 was spent on just four trips to Ukraine by our Ambassador over the past year.

‍

Altogether, it is costing us over $1 million per year to not have a functioning diplomatic presence in Ukraine.

‍

The continued absence of our embassy is out of step with our international partners and does not match this Government’s rhetoric that “today and every day, Australia stands with Ukraine and its people.”

‍

Ukraine has asked us to return our embassy to Kyiv, as a show of moral and diplomatic support as they resist Russian aggression.

‍

Our diplomats are trained and expected to operate overseas in high-risk environments, including conflict zones.

‍

Without an Ambassador in Kyiv, we are neglecting Australia's national interests in one of the most important theatres shaping the global security environment and failing to support a free nation fighting to resist aggression in its hour of need.

‍

Our diplomats are trained and expected to operate overseas in high-risk environments, including conflict zones. The “psycho-social risks” cited as a prominent consideration for a return can be managed.

‍

DFAT staff have frequently served overseas in high-risk environments, including Afghanistan and Iraq, under the current legislative regime. If additional funding is needed for security measures to manage the risks of a return of our diplomatic presence to Ukraine, then this should be disclosed.

‍

The Albanese Government must outline the pathway for the return of our Embassy to Ukraine, including conditions that it considers must be met. It must come clean on whether it has any intention of re-establishing our embassy in Ukraine, or whether it will only consider doing so when hostilities between Russia and Ukraine have ended.