Category: Australia

  • ANALYSIS: By Donald Rothwell, Australian National University

    In an unprecedented legal development, senior Australian politicians, including Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, have been referred to the International Criminal Court (ICC) for investigation into whether they have aided or supported Israel’s actions in Gaza.

    The referral, made by the Sydney law firm Birchgrove Legal on behalf of their clients, is the first time any serving Australian political leaders have been formally referred to the ICC for investigation.

    The referral asserts that Albanese, Foreign Minister Penny Wong, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton and other members of the government have violated the Rome Statute, the 1998 treaty that established the ICC to investigate and prosecute allegations of war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity.

    Specifically, the law firm references:

    • Australia’s freezing of aid to the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), the aid agency that operates in Gaza
    • the provision of military aid to Israel that could have been used in the alleged commission of genocide and crimes against humanity
    • permitting Australians to travel to Israel to take part in attacks in Gaza
    • providing “unequivocal political support” for Israel’s actions in Gaza.

    A key aspect of the referral is the assertion, under Article 25 of the Rome Statute, that Albanese and the others bear individual criminal responsibility for aiding, abetting or otherwise assisting in the commission (or attempted commission) of alleged crimes by Israel in Gaza.

    At a news conference today, Albanese said the letter had “no credibility” and was an example of “misinformation”. He said:

    Australia joined a majority in the UN to call for an immediate ceasefire and to advocate for the release of hostages, the delivery of humanitarian assistance, the upholding of international law and the protection of civilians.

    How the referral process works
    There are a couple of key questions here: can anyone be referred to the ICC, and how often do these referrals lead to an investigation?

    Referrals to the ICC prosecutor are most commonly made by individual countries — as has occurred following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 — or by the UN Security Council. However, it is also possible for referrals to be made by “intergovernmental or non-governmental organisations, or other reliable sources”, according to Article 15 of the Rome Statute.

    The ICC prosecutor’s office has received 12,000 such referrals to date. These must go through a preliminary examination before the office decides whether there are “reasonable grounds” to start an investigation.

    The court has issued arrest warrants for numerous leaders over the past two decades, including Russian President Vladimir Putin and his commissioner for children’s rights, Maria Lvova-Belova; former Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir; and now-deceased Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.

    Why this referral is unlikely to go anywhere
    Putting aside the merit of the allegations themselves, it is unlikely the Australian referrals will go any further for legal and practical reasons.

    First, the ICC was established as an international court of last resort. This means it would only be used to prosecute international crimes when courts at a national level are unwilling or unable to do so.

    As such, the threat of possible ICC prosecution was intended to act as a deterrent for those considering committing international crimes, as well as an incentive for national authorities and courts to prosecute them.

    Australia has such a process in place to investigate potential war crimes and other international crimes through the Office of the Special Investigator (OSI).

    The OSI was created in the wake of the 2020 Brereton Report into allegations of Australian war crimes in Afghanistan. In March 2023, the office announced its first prosecution.

    Because Australia has this legal framework in place, the ICC prosecutor would likely deem it unnecessary to refer Australian politicians to the ICC for prosecution, unless Australia was unwilling to start such a prosecution itself. At present, there is no evidence that is the case.

    Another reason this referral is likely to go nowhere: the ICC prosecutor, Karim Khan, is currently focusing on a range of investigations related to alleged war crimes committed by Russia, Hamas and Israel, in addition to other historical investigations.

    Given the significance of these investigations – and the political pressure the ICC faces to act with speed – it is unlikely the court would divert limited resources to investigate Australian politicians.

    Increasing prominence of international courts
    This referral to the ICC, however, needs to be seen in a wider context. The Israel-Hamas conflict has resulted in an unprecedented flurry of legal proceedings before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the UN’s top court.

    Unlike the ICC, the ICJ does not deal with individual criminal responsibility. The ICJ does, however, have jurisdiction over whether countries violate international law, such as the Genocide Convention.

    This was the basis for South Africa to launch its case against Israel in the ICJ, claiming its actions against the Palestinian people amounted to genocide. The ICJ issued a provisional ruling against Israel in January which said it’s “plausible” Israel had committed genocide in Gaza and ordered Israel to take immediate steps to prevent acts of genocide.

    In addition, earlier this week, a new case was launched in the ICJ by Nicaragua, alleging Germany has supported acts of genocide by providing military support for Israel and freezing aid for UNRWA.

    All of these developments in recent months amount to what experts call “lawfare”. This refers to the use of international or domestic courts to seek accountability for alleged state-sanctioned acts of genocide and support or complicity in such acts. Some of these cases have merit, others are very weak.

    As one international law expert described the purpose:

    It’s […] a way of raising awareness, getting media attention and showing your own political base you’re doing something.

    These cases do succeed in increasing public awareness of these conflicts. And they make clear the desire of many around the world to hold to account those seen as being responsible for gross violations of international law.The Conversation

    Dr Donald Rothwell, professor of international law, Australian National University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.


    This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • The history of such experiments is not promising. Why would those in the US like the game of rugby league, when an established code of superficial similarity already exists? Fundamental differences, for one thing, abound. The US NFL Superbowl tries to keep blood and violence off the pitch. Force, when exercised, is chivalric, the moves ceremonially packaged. Such contests are astonishingly contained, hemmed in by a distinct netting of protocol and protections. These US padded gladiators remain calm, composed and, when irate, kept within the confines of expected conduct.

    Rugby league extols speed, the violent tackle, the brutish push, the military assault. Heads are often confused for balls. Punches fly, tempers fray. Unlike the NFL, the Australian NRL (National Rugby League) offers up a thuggish spectacle: combatants with no padding, unhelmeted heads, and no visible protective gear to speak of. Undeterred, the NRL mandarins were hoping to nab a US audience by opening the season in Las Vegas, a move that has been promoted with aggressive enthusiasm by Australian Rugby League Commission chairman Peter V’landys. This is all a bit rich, given that the code has barely made it, even after a century, beyond the states of New South Wales and Queensland.

    The chairman’s reasoning for pursuing the Vegas dream is not just the glitz, the glamour or the lucrative market that supposedly awaits. It’s intended as a blow against other Australian sporting codes trying to move into the US market. The Australian Football League, for instance, has borne the brunt of V’landys’s mockery. “Because they don’t have the right-sized field in Las Vegas, the AFL couldn’t do it,” he states. Like Christopher Columbus, he envisages a viral conquest. “Ironically, if we’re successful, it will open up for all sports in Australia. If we get tens of millions of dollars of new revenues, I don’t care if they also chase it. Good luck to them.”

    In such ventures, the players are not necessarily the best equipped to respond. But respond to this experiment, they did. “That’s what the NRL are trying to right? Bring this game to America,” said that green salad wonder and, it so happens, Manly captain Daly Cherry-Evans. “I was pretty hopeful this was going to be the turnout.”

    Well and good but wait for what follows. “It’s great to see all the Australians here.” Given that that Cherry-Evans took a little trip out of Australia to promote a game for those who are not Australians, the captain seems to come across as nobly thick and hopeful. “They’re obviously promoting it just as much as we as players. If we can spark the interest of the Americans, that’s the job done.” For whom, pray?

    Illusion in Las Vegas has a celestial pull. Its crown glistens, defies time, rejects reality. You go there to lose it, and much else. It produces such gurgling wishful thinking as that of the Brisbane Broncos captain Adam Reynolds: “It’s unbelievable, it’s got a bit of the grand final feel about it with all the build-up.” Hardly, but Reynolds has hit a vein of self-assurance. “There’s a lot of Broncos fans here, you could definitely feel the atmosphere when they mentioned our names. It’s exciting to just get out there and start playing.” Was Reynolds confusing the fanbase with Australians who had made it to the event? Probably.

    Hollywood star Russell Crowe, who is also part owner of the South Sydney Rabbitohs, has been roped in to advertise the game to NFL traditionalists. His message to them, posted as a YouTube video, is a valiant if not overly convincing effort to explain the rules: “rugby league is footfall – but maybe not as you know it”. For one thing, there are “no helmets, no pads”.

    A broader, less noble motivation is also at play here. In Australia, gambling advertising and promotion have been anathematised by politicians and activists, despite the fact that 73% of Australian adults like a punt. Best, then, to consider such options as the US, where the wagering industry is burgeoning.

    Dreams are being entertained about partnering with a dedicated sports wagering provider, which will be able to purchase the broadcast rights for customers wishing to bet on rugby league. The game, argues V’landys, is a perfect fit “because it has so many exotic bets.” But to suggest that US punters will wager on a sport they do not understand over baseball and basketball, which take place during the NRL season, is to wander in the realms of fantasy.

    Australian journalists, eager to take the pulse of American reactions, were on the ground to gauge responses to the first rugby league displays at Allegiant Stadium. The task was complicated by the sheer numbers of Australian fans. One Robert “Bojo” Ackah, a Nevada native, was taken by how “fast” and “hard hitting” the game was. “I feel like these guys are really a bit out of their mind, but at the same time these guys are very athletic and skilled.” An unnamed Las Vegas Raiders fan observed that, “These guys make the NFL look soft.” Sheer music to the ear of any eager Australian sports scribbler.

    On the other hand, a stiff corrective was offered by former Australian cricketer, Colin Miller, who has been a resident of Las Vegas for two decades. Despite the slushy, optimistic courage in Australian press and media outlets claiming a monumental advertising campaign in Nevada and other parts of the US, Miller was left cold. “I have not seen much publicity for the rugby games,” came the dampening remark.

    The US has found, much to its cost and others, that exporting its own political system does not work. The principle applies to certain sports uniquely grown in soils of certain flavour and environments of certain temper. The Australians should have learned that certain codes rarely take root in the stubborn terrain of such countries as the United States. This has also worked in reverse. Markets established are often markets impervious, and tradition will have its powerful say.

    The post A Wishful Gamble: Rugby League in Las Vegas first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • By Alex Bainbridge, Peter Boyle, Isaac Nellist, Jacob Andrewartha, Jordan Ellis, Alex Salmon, Stephen W Enciso and Khaled Ghannam of Green Left

    Thousands marched for Palestine across Australia at the weekend in the wake of Israel’s massacre of more than 100 starving Palestinians who were trying to get flour from an aid truck southwest of Gaza City.

    Israel’s siege on Gaza has stopped Palestinians from accessing food, medical supplies and other crucial aid. A United Nations report found that more than 90 percent of the population, more than 2 million people, are facing starvation and malnutrition.

    This is made worse by the cutting of funding to the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) by Western governments, the main organisation providing aid to Gaza, after Israel alleged that 12 of its 30,000 staff were involved in the October 7 incursion.

    The Labor government has refused to restore funding to UNRWA despite foreign minister Penny Wong conceding she had not seen any evidence to support Israel’s allegations.

    “Our government has suspended funding to UNRWA when instead it should be restoring it and increasing it,” Greens senator Larissa Waters told the Meanjin/Brisbane rally on March 3, reported Alex Bainbridge.

    Waters said that Foreign Minister Penny Wong was right to condemn Israel’s attack on food vans but that she was “not bowled over by the strength of response because Senator Wong has said she’s going to get her department to have a little word to the Israeli ambassador”.

    “That’s all she’s going to do after we saw desperate parents getting slaughtered [while getting] food for their children.”

    ‘Solidarity with Palestinian women’
    The rally had a “Solidarity with Palestinian women” theme in recognition of International Women’s Day on March 8.


    Call on global Jewish community to rise up against Israel’s genocide in Gaza.   Video: Green Left

    Protesters held a minute’s silence in recognition of United States Air Force serviceperson Aaron Bushnell who self-immolated on February 25 in protest against the US government’s participation in genocide.

    Israel has begun its bombardment offensive against Rafah, the small city in southern Gaza where 1.4 million people are sheltering. More than 30,500 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza since October 7.

    A YouGov survey found that more than 80 percent of Australians support an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, showing the Palestine solidarity movement has cut through the establishment media pro-Israel messaging.

    Edie Shepherd, from the Tzedek Collective, an anti-Zionist Jewish group told thousands at the rally in Gadigal/Sydney on March 3 that the global Jewish community must “rise up against the dominant Zionist frameworks that wield hate, power militarism to carry out atrocities against Palestinians”, reported Peter Boyle.

    “The greatest shame is that our survival of genocide has been weaponised to commit genocide against Palestinians now.”

    Nasser Mashni, president of the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network (APAN), told the March 3 rally in Garramilla/Darwin that “Israelis and Zionists want to kill Palestinians”, reported Stephen W Enciso.

    Israel's massacre of starving Palestinians has been dubbed the "flour massacre"
    Israel’s massacre of starving Palestinians has been dubbed the “flour massacre”. Image: Alex Bainbridge/Green Left

    ‘They want decolonisation’
    “Palestinians do not want to kill Israels. Indigenous folk do not want to kill their colonisers. They just want to be acknowledged. They want [a] treaty. They want their rights. They want restitution. They want racism to stop and decolonisation to start,” he said.

    Kulumbirigin Danggalaba Tiwi woman Mililma May drew links between the colonial violence faced by Indigenous people in Australia and Palestine.

    She pointed to the coronial inquest into the killing of Kumanjayi Walker by former constable Zachary Rolfe, in which Rolfe gave evidence about widespread racism in the Northern Territory Police Force.

    “We are witnessing in plain evidence the racism and the deep horror that exists in the NT police, as across the colony,” May said.

    “We live in the same states and under the same violence as Palestine. It just manifests itself in different ways.”

    Kites flying for Gaza
    A kite-flying for Gaza event was organised by Pilbara for Palestine in Karratha, Western Australia on March 3.

    Children made and flew kites decorated with Palestinian flags, watermelons and “Free Palestine” in solidarity with the children on Gaza.

    Organiser Chris Jenkins told Green Left that the action “demonstrated once again that support for Palestine exists from the CBD to the bush”.

    The community also raised money for UNRWA.

    In Muloobinba/Newcastle a “Hands off Rafah” rally and kite-flying event was held on March 2 at Nobby’s Beach, reported Khaled Ghannam.

    Former Greens Senator Lee Rhiannon, who visited Palestine in June last year, said the Israeli occupation impacts on everything Palestinians do.

    “One of the common things that people we interviewed said was, ‘please take our voice to the world’,” she said.

    “We are part of a massive global movement, millions of people are on the move around the world in so many countries, with a similar message to us:

    • Ceasefire now,
    • Restore UNRWA funding, and
    • End the occupation.”

    She said the UN had called on Australia and other countries to stop arming Israel.

    Republished with permission from Green Left.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Armour, while useful in attack, needs ways and means to stop it being taken out by the plethora or weapons in now faces. Asia possesses very capable armoured fighting vehicle (AFV) manufacturers, but various systems can improve their survivability, situational awareness, firepower and mobility on modern battlefields. Asia-Pacific militaries are slowly adopting some elements in […]

    The post Shielding Armour appeared first on Asian Military Review.

    This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.

  • It can take much bruising, much ridicule, and much castigation to eventually reach the plateau of wisdom.  Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, who took office in November 2022, is one such character.  Like a hero anointed by the gods for grand deeds and fine achievements, he was duly attacked and maligned, accused of virtually every heinous crime in the criminal code.  Sodomy and corruption featured.  Two prison spells were endured.

    His whole fall from grace as deputy-prime minister was all the more revealing for being instigated by his politically insatiable mentor, Mahathir bin Mohammed, Southeast Asia’s wiliest, and most ruthless politician.  Eventually, that old, vengeful fox had to relent: his former protégé would have his day.

    Anwar is in no mood to take sides on spats between the grumbly titans who seek their place in posterity’s sun.  And why should a country like Malaysia do so?  During last year’s visit to Beijing and the Boao Forum in Hainan, he secured a commitment from Chinese President Xi Jinping on foreign investment amounting to RM170.1 billion ($US35.6 billion) spanning 19 memoranda of understanding (MOU).  Greater participation in Malaysia’s 5G network plan by Chinese telecommunications behemoth Huawei was assured some weeks later.

    In the Financial Times, the Malaysian PM levelled the charge against the United States that Sinophobia had become a problem, a fogging fixation.  Why should Malaysia, he asked, “pick a quarrel” with China, a country that had become its foremost trading partner?  “Why must I be tied to one interest?  I don’t buy into this strong prejudice against China, this China-phobia.”

    Much of this middle-of-the-road daring was prompted by comments made by US Vice President Kamala Harris, who has been saddled with the task of padding out ties between Washington and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).  Rather than being diplomatic, the Veep has been irritatingly teacherly.

    Last September, during her visit to the US-ASEAN summit in Jakarta, Harris beat the drum on the issue of promoting “a region that is open, interconnected, prosperous, secure, and resilient.”  Such openness was always going to be subordinate to Washington’s own interests.  “We have a shared commitment to international rules and norms and our partnership on pressing national and regional issues”.  An international campaign against “irresponsible behaviour in the disputed waters” would be commenced.

    During her trip to the Philippines last November, Harris made the focus of concern clear to countries in the region.  “We must stand up for principles such as respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, unimpeded lawful commerce, the peaceful resolution of disputes, and the freedom of navigation and overflight in the South China Sea, and throughout the Indo-Pacific.”

    The subtext for those listening was so obvious as to be scripted in bold font: Our values first; China’s a necessarily distant second.  This coarse directness did not fall on deaf ears, and Anwar was particularly attentive.  He had already found the views voiced by Harris at Jakarta about Malaysia’s leanings towards Beijing as “not right and grossly unfair”.

    In remarks made during a joint press conference with Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese held at the current ASEAN summit, being hosted in Melbourne, Anwar expressed much irritation in being badgered by the United States and its allies on the subject of taking sides.  The virus of Sinophobia had been doing the rounds, causing sniffles and rumbles.  “[M]y reference to China-phobia is because the criticism levied against us for giving additional focus on China; my response is, trade investments is open and right now, China seems to be the leading investor and trade into Malaysia,” Anwar observed.  Malaysians, for the most part, “do not have a problem with China.”

    Labouring, even flogging the “fiercely independent” standing of Malaysia, Anwar went on to state that his country remained “an important friend of the United States and Europe and here in Australia, they should not preclude us from being friendly to one of our important neighbours, precisely China.”

    Nothing typifies this better than Malaysia’s policy towards the supply and manufacturing of semiconductors.  The emergence of a China Plus One Strategy, notably in the electronic supply chain, has seen companies diversify their risk through investing in alternative markets to mitigate risks.  Keep China on side but do so securely.  Anwar has established a task force dedicated to the subject, while also courting such entities as US chipmaker Micron Technology.  Last October, the company promised an investment of US$1 billion to expand its Penang operations, in addition to the previous allocation of $US1 billion to construct and fully equip its new facility.  In business, such promiscuity should be lauded.

    Anwar’s concerns were solid statements of calculated principle, and inconceivable coming out of the mouth of an Australian politician.  Albanese, for his part, has tried to walk the middle road when it comes to security in the Indo-Pacific, even as China remains Australia’s largest trading partner.  He does so in wolf’s clothing supplied by Washington, with various garish labels such as “AUKUS” and “nuclear-powered submarines”.  For decades, Australia’s association with ASEAN has been ventriloquised, the voice emanating from the White House, Pentagon or US State Department.

    Canberra’s middle road remains cluttered by one big power, replete with US road signs and tolls, accompanied by hearty welcomes from the US military industrial complex and its determination to turn Australia into a forward defensive position, a garrison playing war’s waiting game.  To his credit, Anwar has avoided the trap, exposing the inauthentic position of his Australian hosts with skill and undeniable charm.

    The post Wary of Sinophobia: Anwar Ibrahim at the ASEAN Summit first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Canberra will invest $64 million Australian dollars (US$41.8 million) over the next four years, including A$40 million in new funding, to expand maritime cooperation with Southeast Asia, Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong said on Monday.

    Wong made the pledge at a forum on the sidelines of the ASEAN-Australia Special Summit 2024 in Melbourne, which will celebrate 50 years of partnership between Australia and the regional bloc.

    The summit is being held against a backdrop of increasingly assertive posturing by China in the South China Sea and the intensifying civil war in Myanmar, both of which are likely to be high on the agenda.

    Wong said the new funds for maritime cooperation would contribute to security and prosperity within the region.

    “What happens in the South China Sea, in the Taiwan Strait, in the Mekong subregion, across the Indo-Pacific, affects us all,” she said in her keynote address Monday.

    She said the “region’s character” was under challenge and that no country must dominate.

    “We face destabilizing, provocative and coercive actions, including unsafe conduct at sea and in the air and militarisation of disputed features,” Wong said, without singling out a specific nation.

    China asserts sovereignty over almost all of the South China Sea, through which trillions of dollars in trade passes each year, putting it at odds with the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei, Vietnam, and Taiwan. 

    In 2016, an international tribunal refuted the legal basis for nearly all of China’s expansive maritime and territorial claims in the waterway. It said that Beijing’s insistence on holding “historic rights” to the waters were inconsistent with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, or UNCLOS.

    Beijing has never recognized the 2016 arbitration or its outcome.

    Speaking at the same forum, Philippines Secretary of Foreign Affairs Enrique Manalo said the rule of law and especially UNCLOS was the fundamental starting point for maritime cooperation in the region.

    “The shared stewardship of the seas and oceans in the region behooves us to unite in preserving the primacy of international law so we can ensure equitable and sustainable outcomes for all,” he said.

    “It also calls for us to stand firmly together in opposing actions that contradict or are inconsistent with international law.”

    The Philippines under the presidency of Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has taken a stronger stance in dealing with Beijing on the South China Sea.

    Marcos has also pursued warmer ties with the United States, a traditional ally, reversing the policies of his predecessor Rodrigo Duterte.

    In recent months, tensions between Manila and Beijing have led to numerous run-ins, including the China Coast Guard’s alleged harassment of Filipino vessels delivering provisions to troops at its military outpost on Ayungin (Second Thomas) Shoal in the South China Sea.

    BenarNews is an RFA-affiliated online news organization.


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Harry Pearl for BenarNews.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Deeds of substance, rather than words of forced concern, will always take precedence in the chronicles of history.  Superficially, the Australian government has been edging more closely towards expressing concern with aspects of Israel’s relentless war in the Gaza Strip.  While claiming to be targeted, specific and directed against Hamas and other Islamic militants, the war by Israel’s defence forces has left a staggering train of death.  Since Hamas attacked Israel last October, the death toll of Palestinians has now passed 30,000.  Famine, malnutrition, and appalling sanitary conditions are rife.

    Initially staying close to Washington’s line that an immediate humanitarian ceasefire would only embolden Hamas to regroup (Australia abstained in its October 2023 vote on the subject), wobbles began being felt in Canberra.  The slaughter had been so immense, the suffering unsettling to those thousands of miles away.  In December 2023, Australia changed its tune – in a fashion – eventually voting in the UN for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire proposed by the “Arab Group”, a decision greeted with rage and opprobrium by the opposition.

    In February, Guardian Australia obtained documents revealing advice given to Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong by officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.  The advice is hardly filled with the stuff of courage and grit: “Given the improvements in the text and shifting positions of some like-mindeds [sic], we think it would be open to us to vote Yes this time” came one meek observation.  Australia would be in “good company” in doing so.  “Overall, we assess the number of Yes votes will go up (from 120 on the last resolution)”.

    A vote for the resolution was not to be given without the thick varnish of qualification.  An explanation of vote (EOV) would have to accompany Australia’s position, being “very firm in articulating the deficiencies in the text”.  As another email states, “What remains problematic is that the resolution does not reference the 7 October attacks nor condemn (or even mention) Hamas, which perpetuates a trend of erasing Hamas from the record in UN decisions on the crisis.”  The EOV would have to be “firm about our concern that Hamas’s actions weren’t recognised and condemned in the resolution.”

    This approach of nodding in one direction while waving a hand in the other has come to typify the slim, unimaginative armoury of Australian diplomacy.  When it comes to the substance of policy towards Israel, the military industrial complex, not dead Palestinians, tends to have the final say.

    That final say in Australia has been formidable, in contrast to the decisions made by other countries to alter or adjust their arrangements with Israel.  In some cases, ties and relations have been severed, with embassy staff being recalled.  Having been put on notice by the International Court of Justice that its military actions in Gaza were not exempt from the operation of the UN Genocide Convention, Israel’s clients are also becoming more cautious in their dealings, knowing that complicity, aiding and abetting also fall foul of the Convention.

    Last month, the aviation unit of Japan’s Itochu Corp announced that it was ending its strategic cooperation with Israel’s defence company, Elbit Systems Ltd which had begun with the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) in March 2023.  The company’s Chief Financial Officer, Tsuyoshi Hachimura, was clear about the role played by the World Court in reaching the decision.  “Taking into consideration the International Court of Justice’s order on January 26, and that the Japanese government supports the role of the Court, we have already suspended new activities related to the MOU, and plan to end the MOU by the end of February.”

    Elbit Systems had little reason to be too disappointed.  Despite having its technology (the BMS Command and Control system) removed from Australian Army equipment three years ago for reasons of data security, the company now boasts a spanking new defence contract with the Australian government.  The contract is the largest made by the company since the Gaza conflict commenced with the October 7 attacks by Hamas.  On February 26, the company announced the award of a five-year “contract worth approximately (US)$600 million to supply systems to Hanwha Defense Australia for the Australian Land 400 Phase 3 Project.”  In less jargon-heavy terms, the project will “deliver advanced protection, fighting capabilities and sensors suite to the Redback Infantry Fighting Vehicles (IFV) for the Australian Army.”

    Hanwha Defense Australia’s parent company is located in South Korea, but the manufacture of the IVFs, which will number in the order of 129 vehicles, will take place in Australia.  “The acquisition of these infantry fighting vehicles is part of the Government’s drive to modernise the Australian Army to ensure it can respond to the most demanding land challenges in our region,” said the Australian Ministry of Defence in December.  Elbit Systems promises that most of the work regarding its advanced turret systems will be done in Australia.

    The Australian footprint of Elbit Systems, along with that of other Israeli defence companies, is only growing.  Despite having a gruesome, pioneering record of using lethal drone technology against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip well before the current Israel-Hamas war, Elbit Systems has been courted by Australian defence officials and contractors keen to see the brighter side of such applications.

    The state of Victoria figures prominently in such arrangements, and maintains its memorandum of understanding with the Israeli Defence Ministry, one intended to be a “a formal framework that paves the way for continuing cooperation between the parties.”  Attitudes regarding the MoU post-October 7 have not waned in the state’s Labor government, despite pressure from various opposition parties to abandon it.

    Victoria also hosts Elbit Systems of Australia (ELSA)’s Centre for Excellence in Human-Machine Teaming and Artificial Intelligence in Port Melbourne, an initiative “developed in partnership with the Victorian Government.”  As ELSA puts it, “we develop new technologies, solutions and innovative products adapted for Australian conditions, and apply them across defence, homeland security and emergency services.”

    Forget Wong’s wobbliness, the persuasive pull of the Genocide Convention, and Canberra’s concerns about the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza.  Cash, contracts and jobs drawn from the military industrial complex continue to sneak through the guards.

    The post Triumphant Down Under: Elbit Systems and the Australian Military first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Government and technology solutions KBR announced on 27 February that it has been selected to provide sustainment services to equip the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) with a modernised Fleet Information Environment under Project SEA 2273. KBR said it will provide a 12-month sustainment to Project MINERVA, supported by Australian based companies oobe and Bluerydge. According […]

    The post KBR wins RAN information technology upgrade contract appeared first on Asian Military Review.

    This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.

  • Australia’s space treaty with the United States will prevent the federal government from using revenue collected from US launches to fund the development of local rocket technology, leading to warnings it has ceded sovereignty on industry development in the space sector. The Technology Safeguards Agreement (TSA), made public for the first time on Tuesday, also…

    The post Warning space treaty cedes Australian sovereignty appeared first on InnovationAus.com.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.com.

  • Tuvalu has reaffirmed its recognition of Taiwan following an election last month that had triggered speculation the Pacific island country could sever ties and recognize Beijing.

    After choosing a prime minister earlier this week, Tuvalu’s new government on Wednesday released a statement of its domestic and international priorities. While reaffirming ties with Taiwan, the coral atoll nation of some 10,000 people also signaled it wants more benefits from the relationship.

    “The new government wishes to reaffirm its commitment to the long-term and lasting special relationship between Tuvalu and the Republic of China, Taiwan,” the statement said.

    “It intends to reassess options that would strengthen and lift it to a more durable, lasting and mutually beneficial relationship.”

    Seve Paeniu, the finance minister in the previous government who reportedly argued for reviewing ties with Taiwan, is not part of Tuvalu’s new nine-man Cabinet.

    Tuvalu is one of the dwindling number of nations that have diplomatic relations with Taiwan instead of Beijing. Last month, another Pacific island nation, Nauru, severed ties with Taiwan, reducing its diplomatic allies to 12 countries. Among Pacific island nations, Palau and the Marshall Islands also recognize Taiwan.

    China’s government has courted Pacific island nations for the past two decades as it seeks to isolate Taiwan diplomatically, gain allies in international institutions and challenge U.S. dominance. Beijing regards Taiwan, a democracy and globally important tech manufacturing center, as a renegade province that must be reunited with the mainland.

    AP24057084839947.jpg
    Funafuti, the main island of the nation state of Tuvalu, is shown in this file photo taken on Oct. 13, 2011, from a Royal New Zealand Air Force C130 aircraft as it approaches the tiny South Pacific nation. (AP Photo/Alastair Grant)

    The new Tuvalu government’s statement of priorities underlined the numerous challenges facing the farflung archipelago nation, particularly on its most populated atoll Funafuti.

    It listed 19 challenges that included higher sea levels, lack of protection against king tides that swamp atolls, insufficient medical services, chronic problems of waste disposal on Funafuti – which is only a few square kilometers in area – lack of affordable flights, lack of reliable shipping and a high cost of living.

    The statement also said that the new government broadly supports a contentious security pact with Australia that was signed last year, but would seek to amend parts of it.

    The treaty between Tuvalu and Australia, called the Falepili Union, requires Tuvalu to have Australia’s agreement for “any partnership, arrangement or engagement with any other state or entity on security and defence-related matters.” Its expansive scope and lack of consultation was criticized during the election campaign.

    The Tuvalu government statement said it recognizes the absence of transparency and consultations in informing Tuvaluans about the treaty, which comes with a long-term commitment to resettle some Tuvaluans in Australia.

    It said it would address those concerns and work with the Australian government for an arrangement that safeguards Tuvalu’s sovereignty.

    BenarNews is an RFA-affiliated online news organization.


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Stephen Wright for BenarNews.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • If only we could say that Peter Dutton, Australia’s federal opposition leader and curator of bigoted leanings, was unusual in assuming that granting humanitarian visas to Palestinians might be problematic.  But both he, and his skew-eyed spokesman on home affairs, James Patterson, have concluded that votes are in the offing.  Refugees may be accepted from the Ukrainian-Russian War, as long as they are Ukrainian, but anything so much as a whiff of a Palestinian fleeing the Israel-Hamas conflict is bound to be concerning.  Ukrainians are noble victims; the latter might be terrorist sympathisers or Hamas militants.

    This view started being floated in November last year, when Dutton began warning the public that visitor visas for Palestinians could result in a calamity.  (At that point, 860 visas had been issued to Palestinians.)  “The inadequacy of these checks could result in a catastrophic outcome in our country,” he foamed.  “Taking people out of a war zone without conducting the checks, particularly those that are available to us in the US, is reckless.”

    No concern was voiced about the possibility that Israelis, who had also been offered 1,793 visas, might pose a problem to the heavenly idyll of Australian security.  It is also worth mentioning that Dutton, when home affairs minister, approved over 500 visas a week to Syrians fleeing the civil war.  Ditto the granting of 5,000 visas to Afghans the month the Taliban resumed control of Kabul in the aftermath of retreating Western armies.

    Dutton’s arithmetic is that of the typical copper: simple, direct, amateurish.  Among the Palestinians, “one person, or could be 10 people, I don’t know” might be of concern.  His concerns are feverishly listed: “Have interviews been conducted, do we know people’s ideologies, do we know their interest in the west, why they want to come to Australia.”  This template would be applicable to every group of visitors or migrants seeking to come to Australia at any one point.  No one is likely to say on their visa application: “I come to see your new country and hope to commit atrocities.”

    Given the number of conflict zones on Planet Earth, Dutton was offering an obtuse statement calculated to boost flagging popularity.  It was also timed within a matter of hours after the declaration of a four-day ceasefire in Gaza.  While proving, at times, sketchy in her role as Home Affairs Minister, Clare O’Neil was close to the mark in stating that, “Dutton is a reckless politician who will do and say anything to score political points – even if it puts the national security of Australians at risk.”

    But Dutton did not want to be dismissed as a paranoid former police officer who sees criminals everywhere and innocence as a constipated afterthought.  “The prime minister here needs to hit the pause button – I’m not saying people shouldn’t come at some point – but people should come when all the checks are conducted.”

    Again, a strange sentiment, given that visa applicants tend to face a series of tests that are more demanding than most when seeking to visit the Down Under Paradise where perfection is assumed.  “If a visa applicant is assessed as posing a risk to the health, safety or good order of the Australian community, their visa may be considered for refusal,” were the dull words of a government spokesperson.

    With the arrival of irregular migrants on the shores of Western Australia this month, cockeyed bigotry again assumed its role on the podium of Australian politics.  Seeking to tie the arrivals as connected with shoddy security credentials, the opposition fanned out the implications of granting up to 2,000 visas for Palestinians, a fact seen as particularly galling to the shadow home affairs minister.  “In the middle of an unprecedented antisemitism crisis, the government should be taking much greater care in granting visas to people from a war zone run by a terrorist organisation,” bleated Patterson.  “How can they possibly assure themselves there is not one Hamas supporter among them?  And how will it help social cohesion if they manage to slip through?”

    By this logic, no one should ever leave a war zone, an area of devastation, a territory blighted by terror.  You just might be a regime supporter, a sympathiser, despite suffering possible harm, even death.  But there is an inadvertent slant coming through in Patterson’s mangled world view: Palestinians, having been maimed, murdered and traumatised, might wish to take out their grievance on a foreign power, possibly one sympathetic to Israel.  Ignore the survival imperative, the desire to find, rather than abandon, security; focus, instead, on the motivation for vengeance. Even this view suffers for one obvious point: those wishing to avenge their families and friends are bound to wish to stay in Gaza and the West Bank, rather than flee and plot from afar.

    With the current arrivals from Gaza – some 340 or so have managed to drip themselves from the Palestinian territories – the bedwetting fantasies of terror being induced by the opposition seem absurd and callous.  But absurdity is a proven calculus for electoral success – at least sometimes.

    The post A Copper’s Skewed Logic: Politicising Palestinian Visas first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Gaza. Palestinians.  Israel.  Genocide.  Taylor Swift?  This odd cobbling of words is the extent celebrities make a mockery of serious conversation, even in such middle-brow outlets as Australia’s Radio National.  Admittedly, it was breakfast, and the presenter a seasoned impressionist of journalism, but surely listeners did not have to know that Swift’s private jet had just arrived in Melbourne, making it an occasion of national significance?

    Ground had already been tilled, and seeds scattered, by desperate academics keen to draw gold dust from the Swift worship machine at Melbourne’s Swiftposium 2024.  Seriousness was not the order of the day and papers such as “Taylor Swift and the Nuremberg Effect on Teenage Girls” were never going to feature on any panels.  Instead, it was an event to give academic circuitry – and sophistry – its deservedly bad name.  “We thought we’d be having a small conference with 50 researchers in two rooms in our Faculty,” remarked Eloise Faichney, chair of the Swiftposium Steering Committee.  “Then, when we ended up in publications like Rolling Stone and The Guardian, demand from the academic community to take part was like nothing I’ve ever seen before for an academic conference.”  Faichney evidently knows little about the bandwagon effect of the academic scavenger, always engaged in a futile quest to find false novelty among the same bones of an argument.

    And they were not the only ones.  Members of the fourth estate, and many offshoots of that once revered profession, have fallen for the Swiftian rhetoric, be it in terms of the harmony effect or economic stimulus.  Forget monetary or fiscal policy; get Swift to do a tour and she will add tens of millions of dollars to the country’s cash registers.  Take, for instance, the following, near shameful selection of predicted returns, which the Australian historian, Humphrey McQueen, valuably gathers for us: the Australian Financial Review, A$140 million; the Daily Telegraph, A$130 million to New South Wales; the Herald-Sun, a staggering, fanciful A$1.2 billion for the state of Victoria alone.

    A less noted fact is that the Swift phenomenon is costly, inflationary and exploitative.  As The Daily Telegraph reported in January, airlines such as Virgin, Qantas and Jetstar were all cashing in on spiked prices, hoping to squeeze every little bit of cash from passengers, Swifties or otherwise.  A one-way flight from Brisbane to Sydney with Jetstar would cost anywhere between A$399 to A$460 on the planned Sydney tour date on February 23, as compared to A$92 to A$123 the week prior.  Hotels were hardly going to miss out either on the lucrative bonanza: the Marriott Sydney Harbour’s prices, for instance, rising from the pre-Swift level of $A589 to an unforgivable $A1039.

    All of this served as the teaser for Swift’s mid-February arrival.  Bulletins, even of such self-professed, serious news hounds as those at the twenty-four-hour ABC network, would furnish updates on the songstress’s movements.  Every banal detail became significant, the fans worthy of top billing as interviewees.

    Political maturity and cultivated disinterestedness also went out the window, expelled with glee.  Here was a chance to get close to the phenomenon and cultivate voters – current and future – and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was not going to miss out.  In an interview with Hit WA FM, he professed his delight and anticipation in attending one of Swift’s shows.  “I am going to Tay Tay,” he sighed.  In cringingly shallow fashion and for pure effect, he even suggested that opposition leader Peter Dutton might have a preference for the Canadian rock band Nickelback, a truly wicked contrast.  “Or, the angry death metal stuff.”

    Newspapers such as The Guardian Australia even urged the PM to get with the Swift program, as her “ubiquity in a fragmented world might carry some broader lessons for a man with a  more modest megaphone at his disposal.” She offers, for instance, lessons in collaboration.  She had “used her fame to build a network of grassroots support that has its own power, energy and agency.”  And, in case you were not listening, Mr Albanese, she offered a “sense of shared joy” instead of privileging conflict.

    On the other side of this gushing sludge, the Swift phenomenon manifests as a brooding presence for reactionaries worried that her influence is clandestine and planned by a politburo central committee.  Or, perhaps, the Pentagon.  Steady yourself, warn the likes of Jesse Watters of Fox: he has evidence that “the Pentagon psychological-operations unit floated turning Taylor Swift into an asset.”  In some GOP circles, the singer is a deeply embedded psyop with collusion from the NFL.  The lunacy comes full circle and Swift is very happy to tease it, telling The Washington Post in 2022 that she, and her legion of fans, have “descended into color coding, numerology, word searches, elaborate hints, and Easter eggs.”  Threatening stuff.

    This Styrofoam performer, this master of magisterial vacuity, who is all machine, promotion and blare, has perfected the insubstantial, promoted a competent formula and boosted it.  In some ways, she has the hallmarks of Tony Blair and the New Labour experiment: start solidly, proclaim a genre, an ideology – then subvert it, discarding most of it on the way.  Sincerity evaporates in the heat of its confection.  Her success lies in her ability – and that of the Swift dissemination army – to mobilise the image of Swift.  Everything else is just costumery, flying private jets, victimising people who monitor her flight paths, and being given stock market advice by Daddy.

    The post Swiftie Nonsense Down Under first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • The imaginative faculties of standard Australian politicians retreat to some strange, deathly place on certain issues.  In that wasteland, they are often unrecoverable.  Like juveniles demanding instant reward, these representatives find complexity hideous, troubling, discomforting.  Focus on the prospect of immediate electoral gain, the crude punch, the bruising, the hurt. That, in sum, is Canberra’s policy towards refugees.

    With this month’s appearance of 39 asylum seekers on some of the most remote shorelines on the planet in Western Australia, the customary wells of hysteria were again being tapped for political gain.  “Here we go again,” lamented the Tasmanian Greens Senator Nick McKim.  “A boat arrives with desperate refugees who need our help and we’re suddenly in a ‘political crisis’ because the media said so”.

    One desperate politician was opposition leader Peter Dutton, who wondered how these dangerous subversives could have ever arrived undetected in the first place.   “The government has all sorts of problems,” he crowed.  “It’s clear that they don’t have the same surveillance in place that we had when we were in government.”

    Dutton found it “inconceivable a boat of this size, carrying 40-plus people, could make it to the mainland without there being any detection.”  The insinuation is hard to ignore: the Labor government permitted the arrival to take place.

    The 2022-3 Australia Border Force annual report had noted a reduction of “maritime patrol days” by 6% and aerial patrols by 14%, the result of vessel maintenance, personnel shortages and logistical difficulties when operating in remote parts off the coast.  Overall budgetary costs for the ABF have also been adjusted to account for the fact that the 2022-3 budget was, as Home Affairs department chief finance officer Stephanie Cargill explained in May year, “overspent”.

    The ABF chief, Michael Outram, has even gone so far as to reproach Dutton for his assessment about funding cuts, which deceptively, even mendaciously suggest belt tightening on the part of the Albanese government.  “Border Force funding is currently the highest it’s been since its establishment in 2015 and in the last year, the ABF has received additional funding totalling hundreds of millions of dollars, to support maritime and land based operations.”

    All in all, there has hardly been a softening of the brutal policy that presumptively and prematurely judges undocumented naval arrivals as unworthy.  As the ABF statement on the arrivals notes with customary severity, “Australia’s tough border protection policies means that no one who travels unauthorised by boat will ever be allowed to settle permanently in Australia.  The only way to travel to Australia is legally, with an Australian visa.”

    The dubious rationale for maintaining the policy, formally known as Operation Sovereign Borders, is still very much in place.  “Austraia,” the ABF continues to explain, “remains committed to protecting its borders, stamping out people smuggling and preventing vulnerable people from risking their lives on futile journeys.  The people smuggling business model is built on the exploitation of information and selling lies to vulnerable people who will give up everything to risk their lives at sea.”

    Rear Admiral Brett Sonter, who leads Operation Sovereign Borders, had also stated that nothing has changed.  “The mission of Operation Sovereign Borders remains the same today as it was when it was established in 2013: protect Australia’s borders, combat people smuggling in our region, and importantly, prevent people from risking their lives at sea.”  To suggest otherwise would create an “alternative narrative” susceptible to exploitation “by criminal people smugglers to deceive potential irregular immigrants and convince them to risk their lives and travel to Australia by boat.”

    This became a point of contention for Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who decided to give Dutton a parliamentary scalding by suggesting that his opponents were “just full of nonsense, and they should stop being a cheer squad for people, encouraging people smuggling.”

    Such “business models”, as they are derisively and demagogically called, are the natural consequence of a yearning to flee.  It is a yearning that is being globally punished, notably by wealthier states less than keen to accept asylum seekers.  Canberra’s savage approach to the problem – non-settlement in Australia of those eventually found to be refugees and detaining individuals in concentration camps in the Pacific – has become the envy of border protection fetishists.  The British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, for instance, dreams of an Australia-styled solution that will involve “turning the boats back” and deporting asylum seekers to Rwanda.  Unfortunately for him, and most fortunately for humanitarians, an army of lawyers and judges have frustrated his vision.

    The border fetishists also make a crucial omission.  The people smugglers, who are of all stripes of opportunism and exploitation rather than some monolithic bloc, are merely facilitating the provisions of the United Nations Refugee Convention.  All who arrive should not be discriminated against on the basis of how they arrive or their backgrounds – the articles of the Convention state as much – yet Australia’s border policy remains persistently cruel and defiant.  Whenever a boat appears with a small cargo full of desperate individuals who make it to land, the fantasies of invasion, unwarranted intrusion and unwanted infiltration catch alight.  It was high time they were snuffed out.

    The post Border Paranoia in Fortress Australia first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Wedgetail Aerospace, supported by Schiebel Pacific, successfully obtained the approval from the Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) to operate the Schiebel CAMCOPTER® S-100 Unmanned Air System (UAS) in civil airspace. It is the first large (>150 kg) Vertical Takeoff and Landing (VTOL) UAS to attain this civil approval from the Australian authorities. Wedgetail Aerospace, […]

    The post Schiebel Camcopter® S-100 Receives Operational Approval From Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) appeared first on Asian Military Review.

    This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.

  • Pacific Media Watch

    The Journalism Education and Research Association of Australia (JERAA) has joined media freedom groups supporting Julian Assange, an Australian citizen whose unjust prosecution continues to undermine press freedoms and human rights.

    In light of recent developments and mounting concerns over Assange’s deteriorating health, JERAA said in a statement it had urged the United States to drop all charges against Assange and facilitate his immediate return to Australia.

    Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, has been the subject of relentless persecution by the US government for his efforts to expose war crimes and government misconduct.

    Assange received a Walkley Award in 2011 for outstanding contribution to journalism through Wikileaks, which included the release of the 2010 “collateral murder” video and the publication of classified US diplomatic cables, shedding light on atrocities committed by the US in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    “It is concerning that Assange faces up to 175 years in jail if found guilty of espionage charges — a sentence that would effectively silence whistle-blowers and journalists worldwide,” JERAA said.

    The association said it believed that Assange’s indictment set a dangerous precedent and posed a grave threat to the fundamental principles of press freedom and freedom of expression.

    ‘Enough is enough’
    JERAA commended Prime Minister Anthony Albanese for his support in calling for Assange’s release and said it echoed his sentiment that “enough is enough.”

    PM Albanese’s recent vote in the federal Parliament for a motion demanding Assange’s return to Australia underscores the legitimacy of our demand. The motion, which received overwhelming support, leaves no room for ambiguity — it is time to bring Assange home.


    The WikiLeaks 2010 “collateral damage” video.         Video: Al Jazeera

    As the UK High Court prepares to rule on Assange’s appeal against extradition in a two-day hearing next week (February 20-21), and with Prime Minister Albanese’s continued efforts to advocate for Assange’s release, JERAA has urged the US to heed the calls for justice and drop all charges against Assange.

    It is imperative that Assange’s rights as an Australian citizen be respected, and that he be afforded the opportunity to return home.

    JERAA president Associate Professor Alexandra Wake said that while some members might not agree with all Assange has done in his life, it was clear that his work was central to our “understanding of press freedoms and human rights”.

    “JERAA upholds the principles of a free and independent press. It is time to end the trial of global media freedom,” she said.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • COMMENTARY: By Martyn Bradbury, editor of The Daily Blog

    Winston Peters says Israel’s actions getting ‘out of hand’ ahead of planned Rafah offensive

    Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has joined with the leaders of Australia and Canada to express grave concern about Israel’s planned ground offensive into the southern Gazan city of Rafah.  

    It’s the strongest statement from New Zealand yet as the number of people killed in the conflict continues to climb. 

    The 'myth of Western humanity and democracy'
    The ‘myth of Western humanity and democracy’. Image: TDB

    New Zealand, Canada and Australia’s weak tantrum against Israel’s ethnic cleansing war crime is simply too little too late.

    Israel’s attacks on Gaza have killed at least 28,663 Palestinians and wounded 68,395 since October 7.

    The death toll in Israel from the October 7 Hamas-led attacks stands at 1,139.

    The disproportionate violence here is beyond appeals from “friends”.

    Pictured is Winston gland handling the Israeli Ambassador earlier this week.

    NZ Minister of Foreign Affairs Winston Peters (right)
    NZ Minister of Foreign Affairs Winston Peters (right) meets with Israel’s Ambassador to New Zealand Ran Yaakoby on Monday . . . the war on Gaza conflict was among key subjects discussed. Image: MFAT via X(Twitter)

    Petty protest belittles NZ mana
    New Zealand’s petty attempts to protest Israel’s ethnic cleansing war crime has belittled our mana and our moral high ground.

    We are refusing to do what is required to against this appalling level of violence, and because we are cowards, this coalition government shames us all.

    According to Newshub: “Rafah, usually a city of 250,000, now has an estimated 1.5 million Palestinians sheltering there, but Israel is planning a ground offensive.

    “So they must flee — back to bombed out buildings — with ruins now perhaps safer.”

    The quoted joint statement by New Zealand, Canada and Australia said:

    “A military operation into Rafah would be ‘catastrophic’ and ‘devastating’.

    “We urge the Israeli government not to go down this path. There is simply nowhere else for civilians to go.

    “There is growing international consensus. Israel must listen to its friends and it must listen to the international community.”

    “Palestinian civilians cannot be made to pay the price of defeating Hamas.”

    Republished from The Daily Blog with permission.


    This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • There are few surprises regarding the final episode of Nemesis, the three-part account on how the Australian Liberal Party, in partnership with the dozy Nationals, psychotically and convulsively disembowelled themselves from the time Tony Abbott won office in 2013.  Over the muddy gore and violence concluding the tenures of Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull, one plotter rose, knife bloodied and brimming with confidence: Scott Morrison.  As always, he claims to have done so without a trace.  That, dear readers, is the way of all advertising men.

    The inconspicuous rise of Morrison heralded a bankrupt political culture, one of smeary gloss, smug grabs on complex issues, the insufferable slogan, the intelligence shaving brochure, the simplifying statement about worlds complex and abstract.  No political environment can, nor should ever eschew the simple message, but Morrisons’s minute, unimaginative cosmos – that of the advertising man with his swill bucket sloshing away – had little to merit it.

    With such a stunted Weltanschauung, Morrison’s misdeeds proved vast in spread and stench, the result of what former cabinet minister and creep-in-chief Christopher Pyne understatedly called a “lack of humility”.  The makers of Nemesis could only dip their feet in the waters of his blighted stewardship.  It would have taken several immersions alone to cover the despoiling of public life marked by stacking the Fair Work Commission and Administrative Appeals Tribunal with appointments friendly to the Coalition or the so-called “rorts” affairs, of which there were many cloacal instances of corruption.

    While the library of Australian politics is shelf-heavy with misused funds to advance the fortunes of the party in government, the Morrison government proved exemplary.  In the lead-up to the 2019 election, Nationals Senator Bridget McKenzie’s office was the happy recipient of $100 million worth of community sport infrastructure grants.  Their destination was exclusively towards marginal seats, best typified by the mock presentation by Georgina Downer to the South Australian Yankalilla bowling club of a $127,373 grant.  The novelty cheque from the Liberal candidate for Mayo was scorned by sitting member and independent Rebekha Sharkie at the time as unrivalled in its crassness and desperation.

    Much the same story was repeated in the so-called “car parks rorts” affair, which saw hundreds of millions of dollars directed towards 47 car parks, largely located in the top 20 marginal seats selected by staffers working for the then infrastructure minister, Alan Tudge.  The decision making by the staffers left the Department of Infrastructure a mere spectator to policy.

    By 2022, Morrison’s crooked form on the issue of grants was complete and immortal.  The Australian National Audit Office, when examining the Building Better Regions Fund (BBRF), found that “65 per cent of IP [infrastructure project] stream applications approved for funding were not those assessed as being the most meritorious in the assessment process.”

    Other matters covered in the series finale continue to look baffling and uncomfortable. Authoritarian paranoia made its ugly appearance in Morrison’s decision to appoint himself, unbeknownst to his fellow ministers, to the departments of health, finance, treasury, home affairs and resources during the COVID-19 crisis.  Despite the ravages of the pandemic and the risks of debility to his cabinet, there was no reason for doing so.

    Excruciating clumsiness stood out with his handling of sexual assault allegations made by Liberal staffer Brittany Higgins (“Jenny [Morrison’s wife] and I spoke last night and she said to me, you have to think about this as a father”) while his abominable treatment of Christine Holgate, which resulted in the removal of Australia Post’s most successful CEO for approving Cartier watches for select staff, suggested what came to known as the government’s “woman problem”.  The Nationals leader, David Littleproud, could only draw the obvious conclusion: “[W]omen had lost faith in us because we didn’t handle those situations well.  That was the real beginning, where Australians stopped listening, but particularly women stopped listening.”

    Gross indifference over his clandestine family trip to Hawaii as Australia scorched and smouldered before furious bush fires, one which he hoped the then-Nationals leader Michael McCormack could keep mum about, suggested Morrison’s lack of maturity.  “It looked as if there had been lies told to the [press] gallery,” Liberal Senator Andrew Bragg admitted.  Liberal MP Russell Broadbent preferred to be “gobsmacked” about the whole affair.

    On the issue of the AUKUS security pact between the US, UK and Australia, Morrison nails his colours firmly to the mast as a dangerously deluded pioneer.  It was he, and only he, that suggested the submarine agreement with France’s Naval Group for twelve diesel-powered attack submarines be scratched in favour of a nuclear-propulsion option.

    Given the incurably mendacious nature of the man, claims to having a monopoly on AUKUS must be regarded with caution.  For one thing, it has since come to light that the Australian businessman Anthony Pratt already had former US President Donald Trump’s ear on the subject of nuclear-powered submarines when they met at the Mar-a-Lago club in April 2021. Pratt then allegedly shared the details of the discussion with three former Australian prime ministers, 10 Australian officials, 11 of Pratt’s employees and six journalists.  The announcement of AUKUS only took place on September 15, 2021, suggesting a filtering of ideas through the Australian-US security apparatus.  Trump may have left office by then, but the lingering interests of the US military industrial complex had not.

    Morrison’s unspeakable treatment of the French president, Emmanuel Macron, proved diabolically amateurish and spiteful.  To have dinner with the head of state of another country even as plans to terminate an agreement worth A$90 billion is underfoot, suggests some form of arrested mental development.  “You don’t cancel a $90 billion contract and the other party is happy,” he merely shrugged.  In any case, he did not want to see Macron deploy “the entire French diplomatic corps and [kill] the deal”.  This was, in his mind, “the best” of decisions, “one that others had never sought to successfully undertake.”

    If the best decision of an administration involves the renting of a country’s autonomy, the surrendering of land and facilities to be used by a nuclear-armed, clumsy goliath, the conversion of an entire state to the status of a garrisoned, forward defence base to police rivals, including a power with whom you have no historical animosity with, one is coming very close to confusing patriotic innovation and self-interest with treason.

    The post When Scott Morrison Met Nemesis first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • The Australian government has announced an A$399 million funding package intended to advance development of key systems for the Boeing MQ-28A Ghost Bat Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA). The funding also calls for construction of three new next-generation Block 2 aircraft. Defence Industry Minister Pat Conroy said on 9 February that the funding will enable further […]

    The post Australia pumps in more funding for Ghost Bat development appeared first on Asian Military Review.

    This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.

  • Wansolwara News

    The University of the South Pacific journalism programme is hosting a cohort student journalists from Australia’s Queensland University of Technology this week.

    Led by Professor Angela Romano, the 12 students are covering news assignments in Fiji as part of their working trip.

    The visitors were given a briefing by USP journalism teaching staff — Associate Professor in Pacific journalism and programme head Dr Shailendra Singh, and student training newspaper supervising editor-in-chief Monika Singh.

    PACIFIC MEDIA CONFERENCE 4-6 JULY 2024
    PACIFIC MEDIA CONFERENCE 4-6 JULY 2024

    The students held lively discussions about the form and state of the media in Fiji and the Pacific, the historic influence of Australian and Western news media and its pros and cons, and the impact of the emergence of China on the Pacific media scene.

    Dr Singh said the small and micro-Pacific media systems were “still reeling” from revenue loss due to digital disruption and the covid-19 pandemic.

    As elsewhere in the world, the “rivers of gold” (classified advertising revenue) had virtually dried up and media in the Pacific were apparently struggling like never before.

    Dr Singh said that this was evident from the reduced size of some newspapers in the Pacific, in both classified and display advertising, which had migrated to social media platforms.

    Repeal of draconian law
    He praised Fiji’s coalition government for repealing the country’s draconian Media Industry Development Act last year, and reviving media self-regulation under the revamped Fiji Media Council.

    However, Dr Singh added that there was still some way to go to further improve the media landscape, including focus on training and development and working conditions.

    “There are major, longstanding challenges in small and micro-Pacific media systems due to small audiences, and marginal profits,” he said. “This makes capital investment and staff development difficult to achieve.”

    The QUT students are in Suva this month on a working trip in which students will engage in meetings, interviews and production of journalism. They will meet non-government organisations that have a strong focus on women/gender in development, democracy or peace work.

    The students will also visit different media organisations based in Suva and talk to their female journalists on their experiences and their stories.

    The USP journalism programme started in Suva in 1988 and it has produced more than 200 graduates serving the Pacific and beyond in various media and communication roles.

    The programme has forged partnerships with leading media players in the Pacific and our graduates are shining examples in the fields of journalism, public relations and government/NGO communication.

    Asia Pacific Report publishes in partnership with The University of the South Pacific’s newspaper and online Wansolwara News.


    This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Wansolwara.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Times were supposedly better in 2022.  That is, if you were a lawmaker in the Australian state of Victoria, a busy Israeli arms manufacturer, or cash counting corporate middleman keen to make a stash along the way between the two.  That view is premised on the notion that what happened on October 7, 2023 in Israel was stunningly remarkable, a historical blot dripped and dribbled from nothingness, leaving the Jewish state vengeful and yearning to avenge 1200 deaths and the taking of 240 hostages.  All things prior were dandy and uncontroversial.

    Last month, word got out that the Victorian government had inked a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with the Israeli Defence Ministry in December 2022.  “As Australia’s advanced manufacturing capital, we are always exploring economic and trade opportunities for our state – especially those that create local jobs,” a government spokesperson stated in January.  It’s just business.

    No one half observant to this should have been surprised, though no evidence of the MoU, in form or substance, exists on Victorian government websites.  (It is, however, listed on the Australian government’s Foreign Arrangements Scheme register.)  For one thing, Israel’s Ministry of Defense had happily trumpeted it, stating that its International Defense Cooperation Directorate (SIBAT) and the Victorian statement government had “signed an industrial defense cooperation statement” that December.  Those present at the signing ceremony were retired General Yair Kulas, who heads SIBAT and Penelope McKay, acting secretary for Victoria’s Department of Jobs, Precincts, and Regions.

    That an MoU should grow from this was a logical outcome, a feature of the State’s distinctly free approach to entering into agreements with foreign entities.  In April 2021, the previous Morrison government terminated four agreements made by the Victorian government with Iran, Syria and China.  The agreements with Iran and Syria, signed in November 2004 and March 1999 respectively, were intended as educational, scientific and training ventures.  The two agreements with China came in the form of an MoU and framework agreement with the National Development and Reform Commission of the PRC, both part of Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

    The Israeli arms industry has taken something of a shine to Victoria.  One of its most aggressive, enterprising representatives has been Elbit Systems, Israel’s prolific drone manufacturing company.  Through Elbit Systems of Australia (ELSA), it established a Centre of Excellence in Human-Machine Teaming and Artificial Intelligence in Port Melbourne after announcing its plans to do so in February 2021.

    One of its main co-sponsors is the state government’s Invest Victoria branch.  The body is tasked with, in the tortured words of the government, “leading new entrant Foreign Direct Investment and investment opportunities of significance as well as enhancing the business investment environment, developing and providing whole-of-government levers and strengthening the governance of investment attraction activities.”  RMIT University’s Centre for Industrial AI Research and Innovation also did its bit alongside the state government in furnishing support.

    The two-year partnership with ELSA’s Centre of Excellence had rosy, arcadian goals.  The company’s then managing director and retired Major General Paul McLachlan wanted to impress his audience with glossily innocent reasons behind developing drone technology, which entailed counting any “number of people in designated evacuation zones, then to co-ordinate and communicate the most efficient evacuation routes to everyone in the zone, as well as monitoring the area to ensure that everyone has been accounted for.”

    McLachlan, in focusing on “the complex problems that emergency management organisations face during natural disasters” skipped around the nastily obvious fact that the technology’s antecedents have been lethal in nature.  They had been used to account for the killing and monitoring of Palestinians in Gaza, with its star performer being Elbit’s Hermes drone.  A grisly fact from the summer months of July 2014, when the IDF was making much use of Elbit’s murderous products in Gaza, company profits increased by 6.1%.

    This was not a record that worried the director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute’s defence, strategy and national security program, Michael Shoebridge.  As he told the ABC, the MoU “would have been entirely uncontroversial before the Israel-Hamas war.  But now, of course, there’s a live domestic debate about the war, and … most people are concerned about civilian casualties.”

    It is exactly the slipshod reasoning that gives the think-tankers a bad name.  It means that Israel’s predatory policies towards Palestinians since 1948 can be dismissed as peripheral and inconsequential to the current bloodbath.  The racial-administrative policies of the Jewish state in terms of controlling and dispossessing Palestinians in the West Bank and the trampling, sealing and suffocating of Gaza, can be put down to footnotes of varying, uncontroversial relevance.

    The Victorian Greens disagree.  On February 7, the party released a statement promising to introduce a motion calling on the Victorian government “to end its secretive relationship with the Israeli Ministry of Defence.”  They also demanded the government to “sever any ties with companies arming Israel’s Defence Force, which has killed 27,500 Palestinians in less than four month.”

    Given the federal government’s brusque termination of previous agreements entered into by Victoria with purportedly undesirable entities, the Albanese government has a useful precedent.  With legal proceedings underway in the International Court of Justice in The Hague seeking to determine whether genocide is taking place in Gaza, along with an interim order warning Israel to abide by the UN Genocide Convention, a sound justification has presented itself.  Complicity with genocide – actual, potential or as yet unassessed by a court – can hardly be in Canberra’s interest.  Over to you, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.

    The post When Times Were Better: Victoria’s Ties with Israel’s Defence Industry first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • By Lawrence Fong of the PNG Post-Courier

    Papua New Guinea and Australia created another piece of history yesterday when James Marape became the first international leader to address the Australian Federal Parliament since 2020.

    In a speech laden with heartfelt gratitude and sentimental recollections of the shared history of both nations, the PNG Prime Minister thanked Australia for all it had done for his country – from giving it independence, to sending missionaries and public servants to help develop the country, to fighting together with Papua New Guineans during World War II, to all the current economic and other assistance.

    Marape had said before leaving for Canberra that he would not be asking Australia for any help.

    "Historic moment" PNGPC 9Feb24
    “Historic moment” . . . Today’s front page coverage in the PNG Post-Courier. Image: PC screenshot APR

    He repeated that in his address yesterday — even though he really shouldn’t have, for help from Australia has, is, and will be constant going into the future.

    But he did appeal to the Australians not to forget Papua New Guinea during its current, ongoing challenges.

    “Today, I carry the humble and deep, deep gratitude of my people, the thousand tribes. On behalf of my people, I thank Australia for everything you have done and continue to do for us,” Marape said.

    “I appreciate all governments of Australia which have assisted our governments since 1975.

    ‘Crucial role in develoment’
    “Thank you for continuing to support us throughout the life of our nationhood. Your assistance in education, health, infrastructure development in ports, roads and telecommunications continue to a play a crucial role in our development as a country.

    “I appreciate, also, all Australian investors, who, to date, comprise the biggest pool of investors in Papua New Guinea.

    “We realise our success as a nation will be the ultimate payoff for the work put in by many Australians.

    “Thus, I commit my generation of Papua New Guineans to augmenting the sanctity of our democracy and progressing our economy.

    “We pledge to work hard to ensure that PNG emerges as an economically self-sustaining nation so that we too help keep our region safe, secure and prosperous for our two people and those in our Indo-Pacific family.”

    Marape’s address comes during a period of constant domestic and external challenges.

    He is facing a potential vote of no confidence on his leadership this month and his government is also dealing with competition for influence from world powers, including China, USA, India, Indonesia, France and Australia.

    Australia’s ‘real friend’
    But he assured Australia that Papua New Guinea is its “real friend”.

    This is despite revelations last week that his government was in talks with China over a potential security deal, a revelation that has worried Australia and the United States.

    “In a world of many relations with other nations, nothing will come in between our two nations because we are family and through tears, blood, pain and sacrifice plus our eternal past our nations are constructed today,” he promised.

    “These have all been our challenges. But as I visit with you in Australia today, I ask of you please, do not give up hope on Papua New Guinea.

    “We have always bounced back from low moments and we will continue to grow,” Marape said.

    Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Bramo Tingkeo of the PNG Post-Courier

    Papua New Guinea’s Prime Minister James Marape made his historic address to the Australian Federal Parliament in Canberra today.

    Following Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s welcome address, Marape highlighted with gratitude the historical ties between the two nations and made special reference to the continuous support given to PNG by Australia since independence in 1975.

    “We thank Australia for the profound work that has gone into the setting up of key institutions that remain the anchor of this free vibrant democracy of PNG,” said Marape.

    Speaking during his address to senators and members of the Australian federal Parliament, Marape described the relationship between the two countries as being “joined to the hips” and “locked into earth’s crust together”, referring to the Indo-Australian tectonic plate.

    He emphasised the efforts of Australia as being a “huge pillar of support” in terms of infrastructural development for Papua New Guinea.

    Marape also made reference to former Australian prime minister Gough Whitlam and Grand Chief Sir Michael Somare as the “forefathers who made independence possible” and described Australia as being a big brother or sister that had nurtured PNG into adulthood.

    Post-Courier: ‘My sons will come’

    PNG POST-COURIER
    PNG POST-COURIER

    In an editorial today, the Post-Courier said:

    Today’s a historic day in PNG Australia relationships.

    On this day, January 8, 2024, in Canberra, a son of Kondom Agaundo, the legendary Papua New Guinean warrior chief, will address the Australian Federal Parliament.

    This simple act will fulfill the prophecy of Chief Kondom of Wandi, Chimbu province. His prophecy titled “my sons will come” has become a rallying call for Papua New Guineans to set forth and explore the world of globalism in education, business, sports, foreign policy, tourism and politics.

    It was in Canberra that Kondom, a member of the PNG Legislative Council, felt humiliated when he tried to address an Australian audience. His lack of English proficiency irritated the audience who responded with laughter.

    Chief Kondom, the son of a powerful warrior chief, felt slighted.

    He thought maybe, if not for his poor English, then maybe it was the insinuation of his name.

    While he felt insulted, he was a warrior and would not show any weakness. He held fast to his belief that payment for an offence now would be fulfilled later.

    He was determined to prove his leadership skills. He was determined to tell the white “mastas” that their time in Papua and New Guinea would end.

    He responded with the famous lines: “In my village, I am a chief among my people but today, I stand in front of you like a child and when I try to speak in your language, you laugh at my words.

    “But tomorrow, my son will come and he will talk to you in your language, this time you will not laugh at him.”

    And that the sons and daughters of Chief Kondom, well educated, very confident, fluent and sophisticated, cultured, tasteful, elegant and vibrant have descended on Australia in the last 50 years.

    Former politicians and knights Sir Yano Belo and Sir Nambuka Mara are in Canberra with Prim Minister Marape.

    It was the wisdom of people like Chief Kondom, Sir Yano, Sir Nambuka, Sir Peter Lus and many other political warriors that inspired Chief Sir Michael Somare to demand political independence from Australia.

    The memory of Chief Kondom lives on in Chimbu and across the country. His legacy is written on buildings and schools.

    In 1965, Kondom Agaundo was the Member for Highlands region. He also became a kiap, the first local to embrace Western civilisation.

    He was the first president of Waiye Rural LLG 1959 and the first Chimbu man to own and ride horses.

    He is remembered as the man who fostered coffee in the Central highlands. Sadly, chief Kondom died in a car crash at Daulo Pass in August 1966.

    It is said that the funeral and burial ceremony lasted weeks and over 100 pigs were slaughtered for the man who reminded the Australians his sons would come.

    Today, Prime Minister completes the evolution of the legend of Chief Kondom Agaundo, under the watchful gaze of two of Chief Kondom’s surviving peers.

    Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • AUKUS security partners – Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States –have successfully validated integration of advanced autonomy and artificial intelligence (AI) in unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs) that were used in a contested environment, the Australian Department of Defence (DoD) announced on 6 February. The DoD said the Trusted Operation of Robotic Vehicles in […]

    The post Australia supports latest autonomous robotics demonstration under AUKUS banner appeared first on Asian Military Review.

    This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.

  • Australian defence scientists have carried out a series of trial electronic attacks against robotic vehicles operated by the United States and the United Kingdom as part of the latest advanced technologies trial under AUKUS. The exercise, which took place in South Australia in late 2023, was designed to gauge the behaviour of autonomic vehicles when…

    The post Defence scientists red team robotic vehicles in AUKUS trial appeared first on InnovationAus.com.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.com.

  • The user group is to share experience and know-how of operating the K9 Self-Propelled Howitzer operated by key NATO forces and other countries. Hanwha Aerospace unveils a plan to establish a spare parts center in Europe to enhance integrated logistics support for K9 customers in the region. Military representatives from six of the countries operating […]

    The post K9 User Group Meets in Helsinki appeared first on Asian Military Review.

    This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.

  • By Eleisha Foon RNZ Pacific journalist

    The Republic of Fiji Military Forces (RFMF) “stands by” one of its senior officers, who is taking on a role with the Australian Army, despite the officer being accused of committing human rights abuses.

    The Australian first reported that Colonel Penioni (Ben) Naliva had been appointed as deputy commander of the Australian Army’s 7th Brigade, making him second in command of about 3500 Australian troops.

    However, the right-hand man to former Fiji coup leader and prime minister Voreqe Bainimarama, according to the newspaper, is alleged to have been involved in the violent beatings of two Fijian politicians in 2006.

    “In another case, the UN Special Rapporteur named then-major Naliva, in a report to the Human Rights Council, as being involved in the savage beating of a Suva businessman that left him unable to walk,” according to The Australian’s frontpage report published today.

    “In a third case, a prominent youth activist says Naliva was present when he was detained and tortured in 2006, and did nothing to stop it.”

    Rejected accusations
    But RFMF Military Assistant to Chief of Defence Lieutenant-Colonel Eroni Duaibe has rejected the accusations labelled against Colonel Naliva.

    He told RNZ Pacific most of the allegations had “come about through social media platforms” posted by “disgruntled individuals”.

    “There has not been any formal reports that have been lodged with Fiji police in regards to this,” Lieutenant-Colonel Duaibe said.

    “We stand by Colonel Naliva and his appointment with the Australian defence.”

    According to The Australian, following inquiries about the accusations, “[Australian] Defence is understood to be working with the Fijian government to determine ‘appropriate next steps’”.

    “Defence is aware of reporting regarding Colonel Penioni Naliva. Defence takes any allegations of wrongdoing seriously,” it reported.

    “Colonel Naliva has not been charged over any of the allegations and The Australian is not suggesting they are true, only that they have been made and are now the subject of inquiry by the Australian government.”

    Committed on defence
    RNZ Pacific has contact the Australian Defence, United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Fijian Human Rights and Anti Discrimination Commission for comment.

    Australia has committed to grow its defence and security cooperation with Fiji — under the Vuvale Partnership agreement signed last October, with increasing co-deployments.

    The appointment comes after Colonel Naliva graduated from the Australian War College last year.

    Independent Senator Jacqui Lambie has also called on the Australian government to explain who appointed Colonel Naliva to the role when he is facing such allegations.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.


  • This content originally appeared on VICE News and was authored by VICE News.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Asia Pacific Report

    Senator and deputy leader of the Australian Greens party Mehreen Faruqi says the survival of millions of people in Gaza depends on the “live-saving” humanitarian aid provided by UNRWA, and it is “totally irresponsible” to cut funds to the UN agency.

    “Western countries, like Australia, who have suspended this aid [to UNRWA] have made a pretty disgraceful and morally indefensible decision,” she said.|

    “We know that people are being starved in Gaza at the moment. We know that there is a humanitarian crisis.

    Australian Greens party Mehreen Faruqi senator
    Australian Greens party Mehreen Faruqi senator . . . “The Australian government is making decisions that are completely opposed to the sentiments, feelings and demands of the Australian people.” Image: Wikipedia

    “We know that there is a mission of genocide that Israel is committing, and at this time to suspend aid is disgraceful,” Faruqi told Al Jazeera.

    Australia joined some 15 US-led countries to cut UNRWA funding by US$667 million — more than half of its total pledges.

    The people of Australia had taken to the streets to protest over “weeks and weeks” in support of Gaza. But the government was refusing to listen to their demands, Faruqi said.

    “By refusing to listen to the people of Australia, the Australian government is making decisions that are completely opposed to the sentiments, feelings and demands of the Australian people,” she said.

    ‘People can see . . . 26,000 have been massacred’
    “People in Australia can actually see what is going on in Gaza. They can see more than 26,000 people have been massacred.

    “They can see that more than 12,000 of those are children. This is completely unacceptable. This [Israeli] mission of genocide.

    “And especially the cheerleading by Australia, by the UK, by the US of this invasion of Gaza is reprehensible.”

    UNRWA’s funds should be restored immediately and increased, Faruqi added.

    Countries such as Ireland, Norway and Spain have continued to fund UNRWA – in some cases increasing their aid — and have condemned the funding cuts as an “attack on humanity”.

    New Zealand is currently still funding UNRWA and will review the situation before its next instalment is due mid-year.

    ‘Happy to keep war going’

    Australian author and journalist Antony Loewenstein
    Australian author and journalist Antony Loewenstein . . . “Israelis also “very happy to keep the war going”. Image: Al Jazeera screenshot APR

    Also interviewed by Al Jazeera, independent journalist Antony Loewenstein, author of The Palestine Laboratory exposing the Israeli military profit machine, talked about the views of the Israeli population and the Jewish diaspora.

    Answering a question about Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s declared goal of “total victory” as the war drags on, Loewenstein acknowledged how global diasporas were split in their opinions with younger Jewish groups in the US increasingly seeking a ceasefire, but his view of Israel was grim.

    “One of the things that is really clear. . . is that most Israelis want their hostages back, which makes sense. But at the same time they are also very happy to keep the war going.

    “In fact, most polls do not suggest that the majority of Israeli Jews want the war to end.,” he said.

    “They do want Hamas to be removed in some way. What that looks like, of course is up to debate.”


    Author Antony Loewenstein discusses Jewish diaspora splits over the Gaza war. Video: Al Jazeera

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Palace coups have become a seasonal tradition in Australian politics.  Between 2007 and 2018, Australia had six prime ministers, four of whom were overthrown by their own parties, the first five never being allowed to complete their first term in office.  In contrast, between 1983 and 2007, the country could count on the dry, solid stability of three leaders.  The change of heart led to the irresistible description of Australia being “the coup capital of the democratic world”.

    In the Westminster system of government, where the executive is drawn from the representative chamber, prime ministers are at the mercy of party hacks and factional gangsters.  The party hacks, in turn, are terrified by the polls, the make-belief register of electoral emotion that psephologists pretend to decode.

    As has been shown recently in the United Kingdom, and for a longer stretch in Australia, no ruling leader is safe from their sponsoring party, the shallow and insecure apparatchiks who, always worrying about the next election, will carve you up if needed to make way for a more viable, vote-getting successor.  No principle is sacrosanct if it can be sacrificed in the name of victory, no policy worthwhile preserving.  Every conceivable weapon of choice will be deployed when it comes to ousting the leader of the day.  As for democratic sensibility: What of it?

    Nemesis, a three-part documentary series running on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, deals with the conservative side of the country’s politics, the Liberal-National coalition.  It should be seen alongside the Killing Season, which offered the Labor Party equivalent of ritual-killing and political cannibalism starring Australia’s current ambassador to Washington, Kevin Rudd, and its country’s first female prime minister, Julia Gillard.   Both series leave viewers scratching their heads and wondering what all the murderous fuss was about.

    For the three big figures in Nemesis, the fuss was ample, the disquiet loud.  Tony Abbott, the doctrinaire pugilist Catholic, aggressively superb in opposition but raggedly estranged from the electorate in office; the suave, money-attuned Malcolm Turnbull, lawyer, merchant banker, the thinking suit suspected for not being ideological enough; and the least sympathetic of them all, that walking advertisement of treachery and mendacity, Scott Morrison.

    With Abbott not participating in the series, we are left with the hammed-up Olympian wisdom of Turnbull, describing events with false detachment, and Morrison, his successor, who did as much to assist Turnbull as he did to oust him.  (He who uses the dagger for you is bound to use it on you.)  Morrison’s versions of events are much like that of the critic Mary McCarthy’s assessment of Lillian Hellman’s work: “every work she writes is a lie, including ‘and’ and ‘the’.”

    Most depressing of all is the distinct lack of ideas in the field of battle.  In politics, they shrivel before the glare of hatred, envy and fear.  In these bouts of savaging, leaders are not sacrificed because of their vast hinterland of thought and wonder.  They are not overthrown because one saw the numinous light, the other, despairing dark.  They are sacrificed because they lost, in Abbott’s case, 30 Newspolls in a row, supposedly making them unelectable.  They are removed – again, to take Abbott’s example – because they put their trust in a bullying advisor and confessor, such as the autocratic harridan Peta Credlin.

    When ideas do bubble to the top of the torrid sewerage, they feature such gruesome policies as “Turn Back the Boats,” an Abbott favourite from 2013 that was, contrary to what Morrison claims, popular in its cruelty, a real vote getter.  Voters can be convinced to do the goose step and stomp on the vulnerable if you give them reason to.  By turning back boats heavy with asylum seekers and refugees, a cheap humanitarian sentiment could be massaged: at least they did not drown, even if they were to rot in sadistic enclaves in the Pacific.

    A disturbing nugget from Abbott’s brief prime ministership (2013-2015) is thrown in.  With the downing of Malaysian Airlines MH17 over Ukrainian territory by Russian separatists in July 2014, Abbott was aflame with aggressive vengeance.  Of the 298 dead, 27 were Australians. While an officially cool version of Australian anger was offered by foreign minister, Julie Bishop, Abbott privately wanted the crash site overrun with Australian troops.

    The military establishment of the day was alarmed.  “I was concerned,” former army chief Sir Angus Houston stated, “that the military operation would be provocative, because the crash site was only a short distance from the Russian border, and already I was aware of a huge buildup of Russian forces on the border.” Houston’s effort at dissuading Abbott proved successful. “OK, Angus, I accept your advice,” the Australian PM responded.  “It’ll be a police-led operation.”

    Interestingly enough, the makers of the series omit a similar suggestion by Abbott in November 2014 that 3,500 Australian troops be sent to rescue Yazidis being butchered by zealots of the Islamic State (Daesh) on the desert sands of Iraq. There was not even a hint that US air support would be offered, nor participation from any other power.  Again, the caution of military officialdom and good sense prevailed, though Abbott denies ever floating the idea.

    In a peculiar way, those two suggestions, while coterminous with the fringes of lunacy, also showed a man of some principle, fanatical as it was. Muscular, masculine and misguided in his quixotic way, he was driven by a burning, messianic fire.  But in his broader outlook, Abbott resembled a warrior of yesteryear, a repository of anachronisms, the latter exemplified by his daft decision to give the late Prince Philip a knighthood. If there was ever talk about the superiority of Western civilisation, he would be there to boast about it. Increasingly, even proudly tone deaf to the electorate, he lost his seat in the 2019 election to the independent Zali Steggall. In doing so, he unintentionally laid the seeds for disruptive change that would, in May 2022, see the greatest number of independents ever returned to Canberra.

    The post Cannibalism, Conservatives and Lies: Australia’s Nemesis Story first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Kiwi researchers will begin working with the Adelaide-based SmartSat Cooperative Research Centre on collaborative space projects following a AU$5.6 million commitment from the New Zealand government. The funding, which comes out of the New Zealand government’s Catalyst Fund, is part of a memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed between the SmartSat Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) and…

    The post $5.6m for Aust-NZ space projects appeared first on InnovationAus.com.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.com.