Australian company Bale Defence debuted its RTV6 light tactical vehicle at Land Forces 2024, a show held in Melbourne from 11-13 September. This 6×6 vehicle, whose name stands for Rough Terrain Vehicle, builds upon the DNA of RTV2 and RTV4 4×4 vehicles already in the company’s catalogue. Martyn Jones, chief operating officer at Bale Defence, […]
The post Bale debuts RTV6 at Land Forces 2024 appeared first on Asian Military Review.
This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.
BAE System stole the limelight on opening day at Land Forces 2024 in Melbourne with its new ATLAS, an acronym for Autonomous Tactical Light Armour System. The ATLAS is an 8×8 uncrewed ground vehicle (UGV) developed in-house by BAE Systems Australia. The company refers to the approximately 10-tonne-class vehicle as the Collaborative Combat Variant (CCV), […]
The post BAE Systems embarks on new course with ATLAS appeared first on Asian Military Review.
This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.
The heaviest exhibit at Land Forces 2024 was indisputably an M1A2 SEPv3 Abrams main battle tank. This brand-new example had moved from the city’s port to the exhibition centre after recently arriving in Australia from California by cargo ship. The tank on display, with serial number ‘277002’, possessed a Kongsberg CROWS-Low Profile weapon station, giving […]
The post M1A2 SEPv3 Abrams puts in maiden Australian appearance appeared first on Asian Military Review.
This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.
September 11. Melbourne. The scene: the area between Spencer Street Bridge and the Batman Park-Spencer Street tram stop. Heavily armed police, with glinting face coverings and shields, had seized and blocked the bridge over the course of the morning, preventing all traffic from transiting through it. Behind them stood second tier personnel, lightly armed. Then, barricades, followed by horse mounted police. Holding up the rear: two fire trucks.
In the skies, unmanned drones hovered like black, stationary ravens of menace. But these were not deemed sufficient by Victoria Police. Helicopters kept them company. Surveillance cameras also stood prominently to the north end of the bridge.
Before this assortment of marshalled force was an eclectic gathering of individuals from keffiyeh-swaddled pro-Palestinian activists to drummers kitted out in the Palestinian colours, and any number of theatrical types dressed in the shades and costumery of death. At one point, a chilling Joker figure made an appearance, his outfit and suitcase covered in mock blood. The share stock of chants was readily deployed: “No justice, no peace, no racist police”; “We, the people, will not be silenced. Stop the bombing now, now, now”. Innumerable placards condemning the arms industry and Israel’s war on Gaza also make their appearance.
The purpose of this vast, costly exercise proved elementary and brutal: to defend Land Forces 2024, one of the largest arms fairs in the southern hemisphere, from Disrupt Land Forces, a collective demonised by the Victorian state government as the great unwashed, polluted rebel rousers and anarchists. Much had been made of the potential size of the gathering, with uncritical journalists consuming gobbets of information from police sources keen to justify an operation deemed the largest since the 2000 World Economic Forum. Police officers from regional centres in the state had been called up, and while Chief Commissioner Shane Patton proved tight-lipped on the exact number, an estimate exceeding 1,000 was not refuted. The total cost of the effort: somewhere between A$10 to A$15 million.
It all began as a healthy gathering at the dawn of day, with protestors moving to the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre to picket entry points for those attending Land Forces.
Over time, there was movement between the various entrances to prevent these modern merchants of death from spruiking their merchandise and touting for offers. As Green Left Online noted, “The Victorian Police barricaded the entrance of the Melbourne Convention Centre so protestors marched to the back entrance to disrupt Land Forces whilst attendees are going through security checks.”
In keeping with a variant of Anton Chekhov’s principle, if a loaded gun is placed upon the stage, it is bound to be used. Otherwise, leave it out of the script. A large police presence would hardly be worthwhile without a few cracked skulls, flesh wounds or arrests. Scuffles accordingly broke out with banal predictability. The mounted personnel were also brought out to add a snap of hostility and intimidation to the protestors as they sought to hamper access to the Convention. For all of this, it was the police who left complaining, worried about their safety.
Then came the broader push from the officers to create a zone of exclusion around the building, resulting in the closure of Clarendon Street to the south, up to Batman Park. Efforts were made to push the protests from the convention centre across the bridge towards the park. This was in keeping with the promise by the Chief Commissioner that the MCEC site and its surrounds would be deemed a designated area over the duration of the arms fair from September 11 to 13.
Such designated areas, enabled by the passage of a 2009 law, vests the police with powers to stop and search a person within the zone without a warrant. Anything perceived to be a weapon can be seized, with officers having powers to request that civilians reveal their identity.
Despite such exercisable powers, the relevant legislation imposes a time limit of 12 hours for such areas, something most conspicuously breached by the Commissioner. But as Melbourne Activist Legal Support (MALS) group remarks, the broader criteria outlined in the legislative regime are often not met and constitute a “method of protest control” that impairs “the rights to assembly, association, and political expression” protected by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities.
The Victorian government had little time for the language of protest. In a stunningly grotesque twist, the Victorian Premier, Jacinta Allan, defended those at the Land Forces conference as legitimate representatives of business engaging in a peaceful enterprise. “Any industry deserves the right to have these sorts of events in a peaceful and respectful way.” If the manufacture, sale and distribution of weapons constitutes a “peaceful and respectful” pursuit, we have disappeared down the rabbit hole with Alice at great speed.
That theme continued with efforts by both Allan and the opposition leader, John Pesutto, to tarnish the efforts by fellow politicians to attend the protest. Both fumed indignantly at the efforts of Greens MP Gabrielle de Vietri to participate, with the premier calling the measure one designed for “divisive political purposes.” The Green MP had a pertinent response: “The community has spoken loud and clear, they don’t want weapons and war profiting to come to our doorstep, and the Victorian Labor government is sponsoring this.”
The absurd, morally inverted spectacle was duly affirmed: a taxpayer funded arms exposition, defended by the taxpayer funded police, used to repel the tax paying protestors keen to promote peace in the face of an industry that thrives on death, mutilation and misery.
The post Protecting the Merchants of Death: The Police Effort for Land Forces 2024 first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
Police in the southern Australian state of Victoria on Wednesday attacked anti-war protesters with so-called “less lethal” weapons including stun grenades, hard foam projectiles, and pepper spray outside a major international arms convention in Melbourne amid Israel’s Australia-backed annihilation of Gaza. Protesters gathered outside the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Center…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
Asia Pacific Report
The Victorian Greens have demanded an independent inquiry into Australian police tactics and alleged excessive use of force today against antiwar protesters at the Land Forces expo in Melbourne.
State Greens leader Ellen Sandell said her party had lodged a formal protest to the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC).
“We have seen police throw flash grenades into crowds of protesters, use pepper spray indiscriminately, and whip people with horse whip,” she also said in a X post.
“These are military-style tactics used by police against protesters who are trying to have their say, as is their democratic right.”
Police used stun grenades and pepper spray and arrested 39 people as officers were pelted with rocks, manure and tomatoes in what has been described as Melbourne’s biggest police operation in two decades, reports Al Jazeera.
The Victorian Greens and I have demanded an independent inquiry into Victoria Police tactics and excessive use of force at the Land Forces protests in Melbourne today. pic.twitter.com/p8iLU073S0
— Ellen Sandell (@ellensandell) September 11, 2024
The pro-Palestine protesters, also demanding a change in Canberra’s stance on Israel’s war in Gaza, clashed with the police outside the arms fair.
Thousands picketed the Land Forces 2024 military weapons exposition. Australia has seen numerous protests against the country’s arms industry’s involvement in the war over the past 11 months.
Protesting for ‘those killed’ in Gaza
“We’re protesting to stand up for all those who have been killed by the type of weapons [in Gaza] on display at the convention,” said Jasmine Duff from organiser Students for Palestine in a statement.
About 1800 police officers have been deployed at the Melbourne Convention Centre hosting the three-day weapons exhibition. Up to 25,000 people had previously been expected to turn up at the protest.
Two dozen people were reported as requiring medical treatment, said a Victoria state police spokesperson in a statement.
Demonstrators also lit fires in the street and disrupted traffic and public transport, while missiles were thrown at police horses.
However, no serious injuries were reported, according to police.
Deputy Greens leader backs protesters
In a speech to the Senate, the deputy federal leader of the Greens, Senator Mehreen Faruqi, offered her solidarity to “the thousands protesting in Melbourne today to say no to the business of war”.
“The UK has suspended some arms sales to Israel. Canada today is halting more arms sales to Israel.
“What will it take for [Australia’s] Labor government to take action against the apartheid state of Israel?”
This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.
The ADF uses VBS for virtual simulation and image generation across multiple programs. Bohemia Interactive Australia (BIA) is pleased to announce that the Australian Army has renewed the Australian Defence Force (ADF) VBS3 enterprise software support agreement with BIA for the twelfth consecutive year. The ADF uses VBS to prepare for operations through serious gaming […]
The post Australian Defence Force renews agreement with Bohemia Interactive Australia to provide game-based simulation software appeared first on Asian Military Review.
This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.
With similar Israel divestment motions having been passed at City of Sydney and Canterbury/Bankstown Councils, many had expected the motion to pass in what is supposed to be one of the most progressive areas of Sydney. Wendy Bacon reports on what went wrong.
INVESTIGATION: By Wendy Bacon
Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza and the West Bank is tearing apart local councils in Australia, on top of the angst reverberating around state and federal politics.
Inner West Labor Mayor Darcy Byrne has doubled down on his attack on pro-Palestinian activists at the council’s last election meeting before Australia’s local government elections on September 14.
‘Byrne’s attack echoes an astro-turfing campaign supported by rightwing and pro-Israel groups targeting the Greens in inner city electorates.’
With Labor narrowly controlling the council by one vote, the election loomed large over the meeting. It also coincided with a campaign backed by rightwing pro-Israeli groups to eliminate Greens from several inner Sydney councils.
In August, Labor councillors voted down a motion for an audit of whether any Inner West Council (IWC) investments or contracts benefit companies involved in the weapons industry or profit from human rights violations in Gaza and the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
The motion that was defeated had also called for an insertion of a general “human rights” provision in council’s investment policy.
With similar motions having been passed at City of Sydney and Canterbury/Bankstown councils, many had expected the motion to pass in what is supposed to be one of the most progressive areas of Sydney.
It could have been a first step towards the Inner West Council joining the worldwide BDS (boycotts, disinvestments and economic sanctions) campaign to pressure Israel to meet its obligations under international law.
MWM sources attest that the ructions at Inner West Council are mirrored elsewhere in local government. This from Randwick in Sydney’s East:
Global to grassroots
Last week, Portland Council in Maine became the fifth United States city to join the campaign this year, while the City of Ixelles in Belgium announced that it had suspended its twinning agreement with the Regional Council of Megiddo in Israel.
When the Inner West motion failed, some Palestinian rights campaigners booed and shouted “shame” at Labor councillors as they sat silently in the chamber. The meeting, which had nearly reached its time limit of five hours, was then adjourned.
Byrne’s alternative motion was debated at last week’s meeting. It restates council’s existing policy and Federal Labor’s current stance that calls for a ceasefire and a two-state solution.
This alternative motion was passed by Labor councillors, with the Greens and two Independents voting against it. Both Independent Councillor Pauline Lockie and Greens Councillor Liz Atkins argued that they were opposing the motion because it did not do or change anything.
The Mayor spent most of his speaking time attacking those involved with protesting at the August meeting. He described their behaviour as “unacceptable, undemocratic and disrespectful”. There is no doubt that the behaviour at the meeting breached the rules of meeting behaviour at some times.
But then Byrne made a much more shocking and unexpected allegation. He said that the “worst element” of the behaviour was that “local Inner West citizens who happened to have a Jewish sounding name, when their names were read out by me because they’d registered . . . to speak, I think all of them were booed and hissed just because their names happened to sound Jewish.”
News Corp propaganda
This claim is deeply disturbing. If true, such behaviour would definitely be anti-semitic and racist. But the question is: did such behaviour actually happen? Or does this allegation feed into Byrne’s misleading narrative that had fuelled false News Corporation reports that protesters stormed the meeting?
In fact, the protesters had been invited to the meeting by the Mayor.
This reporter was present throughout the meeting and did not observe anything similar to what the Mayor alleged had happened.
Later in the meeting, the Mayor repeated the allegation that the “booing and hissing of people” based “on the fact that they had a Jewish sounding name constituted anti-semitism”.
Retiring Independent Councillor Pauline Locker intervened: “Sorry, point of order, That isn’t actually what happened. . . . It wasn’t based on their Jewish name.”
But Bryne insisted, “That’s not a point of order — that is what happened. It is what the record shows occurred as does the media reportage.”
Other councillors also distanced themselves from Byrne’s allegation. Independent Councillor John Stamolis also said that although he could not judge how the Mayor or other Labor councillors felt on the evening, he could not agree with Byrne’s description or that it described what other councillors or members of the public experienced on the evening.
Greens Councillor Liz Atkins said that there were different perceptions of what happened on the night. Her perception was that the “booing and hissing” was in relation to support for the substance of the Greens motion for an audit of investments rather than an attack on people who spoke against it.
She also said that credit should be given to pro- Palestinian activists who themselves encouraged people to listen quietly.
Fake antisemitism claims
Your reporter asked Rosanna Barbero, who also was present throughout the meeting, what she observed. Barbero was the recipient of this year’s Multicultural NSW Human Rights Medal, recognising her lasting and meaningful contribution to human rights in NSW.
She is also a member of the Inner West Multicultural Network that has helped council develop an anti-racism strategy.
“I did not witness any racist comments,” said Barbero.
Barbero confirmed that she was present throughout the meeting and said: “I did not witness any racist comments. The meeting was recorded so the evidence of that is easy to verify.”
So this reporter, in a story for City Hub, took her advice and went to the evidence in the webcast, which provides a public record of what occurred. The soundtrack is clear. A listener can pick up when comments are made by audience members but not necessarily the content of them.
Bryne has alleged speakers against the motion were booed when their “Jewish sounding’ names were announced. Our analysis shows none of the five were booed or abused in any way when their names were announced.
There was, in fact, silence.
Five speakers identified themselves as Jewish. Four spoke against the motion, and one in favour.
Two of the five were heard in complete silence, one with some small applause at the end.
One woman who spoke in favour of the motion and whose grandparents were in the Holocaust was applauded and cheered at the end of her speech.
One man was interrupted by several comments from the gallery when he said the motion was based on “propaganda and disinformation” and would lead to a lack of social cohesion. He related experiences of anti-semitism when he was at school in the Inner West 14 years ago.
At the conclusion of his speech, there were some boos.
One man who had not successfully registered was added to the speakers list by the Mayor. Some people in the public gallery objected to this decision. The Mayor adjourned the meeting for three minutes and the speaker was then heard in silence.
The speakers in favour of the motion, most of whom had Palestinian backgrounds and relatives who had suffered expulsion from their homelands, concentrated on the war crimes against Palestinians and the importance of BDS motions. There were no personal attacks on speakers against the motion.
In response to a Jewish speaker who had argued that the solution was peace initiatives, one Palestinian speaker said that he wanted “liberation”, not “peace”.
Weaponising accusations of anti-semitism to shut down debate
Independent Inner West Councillor Pauline Lockie warned other councillors this week about the need to be careful about weaponising accusations of race and anti-semitism to shut down debates. Like Barbero, Lockie has played a leadership role in developing anti-racism strategies for the Inner West.
There are three serious concerns about Byrne’s allegations. The first concern is that they are not verified by the public record. This raises questions about the Mayor’s judgement and credibility.
The second is that making unsubstantiated allegations of antisemitism for the tactical purposes of winning a political argument demeans the seriousness and tragedy of anti-semitism.
Thirdly, there is a concern that spreading unsubstantiated allegations of anti-semitism could cause harm by spreading fear and anxiety in the Jewish community.
Controversial Christian minister
The most provocative speaker on the evening was not one of those who identified themselves as Jewish. It was Reverend Mark Leach, who introduced himself as an Anglican minister from Balmain. When he said that no one could reasonably apply the word “genocide” to what was occurring in Gaza, several people called out his comments.
Given the ICJ finding that a plausible genocide is occurring in Gaza, this was not surprising.
Darcy Byrne then stopped the meeting and gave Reverend Leach a small amount of further time to speak. Later in his speech, Reverend Leach described the motion itself as “deeply racist” because it held Israel accountable above all other states.
Boos for Leach
In fact, the motion would have added a general human rights provision to the investment policy which would have applied to any country. Reverend Leach was booed at the conclusion of his speech.
One speaker later said that she could not understand how this Christian minister would not accept that the word “genocide” could be used. This was not an anti-semitic or racist comment.
Throughout the debate, Byrne avoided the issue that the motion only called for an audit.
He also used his position of chair to directly question councillors. The following exchange occurred with Councillor Liz Atkins:
Mayor: Councilor Atkins, can I put to you a question? I have received advice that councillor officers are unaware of any investment from council that is complicit in the Israeli military operations in Gaza and the Palestinian territories. Are you aware of any?
Atkins: No. That’s why the motion asked for an audit of our investments and procurements.
Mayor: I’ll put one further question to you. The organisers of the protest outside the chamber and the subsequent overrunning of the council chamber asserted in their promotion of the event that the council was complicit in genocide. Is that your view?
Atkins: I don’t know. Until we do an audit, Mayor . . . Can I just take exception with the point of view that they “overran” the meeting? You invited them all in, and not one of them tried to get past a simple rope barrier.
Byrne says it’s immoral to support a one-party state
During the debate, Byrne surprisingly described support for a one-state solution for Israel and Palestinians as “immoral”. He described support for “one state” as meaning you either supported the wiping out of the Palestinians or the Israelis.
In fact, there is a long history of citizens, scholars and other commentators who have argued that one secular state of equal citizens is the only viable solution.
Many, including the Australian government, do not agree. Nevertheless, the award-winning journalist and expert on the Middle East, Antony Loewenstein, argued that position in The Sydney Morning Herald in November 2023.
Mayor in tune with Better Council Inc campaign
All of this debate is happening in the context of the hotly contested election campaign. The Mayor is understandably preoccupied with the impending poll. Rather than debating the issues, he finished the debate by launching an attack on the Greens, which sounded more like an election speech than a speech in reply in support of his motion.
Byrne said: “Some councillors are unwilling to condemn what was overt anti-Semitism”.
This is a heavy accusation. All councillors are strongly opposed to anti-semitism. The record does not show any overt anti-semitism.
Byrne went on: “But the more troubling thing is that there’s a large number of candidates running at this election who, if elected, will be making foreign affairs and this particular issue one of the central concerns of this council.
“This will result in a distraction with services going backwards and rates going up.”
In fact, the record shows that the Greens are just as focused on local issues as any other councillors. Even at last week’s meeting, Councillor Liz Atkins brought forward a motion about controversial moves to install a temporary cafe at Camperdown Park that would privatise public space and for which there had been no consultation.
Labor v Greens
Byrne’s message pitting concern about broader issues against local concerns is in tune with the messaging of a recently formed group called Better Council Inc. that is targeting the Greens throughout the Inner West and in Randwick and Waverley.
Placards saying “Put the Greens last”, “Keep the Greens Garbage out of Council” featuring a number of Greens candidates have gone up across Sydney. Some claim that the Greens are fixated on Gaza and ignore local issues.
Better Inc.’s material is authorised by Sophie Calland. She is a recently graduated computer engineer who told the Daily Telegraph that “she was a Labor member and that Better Council involves people from across the political aisle — even some former Greens.”
She described the group as a “grassroots group of young professionals” who wanted local government officials to focus on local issues.
“We believe local councils should concentrate on essential community services like waste management, local infrastructure, and the environment. That’s what councils are there for — looking after the needs of their immediate communities.”
On Saturday, Randwick Greens Councillor Kym Chapple was at a pre-poll booth at which a Better Council Inc. campaigner was handing out material specifically recommending that voters put her last.
Chapple tweeted that the Better councilwoman didn’t actually know that she was a councillor or any of the local issues in which she had been involved.
“That does not look like a local grassroots campaign. It’s an attempt to intimidate people who support a free Palestine. Anyway, it feels gross to have someone say to put you last because they care about the environment and local issues when that’s literally what you have done for three years.”
She then tweeted a long list of her local campaign successes.
Never Again is Now astroturf campaign
In fact, the actual work of distributing the leaflets is being done by a group spearheaded by none other than Reverend Mark Leach, who spoke at the Inner West Council meeting. Leach is one of the coordinators of the pro-Israel right-wing Christian group Never Again is Now.
The group is organising rallies around Australia to campaign against anti-semitism.
Reverend Mark Leach works closely with his daughter Freya Leach, who stood for the Liberal Party for the seat of Balmain in the 2023 state election and is associated with the rightwing Menzies Institute. Mark Leach describes himself as “working to renew the mind and heart of our culture against the backdrop of the radical left, Jihadist Islam and rising authoritarianism.
Leach’s own Twitter account shows that he embraces a range of rightwing causes. He is anti-trans, supports anti-immigration campaigners in the UK and has posted a jolly video of himself with Warren Mundine at a pro-Israeli rally in Melbourne.
Mundine was a No campaign spokesperson for the rightwing group Advance Australia during the Voice referendum.
Leach supports the Christian Lobby and is very critical of Christians who are campaigning for peace.
Anti-semitism exists. The problem is that Reverend Leach’s version of anti-semitism is what international law and human rights bodies regard as protesting against genocidal war crimes.
For #NeverAgainisNow, these atrocities are excusable for a state that is pursuing its right of “self-defence”. And if you don’t agree with that, don’t be surprised if you find yourself branded as not just “anti-semitic” but also a bullying extremist.
As of one week before the local government election, the Never Again is Now was holding a Zoom meeting to organise 400 volunteers to get 50,000 leaflets into the hands of voters at next Saturday’s local election.
This may well be just a dress rehearsal for a much bigger effort at the Federal election, where Advance Australia has announced it is planning to target the Greens.
Wendy Bacon is an investigative journalist who was professor of journalism at UTS. She has worked for Fairfax, Channel Nine and SBS and has published in The Guardian, New Matilda, City Hub and Overland. She has a long history in promoting independent and alternative journalism. She is not a member of any political party but is a Greens supporter and long-term supporter of peaceful BDS strategies. Republished from Michael West Media with the author’s permission.
This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.
With similar Israel divestment motions having been passed at City of Sydney and Canterbury/Bankstown Councils, many had expected the motion to pass in what is supposed to be one of the most progressive areas of Sydney. Wendy Bacon reports on what went wrong.
INVESTIGATION: By Wendy Bacon
Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza and the West Bank is tearing apart local councils in Australia, on top of the angst reverberating around state and federal politics.
Inner West Labor Mayor Darcy Byrne has doubled down on his attack on pro-Palestinian activists at the council’s last election meeting before Australia’s local government elections on September 14.
‘Byrne’s attack echoes an astro-turfing campaign supported by rightwing and pro-Israel groups targeting the Greens in inner city electorates.’
With Labor narrowly controlling the council by one vote, the election loomed large over the meeting. It also coincided with a campaign backed by rightwing pro-Israeli groups to eliminate Greens from several inner Sydney councils.
In August, Labor councillors voted down a motion for an audit of whether any Inner West Council (IWC) investments or contracts benefit companies involved in the weapons industry or profit from human rights violations in Gaza and the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
The motion that was defeated had also called for an insertion of a general “human rights” provision in council’s investment policy.
With similar motions having been passed at City of Sydney and Canterbury/Bankstown councils, many had expected the motion to pass in what is supposed to be one of the most progressive areas of Sydney.
It could have been a first step towards the Inner West Council joining the worldwide BDS (boycotts, disinvestments and economic sanctions) campaign to pressure Israel to meet its obligations under international law.
MWM sources attest that the ructions at Inner West Council are mirrored elsewhere in local government. This from Randwick in Sydney’s East:
Global to grassroots
Last week, Portland Council in Maine became the fifth United States city to join the campaign this year, while the City of Ixelles in Belgium announced that it had suspended its twinning agreement with the Regional Council of Megiddo in Israel.
When the Inner West motion failed, some Palestinian rights campaigners booed and shouted “shame” at Labor councillors as they sat silently in the chamber. The meeting, which had nearly reached its time limit of five hours, was then adjourned.
Byrne’s alternative motion was debated at last week’s meeting. It restates council’s existing policy and Federal Labor’s current stance that calls for a ceasefire and a two-state solution.
This alternative motion was passed by Labor councillors, with the Greens and two Independents voting against it. Both Independent Councillor Pauline Lockie and Greens Councillor Liz Atkins argued that they were opposing the motion because it did not do or change anything.
The Mayor spent most of his speaking time attacking those involved with protesting at the August meeting. He described their behaviour as “unacceptable, undemocratic and disrespectful”. There is no doubt that the behaviour at the meeting breached the rules of meeting behaviour at some times.
But then Byrne made a much more shocking and unexpected allegation. He said that the “worst element” of the behaviour was that “local Inner West citizens who happened to have a Jewish sounding name, when their names were read out by me because they’d registered . . . to speak, I think all of them were booed and hissed just because their names happened to sound Jewish.”
News Corp propaganda
This claim is deeply disturbing. If true, such behaviour would definitely be anti-semitic and racist. But the question is: did such behaviour actually happen? Or does this allegation feed into Byrne’s misleading narrative that had fuelled false News Corporation reports that protesters stormed the meeting?
In fact, the protesters had been invited to the meeting by the Mayor.
This reporter was present throughout the meeting and did not observe anything similar to what the Mayor alleged had happened.
Later in the meeting, the Mayor repeated the allegation that the “booing and hissing of people” based “on the fact that they had a Jewish sounding name constituted anti-semitism”.
Retiring Independent Councillor Pauline Locker intervened: “Sorry, point of order, That isn’t actually what happened. . . . It wasn’t based on their Jewish name.”
But Bryne insisted, “That’s not a point of order — that is what happened. It is what the record shows occurred as does the media reportage.”
Other councillors also distanced themselves from Byrne’s allegation. Independent Councillor John Stamolis also said that although he could not judge how the Mayor or other Labor councillors felt on the evening, he could not agree with Byrne’s description or that it described what other councillors or members of the public experienced on the evening.
Greens Councillor Liz Atkins said that there were different perceptions of what happened on the night. Her perception was that the “booing and hissing” was in relation to support for the substance of the Greens motion for an audit of investments rather than an attack on people who spoke against it.
She also said that credit should be given to pro- Palestinian activists who themselves encouraged people to listen quietly.
Fake antisemitism claims
Your reporter asked Rosanna Barbero, who also was present throughout the meeting, what she observed. Barbero was the recipient of this year’s Multicultural NSW Human Rights Medal, recognising her lasting and meaningful contribution to human rights in NSW.
She is also a member of the Inner West Multicultural Network that has helped council develop an anti-racism strategy.
“I did not witness any racist comments,” said Barbero.
Barbero confirmed that she was present throughout the meeting and said: “I did not witness any racist comments. The meeting was recorded so the evidence of that is easy to verify.”
So this reporter, in a story for City Hub, took her advice and went to the evidence in the webcast, which provides a public record of what occurred. The soundtrack is clear. A listener can pick up when comments are made by audience members but not necessarily the content of them.
Bryne has alleged speakers against the motion were booed when their “Jewish sounding’ names were announced. Our analysis shows none of the five were booed or abused in any way when their names were announced.
There was, in fact, silence.
Five speakers identified themselves as Jewish. Four spoke against the motion, and one in favour.
Two of the five were heard in complete silence, one with some small applause at the end.
One woman who spoke in favour of the motion and whose grandparents were in the Holocaust was applauded and cheered at the end of her speech.
One man was interrupted by several comments from the gallery when he said the motion was based on “propaganda and disinformation” and would lead to a lack of social cohesion. He related experiences of anti-semitism when he was at school in the Inner West 14 years ago.
At the conclusion of his speech, there were some boos.
One man who had not successfully registered was added to the speakers list by the Mayor. Some people in the public gallery objected to this decision. The Mayor adjourned the meeting for three minutes and the speaker was then heard in silence.
The speakers in favour of the motion, most of whom had Palestinian backgrounds and relatives who had suffered expulsion from their homelands, concentrated on the war crimes against Palestinians and the importance of BDS motions. There were no personal attacks on speakers against the motion.
In response to a Jewish speaker who had argued that the solution was peace initiatives, one Palestinian speaker said that he wanted “liberation”, not “peace”.
Weaponising accusations of anti-semitism to shut down debate
Independent Inner West Councillor Pauline Lockie warned other councillors this week about the need to be careful about weaponising accusations of race and anti-semitism to shut down debates. Like Barbero, Lockie has played a leadership role in developing anti-racism strategies for the Inner West.
There are three serious concerns about Byrne’s allegations. The first concern is that they are not verified by the public record. This raises questions about the Mayor’s judgement and credibility.
The second is that making unsubstantiated allegations of antisemitism for the tactical purposes of winning a political argument demeans the seriousness and tragedy of anti-semitism.
Thirdly, there is a concern that spreading unsubstantiated allegations of anti-semitism could cause harm by spreading fear and anxiety in the Jewish community.
Controversial Christian minister
The most provocative speaker on the evening was not one of those who identified themselves as Jewish. It was Reverend Mark Leach, who introduced himself as an Anglican minister from Balmain. When he said that no one could reasonably apply the word “genocide” to what was occurring in Gaza, several people called out his comments.
Given the ICJ finding that a plausible genocide is occurring in Gaza, this was not surprising.
Darcy Byrne then stopped the meeting and gave Reverend Leach a small amount of further time to speak. Later in his speech, Reverend Leach described the motion itself as “deeply racist” because it held Israel accountable above all other states.
Boos for Leach
In fact, the motion would have added a general human rights provision to the investment policy which would have applied to any country. Reverend Leach was booed at the conclusion of his speech.
One speaker later said that she could not understand how this Christian minister would not accept that the word “genocide” could be used. This was not an anti-semitic or racist comment.
Throughout the debate, Byrne avoided the issue that the motion only called for an audit.
He also used his position of chair to directly question councillors. The following exchange occurred with Councillor Liz Atkins:
Mayor: Councilor Atkins, can I put to you a question? I have received advice that councillor officers are unaware of any investment from council that is complicit in the Israeli military operations in Gaza and the Palestinian territories. Are you aware of any?
Atkins: No. That’s why the motion asked for an audit of our investments and procurements.
Mayor: I’ll put one further question to you. The organisers of the protest outside the chamber and the subsequent overrunning of the council chamber asserted in their promotion of the event that the council was complicit in genocide. Is that your view?
Atkins: I don’t know. Until we do an audit, Mayor . . . Can I just take exception with the point of view that they “overran” the meeting? You invited them all in, and not one of them tried to get past a simple rope barrier.
Byrne says it’s immoral to support a one-party state
During the debate, Byrne surprisingly described support for a one-state solution for Israel and Palestinians as “immoral”. He described support for “one state” as meaning you either supported the wiping out of the Palestinians or the Israelis.
In fact, there is a long history of citizens, scholars and other commentators who have argued that one secular state of equal citizens is the only viable solution.
Many, including the Australian government, do not agree. Nevertheless, the award-winning journalist and expert on the Middle East, Antony Loewenstein, argued that position in The Sydney Morning Herald in November 2023.
Mayor in tune with Better Council Inc campaign
All of this debate is happening in the context of the hotly contested election campaign. The Mayor is understandably preoccupied with the impending poll. Rather than debating the issues, he finished the debate by launching an attack on the Greens, which sounded more like an election speech than a speech in reply in support of his motion.
Byrne said: “Some councillors are unwilling to condemn what was overt anti-Semitism”.
This is a heavy accusation. All councillors are strongly opposed to anti-semitism. The record does not show any overt anti-semitism.
Byrne went on: “But the more troubling thing is that there’s a large number of candidates running at this election who, if elected, will be making foreign affairs and this particular issue one of the central concerns of this council.
“This will result in a distraction with services going backwards and rates going up.”
In fact, the record shows that the Greens are just as focused on local issues as any other councillors. Even at last week’s meeting, Councillor Liz Atkins brought forward a motion about controversial moves to install a temporary cafe at Camperdown Park that would privatise public space and for which there had been no consultation.
Labor v Greens
Byrne’s message pitting concern about broader issues against local concerns is in tune with the messaging of a recently formed group called Better Council Inc. that is targeting the Greens throughout the Inner West and in Randwick and Waverley.
Placards saying “Put the Greens last”, “Keep the Greens Garbage out of Council” featuring a number of Greens candidates have gone up across Sydney. Some claim that the Greens are fixated on Gaza and ignore local issues.
Better Inc.’s material is authorised by Sophie Calland. She is a recently graduated computer engineer who told the Daily Telegraph that “she was a Labor member and that Better Council involves people from across the political aisle — even some former Greens.”
She described the group as a “grassroots group of young professionals” who wanted local government officials to focus on local issues.
“We believe local councils should concentrate on essential community services like waste management, local infrastructure, and the environment. That’s what councils are there for — looking after the needs of their immediate communities.”
On Saturday, Randwick Greens Councillor Kym Chapple was at a pre-poll booth at which a Better Council Inc. campaigner was handing out material specifically recommending that voters put her last.
Chapple tweeted that the Better councilwoman didn’t actually know that she was a councillor or any of the local issues in which she had been involved.
“That does not look like a local grassroots campaign. It’s an attempt to intimidate people who support a free Palestine. Anyway, it feels gross to have someone say to put you last because they care about the environment and local issues when that’s literally what you have done for three years.”
She then tweeted a long list of her local campaign successes.
Never Again is Now astroturf campaign
In fact, the actual work of distributing the leaflets is being done by a group spearheaded by none other than Reverend Mark Leach, who spoke at the Inner West Council meeting. Leach is one of the coordinators of the pro-Israel right-wing Christian group Never Again is Now.
The group is organising rallies around Australia to campaign against anti-semitism.
Reverend Mark Leach works closely with his daughter Freya Leach, who stood for the Liberal Party for the seat of Balmain in the 2023 state election and is associated with the rightwing Menzies Institute. Mark Leach describes himself as “working to renew the mind and heart of our culture against the backdrop of the radical left, Jihadist Islam and rising authoritarianism.
Leach’s own Twitter account shows that he embraces a range of rightwing causes. He is anti-trans, supports anti-immigration campaigners in the UK and has posted a jolly video of himself with Warren Mundine at a pro-Israeli rally in Melbourne.
Mundine was a No campaign spokesperson for the rightwing group Advance Australia during the Voice referendum.
Leach supports the Christian Lobby and is very critical of Christians who are campaigning for peace.
Anti-semitism exists. The problem is that Reverend Leach’s version of anti-semitism is what international law and human rights bodies regard as protesting against genocidal war crimes.
For #NeverAgainisNow, these atrocities are excusable for a state that is pursuing its right of “self-defence”. And if you don’t agree with that, don’t be surprised if you find yourself branded as not just “anti-semitic” but also a bullying extremist.
As of one week before the local government election, the Never Again is Now was holding a Zoom meeting to organise 400 volunteers to get 50,000 leaflets into the hands of voters at next Saturday’s local election.
This may well be just a dress rehearsal for a much bigger effort at the Federal election, where Advance Australia has announced it is planning to target the Greens.
Wendy Bacon is an investigative journalist who was professor of journalism at UTS. She has worked for Fairfax, Channel Nine and SBS and has published in The Guardian, New Matilda, City Hub and Overland. She has a long history in promoting independent and alternative journalism. She is not a member of any political party but is a Greens supporter and long-term supporter of peaceful BDS strategies. Republished from Michael West Media with the author’s permission.
This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.
COMMENTARY: By Binoy Kampmark in Melbourne
Between tomorrow and Friday, the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre (MCEC) will host a weapons bazaar that ought to be called “The Merchants of Death”.
The times for these merchants are positively bullish, given that total global military expenditure exceeded US$2.4 trillion last year, an increase of 6.8 percent in real terms from 2022.
The introductory note to the event is mildly innocuous:
“The Land Forces 2024 International Land Defence Exposition is the premier platform for interaction between defence, industry and government of all levels, to meet, to do business and discuss the opportunities and challenges facing the global land defence markets.”
The website goes on to describe the Land Defence Exposition as “the premier gateway to the land defence markets of Australia and the region, and a platform for interaction with major prime contractors from the United States and Europe”.
At the Brisbane Convention and Exhibition Centre in 2022, the event attracted 20,000 attendees, 810 “exhibitor organisations” from 25 countries, and ran 40 conferences, symposia and presentations.
From 30 nations, came 159 defence, government, industry and scientific delegations.
Land Forces 2024 is instructive as to how the military-industrial complex manifests. Featured background reading for the event involves, for instance, news about cultivating budding militarists.
Where better to start than in school?
School military ‘pathways’
From August 6, much approval is shown for the $5.1 million Federation Funding Agreement between the Australian government and the state governments of South Australia and West Australia to deliver “the Schools Pathways Programme (SPP)” as part of the Australian government’s Defence Industry Development Strategy.
The programme offers school children a chance to taste the pungent trimmings of industrial militarism — visits to military facilities, “project-based learning” and presentations.
Rather cynically, the SPP co-opts the science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) aspect of government policy, carving up a direct link between school study and the defence industry.
“We need more young Australians studying STEM subjects in schools and developing skills for our future workforce,” insisted Education Minister Jason Clare. It is hard to disagree with that, but why weapons?
There is much discontent about the Land Forces exposition.
Victorian Greens MP Ellen Sandell and federal MP for Melbourne Adam Bandt wrote to Premier Jacinta Allan asking her to call off the arms event.
The party noted that such companies as Elbit Systems “and others that are currently fuelling . . . Israel’s genocide in Palestine, where 40,000 people have now been killed — will showcase and sell their products there”.
Demands on Israel dismissed
Allan icily dismissed such demands.
Disrupt Land Forces, which boasts 50 different activist collectives, has been preparing.
Defence Connect reported as early as June 4 that groups, including Wage Peace — Disrupt War and Whistleblowers, Activists and Communities Alliance, were planning to rally against the Land Force exposition.
The usual mix of carnival, activism and harrying have been planned over a week, with the goal of ultimately encircling the MCEC to halt proceedings.
Ahead of the event, the Victorian Labor government, the event’s sponsor, has mobilised 1800 more police officers from the regional areas.
Victorian Police Minister Anthony Carbines did his best to set the mood.
“If you are not going to abide by the law, if you’re not going to protest peacefully, if you’re not going to show respect and decency, then you’ll be met with the full force of the law.”
Warmongering press outlets
Let us hope the police observe those same standards.
Warmongering press outlets, the Herald Sun being a stalwart, warn of the “risks” that “Australia’s protest capital” will again be “held hostage to disruption and confrontation”, given the diversion of police.
Its August 15 editorial demonised the protesters, swallowing the optimistic incitements on the website of Disrupt Land Forces.
The editorial noted the concerns of unnamed senior police fretting about “the potential chaos outside MCEC at South Wharf and across central Melbourne”, the context for police to mount “one of the biggest security operations since the anti-vaccine/anti-lockdown protests at the height of covid in 2021–21 or the World Economic Forum chaos in 2000”.
Were it up to these editors, protesters would do better to stay at home and let the Victorian economy, arms and all, hum along.
The merchants of death could then go about negotiating the mechanics of murder in broad daylight; Victoria’s government would get its blood fill; and Melbournians could turn a blind eye to what oils the mechanics of global conflict.
The protests will, hopefully, shock the city into recognition that the arms trade is global, nefarious and indifferent as to the casualty count.
Dr Binoy Kampmark lectures in global studies at RMIT University. This article was first published by Green Left and is republished by Asia Pacific Report with permission.
This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.
Australians are cutting back on meat due to health and price concerns, but adoption of plant-based meats remains low, and their taste is a big reason why.
One in five (21%) of citizens are ‘meat reducers’ – people who are eating less meat but don’t identify as flexitarians – making it the most popular diet in the country, according to a 2,000-person survey conducted by Toluna for think tank Food Frontier.
Respondents were asked to choose from 13 different dietary patterns – 10% said they were vegetarian, 7% flexitarian, and another 5% vegan, meaning that 42% of Australians are either reducing meat or not consuming it at all.
This year, a quarter of respondents have reduced their meat consumption, while 12% are planning to do so, and 2% have eliminated it altogether. The top three reasons for this were health concerns (61%), budgetary constraints (54%), and climate change (37%) – the latter is a welcome surprise, given the country has one of the largest climate denial rates in the world.
“The cost-of-living crisis may be affecting meat consumption,” suggests Food Frontier CEO Simon Eassom. “Over the past four years, the importance of budget as a motivator for reduced meat consumption has increased significantly, rising from 40% in 2021 to 54% in 2024.”
The dietary drivers in Australia remain similar across the spectrum. For example, 54% of meat reducers said they were doing so for health, 28% also picked medical reasons, and a third (34%) pointed to climate concerns. In the same vein, flexitarian diets are driven by health considerations (58%), medical reasons (34%) and environmental worries (24%).
Similar to the results in 2021, 79% of Australians go meat-free at least one day a week, with a quarter (24%) doing so for three to four days.
But while meat reduction is popular, plant-based analogues to meat still have some way to go – only 35% of Australians have tried these products (up from 25% three years ago), and just 16% eat them regularly.
Australians are most attracted by plant-based meats’ health benefits (53%). Nearly half (45%) enjoy their taste, 38% recognise their environmental advantages, and 36% do so for ethical reasons. However, this is in contrast with the 70% and 54% of Australians who chose health and environment, respectively, as reasons for liking meat analogues.
But these products have low repeat purchase rates, with only 22% of Aussies saying they’d buy them again. Poor taste was cited as a barrier by 46% (down from 52% in 2021), followed by their high price (37%, versus 39% three years ago) – this is despite the price premium of plant-based meats narrowing from 49% in 2020 to 33% last year, according to Food Frontier’s 2023 State of the Industry report.
That study also revealed that plant-based meat sales in Australia increased by 47% between 2020 and 2023, with per capita consumption up by 28%.
Meanwhile, 28% of Australians buy both plant-based meats and traditional plant proteins like tofu and lentils, and one in five prefer the former because they don’t know how to cook the latter.
Mirroring global trends, plant-based milk seems to be the leader in Australia’s alternative protein space, with two in five respondents (41%) having tried these analogues, and a third (34%) drinking them on the regular.
A similar number of consumers (36%) are likely to repurchase plant-based milk after trying it, the higher among the rest of the foods in the survey. Meanwhile, more consumers have tried vegan ice cream (37%) and would buy them again (25%) compared to meat analogues. But vegan cheese leaves a lot to be desired – only 13% who’ve bought it would do so again.
“The study also aimed to understand Australians’ perceptions of climate change contributors and how these considerations are influencing their dietary choices,” said Eassom. Agriculture makes up 13% of Australia’s emissions, and at least 66% of this comes from livestock farming.
But while 66% of Australians realise that fossil fuels contribute to climate change, less than half said so for food waste (45%) and animal agriculture (44%). And when asked what actions they take to reduce their impact on the planet, 76% noted that they recycle – by far the most popular act. Only 22% and 16% have been cutting out meat and dairy, respectively, to fight the climate crisis.
“It appears that some Australians are making a connection between animal agriculture and climate change; however, from a list of perceived key contributors to climate change, animal agriculture was selected by the least number of study participants,” said Eassom.
“This would indicate that, despite growing awareness amongst some consumers, more than half of Australians are either unaware or not concerned about the relationship between food production and climate change.”
The survey also looked at Aussie attitudes towards pet food, finding that consumers are split on their willingness to change their furry friends’ diets. More pet owners would buy wet pet food with ethically raised meat (49%) or minimal animal ingredients (44%) than products with no animal inputs (38%).
“That pet owners are interested in switching to other foods as long as they are nutritionally sufficient demonstrates a market for sustainable and innovative pet food options, mirroring the growing interest in diverse protein sources in human diets,” Eassom said. “In response to this, we are seeing a number of companies exploring alternative proteins, including cultivated meat, in pet food production.
The post One in Five Australians are ‘Meat Reducers’, With Interest in Plant-Based Analogues Driven by Health appeared first on Green Queen.
This post was originally published on Green Queen.
By Efe Özkan
Pro-Palestinian anti-war activists in Australia have protested in Melbourne, disrupting a defence expo set to open on Wednesday.
Protesters gathered yesterday in front of companies connected to weapons manufacturing across Melbourne as police were called to prevent an escalation of the events, according to 7News Melbourne.
Many police cars and units were visible in front of company buildings to prevent an escalation of the protests.
Protests are expected to move across the city to different areas ahead of the Land Forces Military Expo on Wednesday, with more than 25,000 participants, potentially one of the biggest in the country in decades.
On Sunday, Extinction Rebellion activists blocked Montague Street near the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre where the expo is being held.
Pro-Palestinian protesters in Australia have been urging the government to impose sanctions on Israel for its genocidal war on Gaza.
Israel has continued a devastating military offensive in the Gaza Strip since an attack by Hamas resistance forces on October 7, 2023, despite a UN Security Council resolution demanding an immediate ceasefire.
More than 40,000 Palestinians have since been killed, mostly women and children, and more than 91,700 wounded, according to local health authorities.
As the Israeli war enters its 12th month, vast tracts of Gaza lie in ruins amid a crippling blockade of food, clean water, and medicine.
Israel has also intensified its attacks on the Occupied West Bank in recent weeks, killing at least 692 Palestinians.
Extinction Rebellion disruption
Formed in 2018, Extinction Rebellion has employed disruptive tactics targeting roads and airports to denounce the extraction and burning of fossil fuels, reports Al Jazeera.
However, since the war on Gaza, they have also taken a strong position on the fighting and have called for an immediate ceasefire.
“If we believe in climate and ecological justice, we must seek justice in all forms. The climate and ecological emergency has roots in centuries of colonial violence, exploitation and oppression,” the UK-based group said in a statement in November.
This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.
Carbonaught, an Australian agtech startup turning rocks into carbon-sequestering fertilisers, has obtained fresh capital from Singaporean VC firm Better Bite Ventures.
The investment (whose sum is undisclosed) is part of the latter’s First Bite financing scheme for climate-tackling food startups at different stages, from idea and early prototyping to validation.
Carbonaught’s technology taps enhanced rock weathering, a technique that accelerates chemical reactions between rocks, water and air by spreading ground rocks like basalt onto surfaces. This helps remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and store it in rocks.
While weathering is a natural process that has happened for millions of years, startups like Carbonaught are speeding up the process to bring benefits to the planet, farmers, as well as the carbon market, enabling “a system where all parties win”.
This is also why Better Bite Ventures has backed the Queensland-based company. “We are looking forward to seeing the team helping make enhanced rock weathering a core part of the global agricultural system, and in the process taking a real bite out of fertiliser emissions and atmospheric carbon dioxide,” said Simon Newstead, founding partner at the VC firm.
When it rains, the water combines with the carbon dioxide present in the atmosphere to form carbonic acid. As it falls on mountains and farmland, the gas mineralises after interacting with the rocks and soil, and is stored as solid carbonate.
But enhanced rock weathering makes this process dramatically faster. It is becoming increasingly popular as a climate solution, with a host of players including InPlanet, Undo, Vesta, Eion and Lithos Carbon.
For Carbonaught – founded in 2021 by CEO Andrew Pedley and CTO James Lyons – this involves using crushed pieces of basalt that increase the contact between the rain and the rock, and therefore weathering.
The carbonic acid melts the basalt to release nutrients like calcium, phosphorus, magnesium and potassium, helping plants grow and reducing the acidity in soil. The process also absorbs carbon dioxide permanently to form stable carbon minerals.
According to Carbonaught, a 25-tonne basalt carpet using standard farming machinery, will break down and release 500 kgs each of phosphorus and potassium, and 2,000 kgs each of calcium and magnesium.
Its process offers three emissions reduction paths. The first involves replacing up to half of conventional synthetic fertiliser use with higher nitrogen-fixing efficiency. Then there’s permanent carbon removal, which is enabled by soil inorganic carbon that transforms atmospheric CO2 into stable carbonate minerals.
And finally, Carbonaught also helps with non-permanent carbon removal, with the release of essential nutrients creating conditions like increased soil PH to promote microbial growth and the accumulation of soil organic carbon.
Farmers have reaped the benefits of volcanic ash for centuries, allowing them to lower their dependency on fertilisers. But there have been several roadblocks keeping enhanced rock weathering from widespread adoption.
Connecting mines and quarries with farmers, growers and end buyers is a complex exercise, while trustworthy measurement and verification schemes are lacking. That has made it hard to prove that the effects are fast and large enough to justify farmers adopting the practice.
Carbonaught’s platform aims to solve these challenges, with a platform that opens the door for the efficient sourcing and distribution of crushed basalt, provides modelling and application guidance for farmers on-site, and carries out deep measurement and verification to validate soil health and emissions benefits. It also has a marketplace to connect growers of these low-emission crops to buyers.
This offers benefits to everyone. Rock providers get a new revenue stream; farmers get better yields, soil health, and savings on costly fertilisers; and buyers get verified low-carbon products. And the accelerated nature of the process keeps things financially viable.
Carbonaught is deploying its technology in trials in Australia and the US. In the former, it’s implementing its weathering technique on a sugarcane farm, as well as banana plantations and orange orchards, while helping validate its potential on an avocado and macadamia farm.
The startup’s prospects were recognised by the Queensland government too, which awarded it an A$74,800 ($50,000) grant earlier this year as part of its Ignite Spark funding scheme.
Fertilisers are one of five focus areas in the latest round of Better Bite Ventures’ First Bite scheme, which also involves rice production, palm oil, cocoa and coffee, and food waste. In June, it invested in Singapore-based ag-fintech AgriG8, which is helping Asian farmers reduce methane emissions from rice production.
Disclaimer: Green Queen founder and editor-in-chief Sonalie Figueiras is a Venture Partner at Better Bite Ventures.
The post Carbonaught Attracts Funding to Turn Rocks Into Carbon-Removing Fertiliser appeared first on Green Queen.
This post was originally published on Green Queen.
Power should only ever be vested carefully, and certainly not in the hands of mining magnate Gina Rinehart, a creature so comically absurd as to warrant immediate dismissal in any respectable commentary. But Australia’s richest human being demands to be noticed, given the insensible influence she continues to exert in press and policy circles. Rants of smelly suggestion become pearls of perfumed wisdom, often occasioned by large amounts of largesse she disgorges on her sycophantic following.
Of late, she has been busy in her narcissistic daftness. At the National Bush Summit held last month, she proved particularly unstoppable. While advertised as a News Corp project backed by a number of Australian corporate heavies (NBN, CommBank, Woolworths and Qantas), Rinehart’s Hancock Prospecting left its unmistakable mark. The events offered a Rinehart Hall of Mirrors, self-reflecting her purchased eminence. She funded much of it; she structured it; she brought the necessary tyrannical boredom in tow.
Before remarking on some of the observations, brief mention should be made about the source of Rinehart’s animal spirit. One should never condemn, outright, the children for the sins of their parents. But she is the exception that proves the rule. Her father, Lang Hancock, was an elemental Australian version of a 20th century conquistador, an enterprising plunderer of the land and equally immune to cultural refinements and such novel notions as human rights. With barbaric clarity and genocidal suggestion, he proposed in 1984 that unassimilated members of the Indigenous populace be given the following treatment: “dope up the water up, so that they were sterile and would breed themselves out in the future and that would solve the problem.”
At the Port Hedland leg of the Bush Summit, Rinehart fantasised about having the military styled comforts offered by the US firm Rafael Advanced Defense Systems in 2011 to Israel. The Iron Dome system, used to shield Israel from rocket attacks, could just as well be deployed in Australia. But instead of focusing on protecting civilians, the batteries would be invaluable in protecting Rinehart’s own mining assets in the Pilbara.
A gorged ego, the country’s perceived welfare and mining interests are all fused in an unsteady mix of justified plunder under the cover of military protection for Hancock Prospecting. “It is no good having the resources of the Pilbara unless we can ship it out. Hence, we should have defence to keep our railways and ports open, and defend our sea lanes.” To the defensive dome could also be added “war drones, and smart sea mines.”
The next target in this spray of barking madness was government regulation – at least the sort that impairs her extractive practices. With brattish petulance, she even claimed that Canada had treated the mining industry with greater aplomb and respect, despite having, in her words, a “socialist” Prime Minister in the form of Justin Trudeau. Various taxes, such as the Fringe Benefits Tax, should be ditched, given the damage it was doing to Northern Australia.
Others in the primary industry market such as farmers and pastoralists also deserved relief from the stifling burden of red tape. “The size, expense, and intrusion of government has all grown massively in recent times, adding to businesses costs, record business failures, rising house costs and our own living costs, and delaying revenue earning projects.” Some of these observations are far from untrue, but coming from Rinehart, they suggest a grotesque self-interest at work.
In Bendigo, Victoria, her video address fumed at the state of Australia’s “woke” education system. Australia’s children and grandchildren, some “as young as three in pre-schools” were “being let down” by insidious practices, including lessons on the evils of the police and plastics. “They and others in school classes are no longer taught to be proud of our country, quite the opposite.”
Such vulnerable creatures, made to feel anxious about the effects of climate change, were also being deprived of a true understanding of mining, coal and iron ore. “In the entire high school curriculum iron ore is referenced only twice,” she sulks. “Yet climate change and renewable energy are mentioned 48 times.”
All liberal democracies face similar challenges: how to make sure the thick of mind remain distracted and resistant to riot, and keeping the malevolently wealthy contained within the realm of accountability. Rinehart’s commentaries suggest a desire to escape that orbit of accountability, operating as an unelected politician’s wish list. And being unelected is exactly how she likes it. The compromise and messiness of parliamentary debate and the making of policy would prove too excruciating and intolerable. Far better to intimidate elected representatives from afar, using platoons of paid-up lobbyists, consultants and cheering propagandists. When feeling generous, give them a confessional platform to ask forgiveness for their sins.
Were the fossil fuel lobby to be equipped with actual weapons, a coup would not be off the cards. A few Australian prime ministers have already had their heads, politically speaking, served on a platter to the mining industry, with Rinehart’s blessings. A depressing conclusion can thereby be drawn. Australia is a country where rule is exercised by those outside parliament. It’s Rinehart on minerals and metals and the Pentagon and the US military complex on weapons and military bases. What a stupendous state of affairs Australians find themselves in.
The post Give Me Missiles: Gina Rinehart and the Pathologies of Mining first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
Sydney-based Harrison.ai has launched a new AI model to help radiologists analyse and interpret their patients’ x-rays, proving twice as effective as major large language models. On Thursday, the company launched Harrison.rad.1, which can generate specialised reports based on a particular patient’s context and clinical history and enables radiologists to ask open-ended questions about x-ray…
The post Harrison.ai’s new model beats GenAI giants appeared first on InnovationAus.com.
This post was originally published on InnovationAus.com.
Vegvisir has supplied the Australian Army with Vegvisir’s Mixed Reality based situational awareness solution to enhance its sensor systems and to enable Army to explore whether mixed reality improves the efficiency of platforms the Australian Army has converted to uncrewed and optionally crewed vehicles. Vegvisir’s situational awareness system uses vehicle-mounted cameras, an immersive headset, and […]
The post Australian Army Trials Vegvisir Solution to Upgrade Uncrewed M113 APCs appeared first on Asian Military Review.
This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.
The US State Department has greenlighted Australia’s request for sustainment services for its future fleet of Boeing AH-64E Apache attack helicopters under the Foreign MilitarySales (FMS) scheme, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) announced on 23 August. The proposed deal for AH-64E Apache Sustainment Support Services and associated equipment is worth an estimated cost of […]
The post Australia lines up Apache support ahead of deliveries appeared first on Asian Military Review.
This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.
If you ask Elli Hanson about the barriers facing Australian startups and founders in a US-centric VC world, she’ll tell you it has a lot to do with our humility and the social phenomenon known as tall poppy syndrome. “Australian founders hold this incredibly profound quiet confidence, but don’t want to talk about the things…
The post Tall poppies and Australia’s outsized startup opportunity appeared first on InnovationAus.com.
This post was originally published on InnovationAus.com.
Between September 11 and 13, the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre (MCEC) will play host to a bazaar of networking and deal making as part of a show that really ought to be called The Merchants of Death Down Under. And the times for these merchants are positively bullish, given that total global military expenditure exceeded US$2.4 trillion in 2023, an increase of 6.8% in real terms from 2022.
The introductory note to the event is, typically in the lingo of the industry, mildly innocuous, even dull. “The Land Forces 2024 International Land Defence Exposition is the premier platform for interaction between defence, industry and government of all levels, to meet, to do business and discuss the opportunities and challenges facing the global land defence markets.”
In greater detail, the website goes on to describe the Land Defence Exposition as “the premier gateway to the land defence markets of Australia and the region, and a platform for interaction with major prime contractors from the United States and Europe.” When it was held in 2022 at the Brisbane Convention and Exhibition Centre, the event attracted 20,000 attendees, 810 “exhibitor organisations” from 25 countries, and ran 40 conferences, symposia and presentations. From 30 nations came 159 defence, government, industry and scientific delegations.
Land Forces 2024 is instructive into how the military-industrial complex manifests. Featured background reading for the event involves, for instance, news about cultivating budding militarists and numb any disturbing tendencies towards peacemaking. And where better to start than in school, where things have yet to even bud? From August 6, much approval is shown for the A$5.1 million Federation Funding Agreement between the Australian government and the state governments of South Australian and West Australia to deliver “the Schools Pathways Program (SPP)” as part of the Australian government’s Defence Industry Development Strategy. The program offers school children a chance to taste the pungent trimmings of industrial militarism: visits to military facilities, “project-based learning”, and attend presentations.
Rather cynically, the SPP co-opts the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) aspect of government policy, carving up a direct link between school study and the defence industry. “We need more young Australians studying STEM subjects in schools and develop skills for our future workforce,” insists the Australian Minister for Education, Jason Clare. Hard to disagree with the proposition, but why make things so blatantly easy for the Merchants of Death?
Mutterings of discontent have registered against the Land Forces exposition. Ellen Sandell, a Victorian member of parliament and leader of the Victorian Greens, and Adam Bandt, the federal member for Melbourne and leader of the Australian Greens, have written to the state Premier Jacinta Allan to call off the arms event. The party notes that such companies as Elbit Systems “and others that are currently fuelling … Israel’s genocide in Palestine, where 40,000 people have now been killed – will showcase and sell their products there.” Like most state premiers in Australia, Allan sees dollars before principles, icily dismissing such demands.
The protest outfit Disrupt Land Forces, one that so far boasts 50 different activist collectives, has been gathering some steam. As early as June 4, the publishing outlet Defence Connect reported movement on the activist front, with groups such as Wage Peace – Disrupt War and Whistleblowers, Activists & Communities Alliance planning to rally against the Land Force exposition.
On its website the group writes that it “hassled Land Forces out of Magandjin (Brisbane)” in 2022. The prospects look even better now for a re-run. “Imagine what we can do now, in Narrm (Melbourne).” Various activities are anticipated stretching over a week, a usual mix of carnival, activism, harrying – especially the arms dealers – with the goal of gathering 25,000 people who will ultimately encircle the MCEC and cause a halt to proceedings.
Ahead of the event, the Victorian Labor government, the event’s satisfied sponsor, is already anticipating trouble, seeing the threat to peace from protestors as far more profound than boardroom arms dealers making deals in the shadow of death. A further 1,800 police officers are being mobilised, drawn from the regional areas of the state.
The Victorian Minister for Police, Anthony Carbines, did his best to set the mood. “If you are not going to abide by the law, if you’re not going to protest peacefully, if you’re not going to show respect and decency, then you’ll be met with the full force of the law.” Let’s hope the police observe those same standards.
Warmongering press outlets, The Herald Sun being a perennial stalwart, warn of the “risks” that “Australia’s protest capital” will again be “held hostage to disruption and confrontation” given the diversion of police. Its editorial of August 15 gives the protestors a flatteringly demon tinge, treating the projected number of 25,000 attendees quite literally, swallowing whole the optimistic incitements on the website of Disrupt Land Force group.
The editorial also notes the concerns of unnamed senior members of the police force who fret about “the potential chaos outside MCEC at South Wharf and across central Melbourne”, one that compelled the forces to mount “one of the biggest security operations since the anti-vaccine/anti-lockdown protests at the height of Covid in 2021-21 or the World Economic Forum chaos in 2000.”
Were it up to the editors, protesting activists would do far better to stay at home and let the Victorian economy, arms and all, hum along. The merchants of death could go about negotiating the mechanics of murder in broad daylight; the Victorian government would get its blood fill; and Melbournians could turn a blind eye to what oils the mechanics of global conflict. The forthcoming protests will, hopefully, shock the city into recognition that the arms trade is global, nefarious and indifferent to the casualty count.
The post Killing Bazaars: The Land Forces Expo Down Under first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
The challenges of the 21st century are too great for any nation to tackle them alone—especially in the realm of defense and security. That’s why interest among responsible powers is growing in collaboration generally but also with advanced new programs specifically. A case in point is with collaborative combat aircraft, known as CCAs. These highly […]
The post International collaboration unlocks true potential for collaborative combat aircraft appeared first on Asian Military Review.
This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.
It may only be home to six companies, but Australia’s precision fermentation ecosystem is already the largest across Asia-Pacific.
Ingredients made from this technology can contribute to the country’s AU$13B ($8.8B) opportunity to expand and diversify protein production, as forecast by Australia’s science research agency CSIRO. Additionally, precision fermentation could help meet the predicated additional domestic and export demand of 8.5 million tonnes of protein by 2030.
This is according to non-profit Cellular Agriculture Australia, which has published a new report exploring the country’s potential and challenges around precision fermentation.
Currently, there are five startups – Nourish Ingredients, Eden Brew, Daisy Lab, All G Foods, and Eclipse Ingredients – and an ASX-listed company (Noumi) working in the precision fermentation sector in Australia and New Zealand, while Change Foods has origins in Australia and Cauldron Ferm provides contract manufacturing solutions.
These companies are proteins like whey, casein, and bovine and human lactoferrin, as well as fats for better meat and dairy analogues. But as costs continue to be prohibitive, there has been an increased focus on lactoferrin, a high-value ingredient that makes things economically viable in the current landscape.
Cost and scalability are among a number of challenges facing the precision fermentation industry in Australia, including a lack of funding for open-access foundational research, high prices and a lack of clarity for regulatory applications, as well as limited government interest.
To counter that, Cellular Agriculture Australia has posited key policy recommendations for the Australian government to realise the full potential of precision fermentation, centred across research, manufacturing and regulation.
This could help the country “enhance its sovereign capability in biotechnology and food manufacturing, whilst supporting jobs and productivity”, argues the organisation.
It comes after a scorecard on government support for alternative proteins by fellow Aussie think tank Food Frontier placed Australia at the bottom of the list of 10 nations, identifying it as the only country in its analysis to not have a national strategy that included alternative proteins.
The report calls on the Department of Education to place cellular agriculture as a research and infrastructure priority in the next National Research Infrastructure Roadmap. Due in 2026, this outlines the research infrastructure required over the coming decade, informing government actions to increase innovation.
The education department should also recognise foods as a priority application of synthetic biology through precision fermentation in the updated National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy (NCRIS), also due in 2026.
At the moment, synthetic biology is noted as a Step Change area in the NCRIS, which allows nationwide investments in infrastructure by coordinating open-access and targeted specialities, and prioritising scale-up and research translation.
Meanwhile, the think tank urges the Department of Industry, Science and Resources to consider cellular agriculture as “technologies for producing food under likely future Australian climate conditions” in the revitalised 2024 National Science and Research Priorities.
These priorities focus on government support for science and research, and influence the research projects universities submit for funding. This effort should further consider precision fermentation and other cellular agriculture techniques as having significant potential in helping the government reach its net-zero goal.
When it comes to the manufacturing sector, Cellular Agriculture Australia highlights the importance of increased federal investments into pilot and commercial-scale facilities to scale up precision-fermented products. One way to do this would be to expand the scope of the Future Made in Australia to include cellular agriculture and food as key opportunities.
The report recommends the Department of Industry, Science and Resources adopt cellular agriculture technologies in the government’s innovation agenda – in particular, within the proposed national bioeconomy strategy. In a similar move last month, India included smart proteins in its bioeconomy policy.
Meanwhile, the Department of Industry, Science and Resources is called upon to explicitly reference cellular agriculture tech in documents like the National Reconstruction Fund (NRF) Co-investment Plans, which would “unlock substantive funding opportunities” for precision fermentation players.
The think tank notes how existing policies are limited in their ability to fund first-of-a-kind facilities, with NRF investments only provided to projects with positive returns on investment. So the government should also consider additional financing schemes to bridge this gap.
Both federal and state administrations must look into flexible incentive packages – such as government-funded debt, corporate tax holidays, below-market input prices, and leaseback arrangements – to encourage investment in precision fermentation facilities. These can also be implemented through existing policy mechanisms like the NRF.
Already, the joint regulator Food Standards Australia and New Zealand (FSANZ) has approved precision-fermented ingredients from overseas companies, such as Impossible Foods’ soy leghemoglobin (or heme), Cargill’s EverSweet stevia sweetener, and certain infant formulas with fermentation-derived milk oligosaccharides.
Within the wider cellular agriculture space, the FSANZ is also considering an application from Sydney-based startup Vow to sell its cultivated meat in the countries. But to date, it hasn’t approved any precision-fermented ingredients as major food components (like dairy proteins).
The FSANZ’s regulatory framework has been a barrier for many companies. For example, Vow’s approval was expected to take 12 months, but is now approaching two years – precision fermentation has a similar regulatory timeline. Plus, filing a dossier is expensive, with companies having to pay AU$195,000 ($132,000) if they want things to be fast-tracked.
So there’s a lot of room for improvement and streamlining, starting with removing or reducing the high costs associated with submitting food safety assessments. But the FSANZ would itself benefit from increased resources from the Department of Health and Aged Care, states Cellular Agriculture Australia. This would expand its capacity to deal with applications and help the industry be competitive internationally.
The health department could also authorise changes to the FSANZ act, which would streamline approvals for genetically engineered foods. For instance, the regulator could be empowered to accept risk assessments from international jurisdictions to speed up timelines and reduce costs for novel food applications.
Australia’s precision fermentation value chain has a ton of capabilities, thanks to its “robust research capability, a collaborative ecosystem of companies, a well-established regulatory system, and an emerging commercial landscape”, according to Cellular Agriculture Australia CEO Sam Perkins.
“We have all the puzzle pieces here, but government support is crucial to advancing the sector and ensuring Australian companies remain onshore,” he said. “The window of opportunity for this is finite.”
The post Think Tank Lays Out Policy Recommendations for Australia’s Precision Fermentation Sector appeared first on Green Queen.
This post was originally published on Green Queen.
The tiltrotor V-22 Osprey has a plagued, bloodied history. But blighted as it is, the aircraft remains a cherished feature of the US Marines, regarded as vital in supporting combat assault, logistics and transport, not to mention playing a role in search-and-rescue missions and delivering equipment for the Navy carrier air wings.
In March this year, V-22 flights were again permitted after a three-month pause following a fatal crash on November 29 of an Air Force CV-22B off Yakushima Island, Japan and the grounding of all V-22S aircraft in early December. Col. Brian Taylor, program manager for the V-22 Joint Program Office, told a media roundtable two days prior to rescinding the ground order that a “meticulous and data-driven approach” had been used in investigations.
The approach, however, may well have been less meticulous and data-driven than a matter of desperation and self-interest, not to mention the role the aircraft is intended to play in the lighter, more agile forms of conflict envisaged by the “Force Design 2030” strategy. A feature of that strategy is EABO, known to the military wonks as Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations.
Bryan Clark, senior fellow and director of the Hudson Institute’s Center for Defense Concepts and Technology, offers a blunt assessment. “There’s not a clear backup for the Marines, there’s not a clear backup for the Air Force, and soon there won’t be a backup for the Navy’s [carrier onboard delivery] mission.”
The Osprey’s failures have also left their spatter in Australia. On August 27, 2023 a V-22B Osprey with 23 US marines crashed to the north of Darwin on Melville Island, leading to three fatalities. Darwin, having become a vital springboard in projecting US power in the Indo-Pacific, hosts an annual Marine Rotational Force, so-called to avoid suspicions of a permanent garrisoning of the city.
The crash also stirred unwanted memories of a previous Osprey crash in Australia, when a Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 265 failed to safely land on the flight deck of USS Green Bay on August 5, 2017. That lethal occasion saw three deaths and 23 injuries.
The Osprey has pride of place in a military force that specialises in lethal aviation mishaps during training and routine operations. Join the US Armed Forces, and you might just get yourself killed by your own machinery and practices. The investigation into the Melville Island crash was instructive to that end, showing the aircraft to be, yet again, an object of pious reverence in US defence circles.
The initial investigation into the crash was initially eclectic: the Northern Territory police, fire and emergency services, along with personnel from the Australian Defence Force and the US Marine Corps. At the time, acting assistant commissioner and incident controller, Matthew Hollamby, expressed his enthusiasm in carrying out a “thorough investigation”. “We are in the recovery phase and working closely with NT Fire and Rescue Service to assist us with a safe and respectful recovery operation of the three deceased US marines.”
Despite such utterances, it soon became clear that any investigation into the matter would ultimately be pared back. Either the servitors were not considered up to the task, or all too capable in identifying what caused the crash. In September 2023, the local press reported that territory officials were no longer needed, with NT News going so far as to claim that local agencies had been “ousted from the investigation”. The Marines had taken full reins over the matter.
The top brass accordingly got the findings they wanted from the US Marines’ official report, which involved sparing the Osprey and chastising the personnel. There had been no “material or mechanical failure of any component on the aircraft”. The crash had been “caused by a series of poor decisions and/or miscalculations.”
The squadron’s attitude to procedure had also been less than enviable, marked by a “culture that disregarded safety of flight procedures”. There had been a “lack of attention to detail and failure to comply with proper pre-flight procedures”. There had also been a “lackadaisical attitude across the squadron” towards maintenance practices. Command responsibility in not addressing that particular culture was also acknowledged, while the conduct of the Australian Defence Forces and “local nationals” in responding to the crash were deemed “admirable”.
Such reports are hardly intended as ironic, but the executive summary notes how Australian defence protocols were so developed as to enable the Marines to operate with even greater daring than they otherwise would. The ADF’s “casualty evacuation (CASEVAC) and mass casualty (MASSCAS) support structure is allowing Marine units to conduct multi-national military training events in the Northern Territories without sacrificing force requirements. Without these well-established relationships in place this mishap may have been more tragic.”
The findings should have given the then Northern Territory Chief Minister Eva Lawler pause for concern. Squadrons of personnel operating such machinery indifferent to safety would surely stir some searching questions. But NT officials, under the eagle eye of the Canberra military establishment, aim to please, and Lawler proved no different. She knew “that the US Marines will do the work that’s needed now to make sure that any recommendations out of any inquiry are implemented in full.”
In a statement of unconvincing worth, the Marines insisted that they remained “unwavering” in their “commitment to the world class training of our aircrews and ensuring their safety”. And that commitment, not to mention the type of training, is precisely what we should be afraid of.
The post Protecting the Widow Maker: The US Marines Exonerate the Osprey first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
The Royal Australian Navy (RAN) and Australian industry conducted their first direct maintenance task on a nuclear-powered attack submarine (SSN), as part of preparations to host and subsequently operate its own fleet of SSNs. The Submarine Tendered Maintenance Period (STMP) on the US Navy’s Virginia-class SSN USS Hawaii was performed at HMAS Stirling in Western Australia with […]
The post Australia performs first nuclear submarine maintenance work appeared first on Asian Military Review.
This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.
In a speech delivered at the ANU’s Centre for Asian-Australian Leadership on 19 August, Foreign Minster Penny Wong announced changes to the Australian Government’s New Colombo Plan (NCP). The speech—worth watching in full—outlined the government’s reforms to the now 10-year-old Indo-Pacific student mobility scheme, including:
The motivations behind these reforms—the renewed emphasis on language learning, a desire to see more Australian students up in the Indo-Pacific for longer duration experiences, and a rebalancing of the NCP away from the two-week study tours that have characterised the first 10 years of the scheme, are good and worthy goals. But it remains to be seen if the changes announced last week will actually deliver on these ambitions.
The NCP has achieved an extraordinary amount in a relatively short span of time. In its first six years between 2014 and 2019, the NCP increased the number of Australian domestic undergraduates studying in the Indo-Pacific annually by 83%—from 8,437 students in 2014 to 15,440 students in 2019.
CLICK TO ENLARGE
It has nearly doubled the number of Australian undergraduates studying in Indonesia and India annually, and nearly tripled the numbers studying in Vietnam and Malaysia.
Source: Australian Universities International Directors’ Forum (AUIDF). CLICK TO ENLARGE
This achievement has been driven overwhelmingly by expansion of Australian undergraduate participation in short format learning abroad experiences of four weeks or less in duration. In 2019, the year before the pandemic, a record 15,440 domestic undergraduate students undertook learning abroad experiences in the Indo-Pacific. Eleven thousand (or 73%) of these experiences were of four weeks or less in duration. Only 11% (or about 1,800) of these experiences were students studying for a semester or longer in the Indo-Pacific.
Source: Australian Universities International Directors’ Forum (AUIDF). CLICK TO ENLARGE
According to the guidelines for the NCP’s 2025 funding round, the scheme has three objectives:
Over the NCP’s first decade, these objectives have, in practice, often been in tension with one another. The tension originates in the NCP’s design and dual nature as both an education program and an instrument of Australian foreign policy.
Australian universities have spent most of the first decade of the NCP trying to convince the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) of the educational outcomes and access, equity and inclusion benefits delivered by short duration learning abroad experiences. Under its previous settings the NCP has inarguably delivered on the “diversity” aspect of the scheme’s first objective. There are thousands upon thousands of Australian students who have enjoyed two-week introductory experiences of the Indo-Pacific under the NCP Mobility Program since 2014. These are students who now have passports, who have experienced international travel—many for the first time—who otherwise would not have.
However, these outcomes have, arguably, been achieved at the expense of the NCP’s other objectives—specifically the depth of “Indo-Pacific capability and Asia literacy” attained by NCP alumni, and the strength and durability of people-to-people relationships arising from these short visits to the Indo-Pacific by Australian students.
These shortcomings have been noticed by some in Australian foreign policy circles. The Lowy Institute’s Susannah Patton wrote in November 2022 that:
The impact of the NCP in improving Australia’s relationships with Southeast Asia is almost certainly low. The overwhelming majority of students receiving funding under the scheme…are recipients of “mobility grants”, which fund only short-term placements or travel…Qualitative academic research on the experiences of students travelling to Indonesia for short-term placements indicates that while short-term study tours may be “thought provoking”, they are unlikely to forge enduring connections to the country.
“The government should…reshape the New Colombo Plan to focus more on long-term study opportunities to ensure it is meeting its original goal of strengthening Australia’s relationships with countries in the broader Indo-Pacific.”
While prioritisation of longer duration experiences in the Indo-Pacific has been a feature of DFAT’s guidelines to universities since 2014, the raising of the minimum duration for NCP-funded mobility experiences under the 2025 guidelines is the Department’s most muscular pressing of this particular point yet.
Australian universities are not yet very good at getting domestic undergraduates up to the Indo-Pacific for longer duration study—not, at least, at the scale or in the numbers desired by DFAT. The reasons for this are layered and complex. There are both student demand-side and university supply-side barriers. In short, the opportunity costs of heading up to the Indo-Pacific for semester or longer are high for most Australian students. This constrains the demand for such experiences—approximately 1,800 students nationally in 2019. Averaged across Australia’s 42 universities this equates to just 40 students per institution heading up to the Indo-Pacific for a semester or longer each year.
There is a strong case for supporting the study of Indonesian history and cultures in Australian universities.
This is an uneconomically small number of students for Australian universities to accommodate within bespoke course offerings or degree programs. This is particularly the case in an Australian higher education environment characterised since 2017 by capped Commonwealth funding for the teaching of domestic students, and the universities’ consequent drive towards course and degree program rationalisation.
Related
How Indonesian studies’ “brand needy” lets Australian students down
Efforts to overcome the supply-side barriers have been—and remain—particularly neglected. Existing NCP settings provide little to no meaningful institutional funding for universities, at least not of the sort or quantum required to make the universities want to serve DFAT’s aim of longer duration Indo-Pacific study by domestic students.
Consequently, the NCP has been wholly unsuccessful in motivating the kind of structural change required within the Australian higher education system that might see greater numbers of domestic students studying for a semester or longer in the region. The required structural change includes, most importantly, new courses and degree programs with clear, curriculum embedded pathways to a semester or longer in the Indo-Pacific.
DFAT’s approach to achieving the NCP’s objectives can be illuminatingly contrasted with recent interventions into Australian higher education by the Commonwealth Departments of Health and Defence. Rather than offer grants and scholarships to students, these departments have provided funding directly to Australian universities to set up and deliver courses that serve their particular departmental objectives.
Nothing in the latest reforms announced by the foreign minister is likely fix the NCP’s supply-side constraints or make Australian universities want to send domestic students up to the Indo-Pacific for a semester or longer in numbers above the prevailing modest level.
In taking two-week and three-week experiences off the table from 2025, the foreign minister has thrown down the gauntlet to Australian universities, inviting them to both build upon and level-up from the comparatively low-hanging fruit of the two-week study tours that have characterised the NCP’s first decade.
Learning abroad staff working at Australian universities are typically creative, resourceful and mission-driven people. They will likely do their best to adapt to the NCP’s new settings and extend the duration of their students’ sojourning in the Indo-Pacific beyond the new four-week minimum. It is unfortunate, though, that the Australian government has not yet buttressed the enthusiasm of these learning abroad staff with a revenue signal to vice-chancellors and faculty deans of a kind and quantum that might make university leadership prioritise and centre long duration learning abroad to the Indo-Pacific within university course and degree structures.
Declaration of Interest/Disclaimer: ACICIS has received over $19 million since 2014 in Australian Government funding through the New Colombo Plan to support over 4,000 Australian undergraduate students’ participation in the consortium’s short format and semester programs in Indonesia.
The post A new direction for the New Colombo Plan. Maybe. appeared first on New Mandala.
This post was originally published on New Mandala.
Hanwha Aerospace completed the construction of the H-ACE in Geelong, Australia, marking the first overseas production base established by a Korean defense company. AS9 Self-Propelled Howitzer, AS10 Armoured Ammunition Resupply Vehicle, and the Redback Infantry Fighting Vehicle will be manufactured at the facility. Hanwha Aerospace is accelerating its entry into the AUKUS markets through the […]
The post Hanwha Aerospace Completes Armoured Vehicle Factory in Australia appeared first on Asian Military Review.
This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.
The problem with satellite states and subject powers is that their representatives are rarely to be trusted, especially on matters regarding security. Their idea of safety and assurance is tied up in the interests of some other power, one who supposedly guarantees it through a promised force of arms come the place and come the time. The guarantee is often a sham one, variable in accordance with the self-interest of the guardian. In the case of the United States, the island continent of Australia is only useful as an annexure of Washington’s goal: maintaining less the illusion of a Pax Americana than a state of threatened military aggression against any upstart daring to vex an empire.
In an interview with the Weekend Australian published on August 16, Republican Representative Michael McCaul, chair of the US House Committee on Foreign Affairs, did something few Australian politicians or think tankers dare do: offer a bracingly frank assessment about the military intentions of the AUKUS security pact. Forget the peaceful dimension here. A militarised, garrisoned Australia is essential to maintaining US military supremacy – on the pretext of maintaining the peace, naturally.
Australia’s vastness and geography has always mesmerised explorers, writers and planners of the military inclination. In the case of McCaul, Australia was to be praised as offering “key advantages” in deterring China. “It is the central base of operations in the Indo-Pacific to counter the threat.”
In the scheme of things, the northern city of Darwin was vital. “If you really look at the concentric circles emanating from Darwin – that is the base of operations, and the rotating (US) forces there are providing the projection of power and force that we’re seeing in the region.” On Sky News, the congressman went so far as to call Darwin “the epicentre of the organisation projecting power through the South China Sea to China.”
McCaul’s reasons for this state of affairs are given the usual dressing, the gingered sauce we have come to expect from the standard bearers of empire: the entire effort was a collaborative, cooperative one between two equal states with the same interests, an effort to “provide more deterrence in the region and project power and strength so we don’t have a war.” It sounded much like a shabby confection by one superior power to a vastly inferior one: manufacture the security threat – in this case, unchecked, possibly mad Chinese ambitions – and then gather military forces to battle it. Make it a joint affair, much like a married couple menaced by a nightmare.
The monster, once conjured, can only grow more dangerous, and must be fought as a matter of urgency. Their creators demand it. “Time is really of the essence right now, as Chairman Xi has announced his 2027 project,” warned McCaul, taking that all too familiar position on China’s leader as a barking mad despot keen on world war over a small piece of real estate. That year is only of significance to US planners since the Chinese president has promised Beijing’s readiness to invade Taiwan by that time. But such visions have no meaning in a vacuum, and the other power essential to that talk of toughness is Washington’s own provocative role. Australia has no reason to play in such playgrounds of nonsense, but AUKUS has been shown to be an open license for Canberra to commit personnel to any futile conflict over that island.
The integration, which has become synonymous with absorption, of Australia’s defence into the US military industrial complex, is also a matter of interest to McCaul. “I envision there being co-production in Australia … helping to build up our defence industrial base, which is really stressed right now with war in the Middle East and Ukraine and the eastern Europe threat.” Australia, servant to US global power.
This latest visit affirms the content of the recent AUSMIN meeting held in Annapolis, Maryland, where Australia’s Defence Minister Richard Marles and Foreign Minister Penny Wong confirmed that the US war machine would find itself operating in every sphere of Australian defence in what is clumsily described as “Enhanced Force Posture Cooperation”.
The occasion also gave McCaul a chance to announce that defence trade exemptions had been granted to Australia and the UK under the International Traffic in Arms Regulation. He still expressed regret over “big government regulation” as a barrier to “this crucial alliance’s ability to truly deter a conflict in the Indo-Pacific.”
The removal of some defence licensing restrictions has thrilled Marles, who continues to labour under the assumption that this will somehow favour Australia’s barely existing sovereign capability. “This is really important in terms of our ability to build our future submarines, but also to pursue that AUKUS Pillar II agenda of those new innovative technologies.” The embarrassingly naïve Marles ignores the vital feature of any such agreements: that the US maintains control over all intellectual property, including any relevant classified material associated with those technologies.
The comments from Rep. McCaul square with those made by previous officials who see Australia as a vital staging ground for war. US Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell, during his April 3 visit to Washington’s Center for a New American Security (CNAS), was also candid in the promise offered by nuclear powered submarines.
In a discussion with CNAS Chief Executive Officer, Richard Fontaine, Campbell foresaw “a number of areas of conflict and in a number of scenarios that countries acting together,” including Japan, Australia, South Korea and India, when it came to the Indo-Pacific. “I think that balance, the additional capacity will help strengthen deterrence more general [sic].” The nuclear-powered submarines intended for the Royal Australian Navy, along with the boats of likeminded states “could deliver conventional ordinance from long distances. Those have enormous implications in a variety of scenarios, including in cross-strait circumstances”.
Even with such open admissions on the reasons why AUKUS is important to Washington, the timid, the bought, and the bribed, hold the reins in Canberra. For them, the march to war amidst the false sounding notes of peace is not only inevitable but desirable.
The post Warmonger Confessions: More Frankness on AUKUS first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
Australian cricket may be on a break, but one of its greatest batters is still keeping as busy as he’s on the pitch.
Steve Smith’s plant-based milk brand Oat Milk Goodness (OMG), which he co-founded with Tony Adams and Daniel Rootes in 2019, is set to be purchased by fellow Australian company Forbidden Foods in an A$3.4M ($2.25M) deal.
The parent company of vegan snack startup Blue Dinosaur, Forbidden Foods will leverage its domestic distribution footprint and relationships with major retailers to boost the presence of OMG’s oat milks. It will also tap into the profile of OMG’s ambassadors to raise awareness about the Blue Dinosaur brand.
OMG itself is looking to expand internationally, starting with India, a country where former Australia captain Smith harbours a giant fanbase, and one where milk analogues dominate the smart protein sector on the back of growing health consciousness.
“While there are a number of synergies between the businesses, OMG has the potential to benefit from the agreement through access to capital markets and international expansion opportunities,” Smith said, calling the deal a “springboard for OMG’s future growth”.
OMG was established to take advantage of Australia’s native oat supply – it is the third-largest producer of the grain globally. The brand is known for its clean-label, seed-oil-free oat milks that have gained traction in the country’s renowned specialty coffee industry.
The lineup consists of the original, barista-friendly oat milk, a chocolate flavour, as well a chocolate PrOATein version with faba bean and pea protein. The products are available at Woolworths and Ampol Foodary locations, health stores, and online.
For Forbidden Foods, the acquisition represents “considerable upside from an operational and corporate standpoint”. The company’s existing infrastructure and capacity can help manage OMG’s accounts, sales and distribution, and both businesses will be able to leverage their expertise to accelerate product development.
“Both parties have also identified numerous synergy opportunities in sales and marketing and the streamlining of overheads and internal administration costs, which will drive growth and cost efficiencies,” said Forbidden Foods CEO Alex Aleksic.
The deal marks the first step in his company’s goal of becoming a capital-light “brand manager in the ‘better for you’ segment of the FMCG sector to further capitalise on the consumer shift towards healthy choices”.
“The company is currently assessing a number of other value accretive opportunities and will provide further updates over the coming months,” Aleksic added.
Following the acquisition, which is expected to be completed by the end of September, OMG’s near-term priorities include fast-tracking product launches (primarily in the PrOATein range), overseas expansion, and building out its sales team and targeted marketing campaigns.
“The proposed transaction represents a unique opportunity to leverage the respective strengths of both companies and create an integrated multi-channel, health-focused products business serving domestic and international markets,” said Aleksic.
“Strategically, the Forbidden Foods board and management team holds the view that OMG’s product suite specifically complements Forbidden Foods’ core range of Blue Dinosaur healthy snack foods, by adding a leading health-drink range in a fast-growing market.”
According to the filing on the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX), OMG is generating annualised revenues of A$1.2M (about $800,000), and anticipates near-term revenue growth after the transaction is completed.
Meanwhile, Forbidden Foods posted a net loss before tax of A$1.1M ($730,000) in the first half of 2024, a 104% improvement on the same period last year, and its best earnings performance since being listed on the ASX in September 2020.
The company has simultaneously raised A$600,000 from investors alongside the acquisition agreement, and has previously indicated interest in expanding the Blue Dinosaur range across Asia-Pacific, as well as the Middle East and the US.
While plant-based milk only makes up 7.5% of overall milk sales in Australia, oat, soy and almond milk account for a quarter of milk-based drink sales in the country’s coffee shops. A spokesperson for The Alternative Dairy Co. – another milk analogue maker from down under – told Green Queen earlier this year that while almond milk is the most popular, oat is catching up and represents the future of the segment.
Research by industry giant Vitasoy also suggests that these products have made it into 40% of Aussie households, and have the potential to hit another 30%. And the main reason for buying plant-based milk in Australia is health, according to a survey where nearly half (49%) of respondents said these products are better for their health – so OMG’s clean-label oat milk would appeal to these consumers.
Other oat milk players in Australia include Milklab, Minor Figures, Australia’s Own, Chobani and Oatly. And just this week, the latter – the world’s largest oat milk company – debuted in the New Zealand market too.
The post OMG: Australia’s Forbidden Foods to Acquire Cricketer Steve Smith’s Alt-Dairy Brand appeared first on Green Queen.
This post was originally published on Green Queen.
The philosophy of the dunce, and the politics of the demagogue, often keep company. And Peter Dutton has both of these unenviable traits in spades. The Australian opposition leader, smelling weakness in his opponent, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, has again gravitated to something he is most comfortable with: terrifying the kaka out of the Australian public.
The method of doing so is always unimaginatively dull and almost always inaccurate. Select your marginal group in society. Elevate it as a threat, filling it with a gaseous, nasty fantasy. Condemn said group for various fictional and misattributed defects. When all is done, demonise its members and tar any alleged supporters or collaborators as foolish at best, unpatriotic at worst.
The group of late to rankle Dutton and his front bench of security hysterics are Palestinians, notably those fleeing the odious war in Gaza and seeking sanctuary in Australia. Since the October 7 Hamas attacks on Israel, only 2,922 visas have been granted to those possessing Palestinian Authority travel documents, with roughly 350 being visitor visas. Much larger total of 7,111 visa applications have been refused by the federal government. So far, a mere 1,300 of them have made it to Australia, placed on temporary visitor visas that do not enable the holders to receive government aid or engage in meaningful employment. The Albanese government is ruminating on whether to create a new category of visa that would lift such impediments.
On such figures, Dutton has little to work with. Undeterred, he has spent the best part of a week playing the role of the tactically paranoid. “If people are coming in from that war zone and we’re uncertain about their identity or allegiances,” he told Sky News on August 14, it was “not prudent” to let them in.
Education Minister Jason Clare, who represents an electorate in Western Sydney with a sizeable Muslim population, mockingly invited Dutton to pay a visit. “There are people from Gaza here now, they live in my electorate, I’ve met them, great people.” They had “had their homes blown up, their schools blown up, their hospitals blown up, who have had their kids blown up.”
The Shadow Home Secretary James Paterson has also drummed up the concern that the government has simply not convinced “us and the Australian people that the security and identity checks that they’re doing are sufficiently thorough and robust to protect the Australian people”. While Australia had an “important role to play” in confronting “a very serious need,” safety and security of the Australian populace came first.
What constitutes a satisfactory measure for Paterson? A blanket refusal to grant visas to any supporters of Hamas would be a start. “We are several days now into this debate, and they still have not clearly said whether they will or whether they won’t accept someone who is a supporter of Hamas into our country.” All applications from Palestinians fleeing Gaza had to be referred to the domestic intelligence service, ASIO and “robust in-person interviews and biometric tests” conducted.
In comments made to The Australian Financial Review, Paterson revealed the true intention of this dash into demagogy’s thicket. “Governments make choices all the time about who they prioritise to bring to Australia. If the Albanese government picks this cohort ahead of others it will be a revealing choice.”
These objections have an air of stifling unreality to them. For one thing, they are scornful of the views of Mike Burgess, the current ASIO director general, who, on August 11, stated that “there are security checks” or “criteria by which people are referred to my service for review and when they are, we deal with that effectively.”
Burgess, showing uncharacteristic nuance, drew a distinction between the provision of financial or material aid to the organisation, something which might tickle the interest of a screening officer, and that of “rhetorical support”. “If it’s just rhetorical support, and they don’t have an ideology or support for a violent extremism ideology, then that’s not a problem.”
The logic of preventing individuals coming to Australia purely because of a supporting link with Hamas shows a dunce’s principle at work. It falsely imputes that the individual is a potential terrorist, eschewing any broader understanding. Immature and unworldly, such a perspective ignores the blood-spattered political realities of the conflict. The insinuation here is that the only acceptable Palestinian is an apolitical one mutely acknowledging the primacy of Israel power, humble in expressing any claims to self-determination.
The Coalition opposition to granting visas to Palestinians voicing support for Hamas is also implausible in another respect. While claiming to be defenders of that most weaselly of terms, “social cohesion”, Dutton and his stormtroopers seek to demolish it. Manufacturing insecurity, much like the mafia’s credo, becomes the pretext for battling it.
Boiled down to its essentials, the views of Dutton and his colleagues, wholly picked from the cabinet of Israel’s security narrative, is that any support for Palestinian autonomy and independence, manifested through any political or military arm, must be suspect. You had to be, as Paterson put it, “a peaceful supporter of Palestinian self-determination” and an opponent of “using violent means”. Be quiet, remain subservient, and wait for the oppressor’s good will.
The post Tactical Paranoia: Peter Dutton’s Palestinian Problem first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
Partners of the tripartite Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States (AUKUS) security pact have advanced their co-development of resilient and autonomous artificial intelligence technology (RAAIT), the Australian Department of Defence (DoD) announced on 9 August. The latest effort to enhance autonomous systems capability, which sequenced AI algorithms to support target detection and decision-making, […]
The post AUKUS advances autonomous systems development appeared first on Asian Military Review.
This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.
A licence-free environment for AUKUS technology transfer will come into effect next month after the three nations finalised legislative reforms that unlock billions of dollars in defence exports. The Biden Administration will on Friday morning (AEDT) formally certify legislation exempting Australia and the United Kingdom from US export control licensing requirements from September 1. The…
The post US signs off on AUKUS tech trade reforms appeared first on InnovationAus.com.
This post was originally published on InnovationAus.com.