Australia poised to enter another US-led Middle East war

Oct 8, 2024
Globe Map plastic soldier.

With less than two months to go, voters may go to the American polls while their nation is at war. If they do, there is a significant chance that Australia will be dragged in, and in accordance with imperial tradition be sent to fight in the Middle East.

There are not many nations, after all, who have in the past 110 years captured Jerusalem, Damascus (twice) and Beirut (twice) Baghdad (twice), on each occasion fighting alongside Arabs and Palestinians, including, during the invasion of Lebanon and Syria in WWII, a young Jewish scout, Mosche Dayan, who unfortunately lost an eye while with us at the Litani River.

One can almost hear Anthony Albanese intoning, in express imitation of Robert Menzies in 1939, that it was his melancholy duty to inform us officially that, in consequence of the persistence of Palestinians, Lebanese and Iranians in their resistance to their bombing by Israel, America had “declared war on them, and that, as a result, Australia is also at war.”

No niceties about sovereignty here. America would be using (as it does now) Pine Gap to notify Israel of all missile attacks, and Australian-based communications equipment to hear, decrypt and command messages, track movements of Palestinians, Syrians, Lebanese, Iranians and, probably, just in case, Iraqis, Egyptians, Turks and Jordanians. Hard to be regarded as a neutral in such circumstances. Why would we not stand alongside our gallant American allies, as we have in past futile conflicts? For America, Israel is worth all the other theatres of war put together.

With American help, Israel defies its enemies, and its friends

Donald Trump has effectively announced a proposal to obliterate Middle Eastern enemies of Israel if Israel is still engaged in invasions and ethnic cleansing when (or if) he takes office on January 20 next year. It might not make much difference, given that both Joe Biden, the presidential incumbent, and Kamala Harris, the candidate, have put no limits on their willingness to supply Israel whatever it wants. Biden, Harris and Albanese, make occasional pathetic pleas to Israel to not be too beastly to its enemies – pleas routinely ignored by Israel without any consequences to the open chequebook and the constant resupply of munitions. From the Australian Labor as much as the United States, there is only the pretence of even-handedness. Any qualms can be dealt with by reference to “terrorism,” and disproportion to Israel’s right of self-defence.

It appears that neither the United States nor western civilisation are able to moderate Israel’s will to be rid of the Palestinians once and for all. That does not mean that there is no restraint on Israel’s politicians and its lawless army, recently given a cheer from the Australian sidelines by a former Chief of our defence forces. He found that aid workers had been deliberately killed after an unfortunate communications mix-up, which, had it not occurred, would have made the execution (for him) unfortunate but quite legal. Fog of war stuff, apparently, not that RAAF chaps know much about that. It has been more than 50 years since there was any fog – or enemy gunfire — in a RAAF mission anywhere.

Australia has not become engaged in the talks about the Middle East and Ukraine. Although we have provided considerable defence spending. Nothing Australia can do will make much difference to outcomes, a reason it should look very closely to its own interests, rather than taking a lead from the US. Contrary to what Peter Dutton, and the Australian (from which he seems to take his lead), Australia’s short-, medium- and long-term interests do not involve cosying up to an increasingly aggressive and unreasonable Israel. Particularly when it does not even pretend to listen to its friends and former allies, even the US. It has been one thing to condemn the October 7 massacre and to defend Israel’s right to respond – something both Albanese and his foreign minister have done over and over again. It has been another to resist any idea of ceasefire or restraint, or the proportionality of a death rate more than forty times its own casualty rate. All the more so when actors in Israeli politics appear to want the complete eviction of the Palestinian population, and effective annexation of Gaza and the West Bank for settlement. Australia continues to press its policies – including a two-state solution – but the government of Israel appears close to completely repudiating it.

Australia’s interests in the future of Israel are sentimental rather than based on our strategic interests. We may wish the rights of its citizens protected, but Israel gives us a very low example in terms of the Palestinians, at home or next door. The nation’s sense of siege is undermined by its overwhelming military superiority, and the lawlessness with which it pursues its goals. Its indifference to any accountability to international law is particularly indefensible.

Can a bristling, belligerent Israel see out the century? Or deserve to?

The ruthlessness of the Israeli government and its armed forces may have worked politically for Benjamin Netanyahu in his own land, but they have repelled former supporters in other countries. More serious, it has made the Palestinian cause more popular.

Some now wonder whether the resolution of the conflict, caused as much by Israeli terrorism and lawlessness since the Balfour declaration, must depend on relocation of the Jewish state. That would be seen as a fundamental betrayal and be almost impossible to achieve.

On the other hand, the cost of 75 years of civil war, war with neighbours, and the continuing threat to the peace by players on both sides invites the question about whether the state can, or should endure, within its present geography.

Palestine is no closer to jelling now than it was in 1948. It is Israel’s fault more than the Palestinians, not that there was, or is, goodwill on either side. All we can expect is more war, and if Israeli politicians think this can be resolved by murder or deportation, it is quite wrong.

(For a perverse reason, I am inclined to think of eastern Ukraine sections of the old Khazar (Jewish) kingdom, as a potential land for resettlement, provided there was adequate accommodation with the existing population – the stumbling block in 1948. It would give their Russian neighbours something to think about. Those who think this impossible because Israel is irretrievably linked to Jewish history should remember that neither the Balfour declaration, nor the UN resolution for a Jewish state adopted a Zionist view, nor one based on Biblical history. Those who think it impossible because of the rights of the existing population might remember that this area has been convulsed by war and displacement for more than one hundred years. I do not advocate this “solution” so much as point out that alternatives exist. Over the years there have been discussions about a new Zion in Uganda, and for a brief moment, in Western Australia’s Kimberley.

It might well be that the continuing existence of Ukraine is a more vital interest for Australia, even if it is unthinkable that Australia would actually fight there. For good or ill, the Ukrainian war is a theatre in the rivalry between the western Alliance and the old communist totalitarian regimes. Aggression seriously impacts on balances of power. Only two years ago, various presidents and prime ministers were speaking piously of a sacred and immutable rule about invading neighbours. I have not heard any of them use such formulations to condemn Israel’s invasion of Lebanon.

War would change the whole dynamic of the US presidential election. I expect it would be to Trump’s advantage, which is to say that Israel could be a winner, Ukraine a big loser. But how odd that we are not putting China in the calculations.

After all, much of the past eight years has been based on the theory, held strongly by our defence and intelligence establishment, and by journalists at the Sydney Morning Herald, that war between the US and China, over hegemony in the western Pacific is inevitable and desirable. Trump raised tensions with China; Biden raised them further. Now Trump is talking about extending the trade war, but in terms that suggest he wants to make a deal, if by threats of war. It would appear that China doesn’t care much who wins the presidency but is expecting Trump to.

How disappointing for the War Now constituencies, whether in their temporal or spiritual homes in the United States.

Maybe we can sell our subs back to the vendor.

Share and Enjoy !