When I read the Sydney Morning Herald headline about this development, I assumed it must be a typical January “silly season” political beat-up.
After all, surely no self-respecting member of the Albanese Government would exert any diplomatic effort on the Netanyahu regime which ignores international law and is responsible for crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing. Who had determined there is any need to mend a “fractured relationship”? Australian Government spokesmen have, in fact, spent months avoiding direct condemnation of this out-of-control regime, steadfastly refusing to face the reality of Netanyahu’s ruthless military campaign. There is no ”fractured relationship” because Australia’s leadership has been at pains to remain loyal to this rogue ally even though there must be those in the Albanese Cabinet who totally reject the actions of the Netanyahu regime.
It is a surprise that the attorney-general himself has chosen to visit Israel at this time when he has been silent since January 2024 about Australia’s obligation as a signatory to the Genocide Convention, carefully sidestepping any public comment while other nations supported South Africa’s case against Israel in the International Court of Justice. As the chief national law officer, Dreyfus has refused to engage in public debate about the rulings of either the International Criminal Court or the International Court of Justice in adjudicating on Israel’s many breaches of international law.
Presumably the minister now will travel to Tel Aviv for discussions, yet he has not considered it necessary to first engage Australians in considering our priorities as a nation obligated to both the Genocide Convention and international law. Many Australians would expect to hear first from the Attorney General rather than later read whatever may be agreed in secret in Israel.
The Albanese Government has chosen to focus on a very public campaign against antisemitism instead of recognising the real crimes of genocide against the Palestinian people. The daily grotesque evidence of war crimes in Gaza by the Israeli Defence Force has shocked and disturbed the global community for many months. However, the Australian prime minister prefers to call a press conference to condemn racist graffiti than to record outrage about the ongoing suffering of innocent women and children denied food, shelter and health care.
Do his advisers not see the sad incongruity of allowing their boss to record his rejection of racist slogans in Australian cities, but never publicly responding to the ongoing tragedy of Gaza? Surely it is not beyond the capacity of the prime ministerial media team to develop proportional public comment in these unprecedented times of humanitarian crisis?
But perhaps I judge too harshly. Could the Albanese Government have, in fact, created a reform plan of action to assist an immediate ceasefire and return of Israeli and Palestinian hostages?
Has the attorney-general already responded to the Registrar of the International Court of Justice giving Australia’s official answer to the request made of all Genocide Convention signatories in February 2024?
Will Dreyfus hold formal discussions with the Palestinian Authority comparable to any negotiations he is planning with the Netanyahu regime?
How will the Australian Government project its vision for a two-state solution?
What Australian plans have been developed to assist an Israeli administration to conform to repeated international law rulings about illegal occupation of Palestinian land?
Will the attorney-general make clear that Israel has become more isolated than South Africa was during its apartheid regime, so therefore it is essential that its required legal reforms are commenced?
Will detailed reparation and rebuilding of Gaza discussions be included in official discussions with both the Palestinian Authority and the Israel administration and how does the Australian Government plan to assist with financial resources and skilled personnel ?
Are medical evacuations to Australian hospitals on the agenda for the rehabilitation of those many Palestinians seriously injured ?
How best can Australia assist those thousands of children and teenagers orphaned over the last 15 months of military bombardment?
No doubt, it will be difficult for Dreyfus to gain agreement on all these issues, but he does have a responsibility to officially raise them and to clearly highlight them as Australians’ priorities.
It would be incomprehensible for an Australian minister to visit Israel at this time without being absolutely clear about Australia’s major priority, which is our nation’s total commitment to the international humanitarian law essential to guarantee peace and human security. Issues of defence and business co-operation should not be part of any Australian Government official negotiations with the current administration.
Hopefully the reasons for this official visit are based solely on the devastating humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Many Australians have urged a pause in diplomatic relations with the Netanyahu regime, but if Dreyfus is able to negotiate a realistic way forward then his diplomatic and legal skills will be applauded.
A new year demands a fresh start and that is the only justification for an Australian Government minister’s visit to Israel .
Margaret Reynolds has a long commitment to the peace movement dating back to the Anti-Vietnam Moratorium to current advocacy against militarism as National President of Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom.(Australia )
She was a Labor Senator for Queensland 1983-1999 and a member of Bob Hawke’s Ministry 1987-1990. She taught Human Rights and International Relations at University of Queensland 1999-2004 and has worked with a number of international non-government organisations.
Contributions to Pearls and Irritations
Your contribution will fund quality independent comment and analysis in Pearls and Irritations
Contribute
