The Afterlife of Failed Prime Ministers
30 January 2026 Roswell , https://theaimn.net/the-afterlife-of-failed-prime-ministers/
There is a curious phenomenon in modern politics whereby leaders rejected by voters at home are reborn as sages abroad. It is a kind of political reincarnation, except instead of coming back as something wiser, they come back with a microphone, an expense account, and a suspiciously friendly audience.
Take Tony Abbott and Scott Morrison. Two of the most out-of-their-depth, ineffectual, policy-light and spectacularly uninspiring Australian prime ministers of the past 50 years. Governments so underwhelming that voters didn’t merely change their minds – they slammed the door, locked it, and put the furniture up against it.
This is surprising, because while neither man excelled at governing Australia, they have since been warmly embraced on the international speaking circuit – mainly by right-wing conferences, “freedom” forums, and governments that find Western accents useful when saying deeply illiberal things.
Tony Abbott, whose prime ministership was defined by instability, internal warfare and three-word slogans that passed for policy, is now invited to explain leadership. Abbott struggled to explain his own government to his own party room, but apparently this has not deterred organisers elsewhere.
Scott Morrison’s record is fresher – and stranger. A prime minister who treated government as a branding exercise, communicated almost exclusively through slogans, and managed crises with photo opportunities rather than competence. A man so committed to secrecy that, in his final months in office, he quietly appointed himself to five ministries without telling the ministers involved.
Ironically, since leaving office, Morrison appears to have lost the ability to keep secrets altogether.
The man who secretly ran half the government now speaks endlessly. Panels, conferences, fireside chats. There is no shortage of words – just an ongoing shortage of insight. Morrison’s speeches are long on grievance, heavy on culture-war talking points, and light on anything resembling reflection or accountability.
One might reasonably ask: who is paying to hear this?
The answer is not “the public.” These are not broad, curious audiences wondering what went wrong. They are curated rooms. Friendly rooms. Rooms where applause is guaranteed and difficult questions are optional. Rooms where electoral defeat is reframed as martyrdom and democratic accountability as persecution.
Failure, it seems, has become a credential.
In a healthy democracy, losing office used to mean something. It was feedback. A verdict. An instruction to step aside. Now it is merely the start of a second career – one in which rejection at home is marketed overseas as proof of courage.
None of this is illegal. None of it is particularly new. But it is revealing.
If Abbott and Morrison had left office respected, effective, and admired, their global speaking careers would make sense. Instead, they left behind governments remembered largely for chaos, secrecy, and exhaustion. And yet, somewhere overseas, there is always a stage, a lectern, and an audience eager not to ask why.
Australia’s New AUKUS Protest Police, and the Quiet Redefinition of Dissent
28 January 2026 AIMN Editorial, By Denis Hay
AUKUS protest police: FOI documents reveal the AFP’s Orcus Command and how protest is being treated as a national security issue in Australia.
Introduction
Public discussion of AUKUS has focused on submarine delivery dates, strategic alignment, and cost blowouts. Far less attention has been given to how the Australian government is preparing for domestic opposition to the agreement.
Freedom of Information documents obtained by transparency advocate Rex Patrick and reported by Michael West Media reveal that the Australian Federal Police has quietly established a new unit, Orcus Command, dedicated to protecting AUKUS-related defence facilities. The documents show this unit is also planning for public order management, including protest and political dissent connected to Australia’s growing role in US and UK military operations.
This matters because protest is a cornerstone of democratic accountability. When dissent is framed primarily as a security risk, the balance between public order and civil liberties shifts in ways that deserve close public scrutiny.
What has received far less attention is how the government is preparing to manage Australians who oppose it.
Internal link: “Australia’s AUKUS agreement”.
Editor’s note:
This analysis is based on Freedom of Information documents obtained by transparency advocate Rex Patrick and reporting by Michael West Media. All claims in this article are drawn from released documents, budget papers, and publicly available statements. Care has been taken to distinguish between documented facts, lawful policing powers, and broader democratic implications.
What Is Orcus Command
Orcus Command is a specialised AFP unit created to provide protective security for the AUKUS nuclear-powered submarine program, particularly at strategically significant defence bases such as HMAS Stirling in Western Australia.
FOI documents show that:
- The unit was created with minimal public disclosure.
- It has a mandate extending beyond physical asset protection.
- It is embedded within the Department of Defence, not a civilian oversight body.
- Its planning includes public order and protest activity.
This institutional placement is significant. By situating Orcus Command within Defence rather than a civilian agency, protest management around AUKUS is treated as a national security issue rather than a matter of routine democratic policing.
Internal link: “Defence influence in Australia”.
Protest and Dissent as a Security Issue
Internal AFP documents explicitly reference the monitoring and response to political opposition and protest activity linked to AUKUS and the expanding US military presence in Australia.
This reflects a broader shift in Australian governance. Over recent years, most states have introduced or strengthened laws restricting protest, increasing police powers, and imposing harsher penalties for disruption.
Rather than being framed as a democratic expression to be facilitated and protected, protest is increasingly framed as a risk to continuity and order.
The Orcus Command documents indicate:
- Planning for escalation scenarios
- Proactive monitoring of protest groups
- Coordination with state police
- Anticipation of increased protest intensity
Internal link: “right to protest in Australia”
Why is Protest Being Framed as a National Security Issue Under AUKUS?
The documents state that Orcus Command has Commonwealth responsibility for protecting the nuclear submarine program under existing legislative powers.
This places protest activity in the same conceptual space as counterterrorism and critical infrastructure protection. While such powers are lawful, their application to political dissent raises difficult questions.
When a protest is absorbed into a national security framework:
- Thresholds for intervention are lowered.
- Decision-making becomes less transparent.
- Oversight mechanisms are weakened.
- Civil liberties are more easily subordinated to strategic objectives.
This does not mean that protest is automatically criminalised. It does mean that the lens through which protest is viewed has changed.
Internal link: “national security frameworks”.
One of the most sensitive revelations in the AFP briefing material is the inclusion of lethal force within Orcus Command’s armed protection planning.
Lethal force authorisations are standard in many armed federal policing and counter-terrorism contexts. Their inclusion alone is not unlawful or unusual. However, the context matters.
These provisions appear within documents that also discuss protest and public order management. This signals that scenarios involving political dissent are being contemplated within a framework that allows for the highest level of force available to federal police.
This does not suggest protesters will routinely face lethal force. It does show that dissent around AUKUS is being planned for within a security paradigm where extreme outcomes are legally contemplated.
That distinction is important, but it should not be dismissed.
Reassuring Allies, Managing Citizens
FOI emails reveal that Australian authorities are keen to show to the United States and the United Kingdom that protest activity will not disrupt or delay AUKUS operations.
This highlights a core tension: Australian policing resources are being used not only to keep domestic order, but also to reassure foreign military partners.
The documents emphasise:
- Proactive responses to identified protest risks.
- The importance of continuity for allied operations
- Minimising disruption to US and UK interests
Internal link: “Foreign policy dependence“.
Budget Allocations Signal Long-Term Expansion
Funding figures reinforce the seriousness of the operation.
- $73.8 million allocated to Orcus Command in late 2025.
- Funding rising to $125.2 million in 2026.
This near doubling suggests the government expects expanded responsibilities and sustained operations, rather than a short-term security task.
Budgets reflect priorities. In this case, substantial public funds are being committed to a policing unit designed to manage both infrastructure security and anticipated dissent.
Internal link: “public money priorities”.
Secrecy, FOI, and Democratic Oversight
AUKUS is one of the most secretive projects in Australia’s modern history. While some confidentiality around defence capabilities is legitimate, secrecy has expanded far beyond technical details.
The government has:
- Refused a comprehensive public inquiry.
- Limited parliamentary scrutiny
- Relied heavily on national security exemptions
- Restricted public access to key information
Without FOI requests and investigative journalism, the existence and scope of Orcus Command would remain unknown.
The Broader Democratic Context
The creation of Orcus Command does not occur in isolation. It sits alongside:
- Tightened protest laws across states
- Expanded police powers.
- Increasing surveillance of activists
- Reduced tolerance for disruption
Taken together, these trends suggest a gradual rebalancing of the state’s relationship with citizens, particularly where dissent intersects with powerful economic or strategic interests.
Why This Matters for Democracy……………………………………………………………………………………. https://theaimn.net/australias-new-aukus-protest-police-and-the-quiet-redefinition-of-dissent/
United Israel Appeal. Charity channels tax free donations direct to IDF soldiers
by Stephanie Tran | Jan 28, 2026 , https://michaelwest.com.au/united-israel-appeal-channels-tax-free-donations-direct-to-idf-soldiers/
Since 2013, more than $400 million in tax-deductible donations have flowed through an Australian charity, including direct to IDF soldiers. Stephanie Tran reports.
United Israel Appeal (UIA) Australia has remitted $376m to Israel since 2013 via its global partner Keren Hayesod, according to ACNC financial disclosures.
In 2024 alone, UIA Australia received $50.9m in tax-deductible donations and sponsorships.
Financial statements from Keren Hayesod, the Israel-based body that receives and distributes UIA funds, show it received AU$323m in global donations in 2024, with 98.5% originating overseas.
On that basis, Australian fundraising accounted for roughly 13% of Keren Hayesod’s worldwide donation base last year.
UIA Australia first received tax deductible status in January 1998. However, ACNC financial disclosures only go back to 2013. The amount of tax deductible donations made to UIA over its lifetime is likely significantly higher than the figure calculated in this article.
In a press release announcing the decision, then-treasurer Peter Costello stated that “in recognition of the valuable humanitarian service undertaken by [United Israel Appeal], the Government has decided to specifically list it as an international affairs recipient. Legislation to give effect to the Government’s decision will be introduced as soon as practicable.”
“Every dollar aligned with Israel’s national priorities”
At the UIA Victoria AGM in November 2025, UIA leadership were explicit about the organisation’s role in Israel. David Slade, president of UIA Victoria, told members:
“We are the only organisation in Australia raising funds for Israel that holds a seat at every table of decision-making authority mandated to rebuild the country from the north to the south.”
“We are proud that every dollar we distribute is aligned with Israel’s national priorities.”
Julian Black, outgoing federal treasurer of UIA, reported that $39.2m had been sent to Israel nationally, including $14.4m from Victoria, in the 2025 campaign period to mid-November.
UIA Australia describes its central mission as supporting aliyah, “ascent”, referring to Jewish immigration to Israel, and strengthening Israeli society. They state that they “raise funds within Australia and transfer them directly to Keren Hayesod-UIA.”
Keren Hayesod, founded in 1920, describes itself as the “preeminent worldwide fundraising arm for the people of Israel,” operating in dozens of countries. UIA Australia functions as its Australian partner, channelling hundreds of millions of dollars in tax-deductible donations to the fund.
At the 2025 AGM, Slade said:
“This is not theory. It’s delivery. It’s national in scale, national in scope. It aligns with Israel’s priorities and is executed by our global partners.”
1×1515
0:10 / 8:09
1×1515
0:10 / 8:09
Since 2013, more than $400 million in tax-deductible donations have flowed through an Australian charity, including direct to IDF soldiers. Stephanie Tran reports.
United Israel Appeal (UIA) Australia has remitted $376m to Israel since 2013 via its global partner Keren Hayesod, according to ACNC financial disclosures.
In 2024 alone, UIA Australia received $50.9m in tax-deductible donations and sponsorships.
Financial statements from Keren Hayesod, the Israel-based body that receives and distributes UIA funds, show it received AU$323m in global donations in 2024, with 98.5% originating overseas.
On that basis, Australian fundraising accounted for roughly 13% of Keren Hayesod’s worldwide donation base last year.
Source: ACNC
UIA Australia first received tax deductible status in January 1998. However, ACNC financial disclosures only go back to 2013. The amount of tax deductible donations made to UIA over its lifetime is likely significantly higher than the figure calculated in this article.
In a press release announcing the decision, then-treasurer Peter Costello stated that “in recognition of the valuable humanitarian service undertaken by [United Israel Appeal], the Government has decided to specifically list it as an international affairs recipient. Legislation to give effect to the Government’s decision will be introduced as soon as practicable.”
“Every dollar aligned with Israel’s national priorities”
At the UIA Victoria AGM in November 2025, UIA leadership were explicit about the organisation’s role in Israel. David Slade, president of UIA Victoria, told members:
“We are the only organisation in Australia raising funds for Israel that holds a seat at every table of decision-making authority mandated to rebuild the country from the north to the south.”
We are proud that every dollar we distribute is aligned with Israel’s national priorities.
Julian Black, outgoing federal treasurer of UIA, reported that $39.2m had been sent to Israel nationally, including $14.4m from Victoria, in the 2025 campaign period to mid-November.
UIA Australia describes its central mission as supporting aliyah, “ascent”, referring to Jewish immigration to Israel, and strengthening Israeli society. They state that they “raise funds within Australia and transfer them directly to Keren Hayesod-UIA.”
Keren Hayesod, founded in 1920, describes itself as the “preeminent worldwide fundraising arm for the people of Israel,” operating in dozens of countries. UIA Australia functions as its Australian partner, channelling hundreds of millions of dollars in tax-deductible donations to the fund.
At the 2025 AGM, Slade said:
“This is not theory. It’s delivery. It’s national in scale, national in scope. It aligns with Israel’s priorities and is executed by our global partners.”
Support for “lone immigrant soldiers”
Among the programs UIA promotes in Australia is assistance for “lone immigrant soldiers”, individuals who migrate to Israel and serve in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) without immediate family support in the country.
Through the “Wings Program”, UIA partners with the Jewish Agency for Israel to provide grants and assistance to immigrant IDF soldiers. UIA states that they supported 2,200 lone immigrant soldiers in 2024.
According to a report compiled by the Knesset, in August 2024, there were 6,731 lone soldiers serving in the IDF.
Overseas funding networks and settlement links
In 2022, Pastor Larry Huch raised $8 million for Keren Hayesod through his ministry to help “settlements take over produce farms in the West Bank”.
“One of the main Bible prophecies is helping Jews return to the nation of Israel, so we started working with Keren Hayesod with projects such as making aliyah. We help settlements take over produce farms in the West Bank, which is Judea and Samaria,” Hutch said.
According to an analysis by Canadian human rights organisation Just Peace Advocates, public filings by UIA Canada show that funds linked to the broader Keren Hayesod network have supported organisations assisting IDF veterans and institutions located in Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.
At the same AGM, Slade disclosed that his own son is currently serving in the IDF as a lone soldier, describing himself as “a lifelong Zionist”.
UIA also funds the Net@ program, which provides technology education for youth. Promotional materials for the program state that graduates are “strong candidates for elite IDF units”.
[excellent charts here on original]
Comparable program-level detail is not disclosed in Australian ACNC filings, which aggregate remittances to Keren Hayesod. UIA Australia did not respond to questions regarding whether they have oversight of which initiatives are supported by the funds they provide to Keren Kayesod and whether they engage in due diligence practices to ensure that these programs comply with ACNC External Conduct Standards and DGR conditions.
A charity operating in a genocide
UIA’s fundraising expansion has occurred during the Gaza genocide and escalating violence across the occupied Palestinian territories.
A January 2026 report by the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights found that Israeli laws, policies and practices have created “asphyxiating” conditions for Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
The report stated that there has been an “unprecedented deterioration of the human rights situation” since October 2023, as Israeli government “further expanded the use of unlawful force, arbitrary detention and torture, repression of civil society and undue restrictions on media freedoms, severe movement restrictions, settlement expansion and related violations in the occupied West Bank”.
In his National Press Club address, Chris Sidoti, a commissioner on the UN Commission of Inquiry on Palestine and Israel, stated that in light of the Commission’s finding that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza,
“anyone who has served in any arm of the Israeli military in Gaza should be treated as a suspect.“
UIA CEO Yair Miller previously told MWM that “the United Israel Appeal is fully compliant with Australian law”. They did not respond to a follow-up request for comment regarding the matters discussed in this article.
MOBILISE AGAINST THE F35s!
MOBILISE AGAINST THE F35s!
U.S. OUT! CANCEL AUKUS! CLOSE PINE GAP!
WAGE PEACE invites allies and collaborators to a week of action against the F35 genocide jet on the unceded lands of this continent, from 27th March to 2nd April, 2026. (NB Mobilisations never start on the day they say!)
The F35 ‘genocide jet’ is made by the US and the world’s biggest weapons company, Lockheed Martin. The Israeli F35 genocide jets can not fly without Australian replacement parts.
Managed by Lockheed and on US orders, at least 71 packages of F35 parts have been sent from Sydney to Israel. Parts stored at the genocide jet ‘sustainment’ facility at Williamtown RAAF base, just north of Newcastle, were loaded onto commercial Thai Airways passenger flights (WTF!), then forwarded to the Israeli Airforce base at Nevatim.
Turns out, parts produced in Australia can be requisitioned by the US at any time to serve US — and Israeli interests. No matter where F35 parts are made, the US owns them and Lockheed manages them. It’s been like this for more than 10 years. According to Defence Minister Richard Marles, ‘Australia is an F35 country’. We are owned and directed by the disordered, cruel, unjust mess that is the USA and their weapons corporations. The USA’s genocide is our genocide. We are dragged into Israel’s cruelty.
Mass mobilisations of Australian people have said we do not consent to complicity in Israel’s genocide. We have demanded that the Department of Defence and all the companies involved refuse to supply F35 parts or any other weapons to Israel. Yet the supply continues.
CAN WE WIN?
We have wins already!
In a single week in October, 18 actions were held against the weapons industry in 6 cities. Then, in early November, the Department of Defence emailed weapons suppliers in Australia ‘suggesting’ they cancel or refuse further contracts with Israel.
Our friends in the Netherlands have had a win. In October 2025 Supreme Court judges gave the Dutch government six weeks to review its policy on export licenses; the decision was made in a matter of hours: a continuation of the arms embargo from 2024 – no F35 parts.
Supplying a genocide is against International Law and Australia’s own weapons regulations. This acknowledgement by governments that arming Israel might lead to war crimes prosecutions was a huge win for the anti-genocide movement.
Since the genocide began, our movement has constantly picketed, blocked and vandalised companies supplying the genocide jet. In the first week of December we disrupted 3 different F35 suppliers in the Newcastle area alone.
At the same time as our Newcastle actions unfolded, David Shoebridge was grilling Defence officials in Senate Estimates about who signed what and when, and Peter Cronau was reporting on Lockheed Martin’s delivery of Australian genocide jet components from Newcastle to Israel.
Lockheed is worried. The men who sign the defence export permits are even more worried.
WHAT IF WE WERE ABLE TO STOP THE SUPPLY OF AUSTRALIAN PARTS TO F35 GENOCIDE JETS?
The F35 genocide jet is a very inefficient machine, needing 5 hours of ‘sustainment’ for every hour of operation. The genocide jet has been a major contributor to Israel’s bombardment of Gaza, and now Lebanon, so the need for spare parts is still constant.
The F35 weapons transfers from Newcastle to Israel STILL NEED AN EXPORT PERMIT signed by Australian Defence Department officials and approved by Defence Minister Richard Marles for these stored parts.
This is where we think we can make impact.
What if Defence Department officials were publicly named and called upon to refuse to facilitate transport of genocide jet components? What if those Defence officials and Ministers Marles, Wong (Foreign Affairs) and Conroy (Defence Industries) decided that the personal risk of facing a war crimes tribunal in the future outweighed the obligation to serve Lockheed Martin?
COLLABORATIVE PEOPLE-POWERED ACTION
Using the tools we wield the best ¬— community-based direct action and participatory resistance ¬— we propose to work in concert with key politicians, journalists and human rights organisations to problematise the supply of components to Lockheed’s genocide jets. We aim to create a crisis for Defence officials and staff, such that they are no longer willing to sign off on F35 exports, by raising the real possibility their names will end up on war crimes prosecutors’ lips in The Hague.
1 This month
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
– go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com/
Antinuclear 