Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

Australian Politicians Ignore Israel’s Brutality Against Our Citizens

by Paul Gregoire, 10 Oct 2025, https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/australian-politicians-ignore-israels-brutality-against-our-citizens/?fbclid=IwY2xjawNYYbpleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBicmlkETFvZW56NldIYVltV0JSQ1pBAR7k_Ehv4MPM4mBZcl8Ys4k5ckUYvmGHNzne6Ki56oAJjwRA-5TC1-qnzNMnJw_aem_5XDTJx0Kt9Abixs7ELefHA

The morning of Friday, 10 October 2025 saw the Australian Global Sumud Flotilla participants arrive back in our nation, after attempting to breach the Gaza blockade and then being illegally apprehended by Israel. A sizable crowd gathered on Gadigal land at Sydney Airport to welcome them back. However, another Australian flotilla participant has been in Israeli custody and again Australia’s top ministers are silent.

The Global Sumud Flotilla was part an ongoing campaign to breach the 18-year-long goods blockade on Gaza. Six Australians were taken into custody by Israel in international waters last week, amongst over 400 foreign nations, and they were then brutalised and mistreated in prison, while Australian woman Madeline Habib, a participant in a second flotilla, is likely in the hands of Tel Aviv now.

The participants themselves, as well as publics across the planet, have been shocked by the brutalisation and intimidation Israeli forces have subjected the more than 400 illegally detained foreign nationals to. And what’s resulted in equal dismay is the fact that our PM and foreign minister have failed to raise issue over the kidnapping of their fellow citizens, including the plight of Habib.

After focusing on the six Australians in Israeli custody that federal Labor publicly ignored, while the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade sought to provide them with consular assistance, the mainstream media has failed to raise the alarm over Habib’s detention, even though the testimonies arising from the Sumud Flotilla mean she’s likely being abused by an allied nation as well.

And as Israel has been dealing with a further 145 foreign nationals it intercepted in international waters on Wednesday 8 September 2025, as part of another Freedom Flotilla Coalition (FFC) mission, what has been revealed to Australians is not only will our politicians look the other way on a genocide, but they’ll do the same if Israel gets the chance to brutalise any of our constiuency.

Shameful lack of support

“The Australian government is absolutely shameful in our extraction,” said Australian Global Sumud Flotilla participant Julie Lamont, speaking to the ABC from Jordan on Wednesday, after being released from Israel’s notorious Ktzi’ot prison. “It did not really support us at all. We were the last people out of 50 nationalities. We were left their probably because it was October 7.”

In response to an ABC question as to whether our government arranged the flight out of Israel to the Jordanian capital of Amman, Lamont said, “No. We were facilitated by other governments not the Australian government. And now we are here trying to find a way to come back to Australia, and we really are upset that the Australian government have been so shameful in support of their citizens.”

Lamont said Italy had risen to support flotilla participants, whereas her government hadn’t. The documentary filmmaker added that she’d thought they might be detained for months, while fellow local participant Surya McEwen was reportedly singled out for extra rough treatment by the Israeli military, which included beatings, dislocating his arm and slamming his head into a concrete floor.

Lamont and the other Australians were released by Israel on Wednesday. They were part of the final one-third of participants still detained in Ktzi’ot prison. The fact that the Australian government was less responsive to its own nationals would have compounded the hard time they were receiving at the hands of a rogue nation that’s developed diplomatic tensions with ours over recent months.

A spokesperson for foreign minister Penny Wong released a statement on Wednesday that suggested DFAT officials were working hard to assist detained Australians. The spokesperson for the minister said officials conducted welfare checks at the prison and liaised with Israeli officials to obtain their release. However, the statement failed to explain why Israel was illegally detaining these people.

Israeli immunity

The disturbing fact that Australia’s top ministers don’t appear to consider there is any reason to waste their breath while citizens who’d risked their lives to feed a group of people being purposefully starved to death are being illegally imprisoned and subjected to harsh conditions has been coupled by the reacquaintance with the realisation that Israel can harm foreign nationals with impunity.

The flotilla apprehended this week with Habib was the fourth such attempt to breach the Gaza blockade since June. Participants are aware they are risking their lives, because the six boats making up a 2010 FFC flotilla were boarded by Israeli soldiers in international waters, and then nine foreign nationals were shot dead on sight, with a tenth dying later in a coma.

Irish comedian Tadhg Hickey was also part of last week’s Global Sumud Flotilla. Following his release, Hickey told a reporter that he had considered that if he ended up in an Israeli prison, he wouldn’t be subjected to the levels of brutality and deprivation that he was subjected to at the hands of the Israeli Defence Forces, due to the fact that he is a westerner and a white person.

To face the level of sadism and inhumanity that they displayed was really quite shocking,” Hickey explained. “I mean in the five to six days that we were incarcerated, no access to doctors, no access to medicine, no contact with the outside world” and “no lawyers”. He then explained that one of his fellow participants, a 75-year-old, was deprived of his insulin, which could have killed him.

“In my opinion, they were very happy to let him die,” continued Hickey. “It’s not even a patch of what Palestinians are going through. That was on my mind the whole time. I was thinking, ‘If they’re treating me like this, with the passport I have and the privilege I have, imagine what they are doing to Palestinians in prison, many of whom are children.”

A dereliction of duty

The Gaza Freedom Flotilla Instagram page reported on Friday that the participants in the latest flotilla have begun appearing before an Israeli court. Several participants had already been deported. The detainees were also reporting that they had too been subjected to punishing treatment at the hands of the Israeli military, although there was no specific word on Australian citizen Habib.

A large sector of the Australian public that had been aware that foreign nationals would be subjected to human rights violations at the hands of the Israeli state have been given a quick starter course on how there is one nation on the planet that is provided such impunity that it can violate and breach international laws and standards in a completely unbridled manner.

The other lesson Australia learnt is that while Israel might illegally detain and brutalise Australians, this won’t be an issue officially addressed because it is permissible. And this week was really a confirmation after Israel killed Australian aid worker Zomi Frankcom and six others last year and all the foreign minister could do to respond was produce a declaration on the protection of aid workers.

October 13, 2025 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

View from The Hill: Two years of a distant war have brought much damage to Australian society

The Conversation, October 7, 2025, Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

Two years ago, who would have imagined the police and the Palestine Action Group (PAG) would be fighting in court over whether demonstrators should be allowed to rally outside the Sydney Opera House?

Indeed, 24 months ago, who would have thought we’d have (or need) designated “envoys” to combat antisemitism and Islamophobia in Australia?

On Tuesday’s second anniversary of the Hamas atrocities in Israel, it is sobering to reflect how much damage this horrific Middle East conflict, which has cost tens of thousands of lives, most of them Palestinian, has done to Australia’s own society.

In Fitzroy in Melbourne, pro-Palestinian graffiti appeared to mark the anniversary: “Glory to Hamas”, “Oct 7, do it again”, “Glory to the martyrs”.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese described this as “terrorist propaganda” that was “abhorrent,” saying those responsible “must face the full force of the law”.

On Wednesday, the issue of Sunday’s proposed protest outside the Opera House will be back in court. The police don’t want the protesters’ march to be allowed to end in the tight space at the Opera House, citing dangers to safety.

The lawyer for the PAG said on Tuesday: “If the police application is conceded to, the ramifications for the right to protest in Australia will not be confined to the Opera House, but for a wide variety of protest activities”. The group argues the issue is a constitutional one.

In the past two years, this faraway conflict has done substantial harm to Australia’s social cohesion, raised questions about the future of multiculturalism, and produced serious divisions about where lines should be drawn on limiting free speech and the right to protest. The response of institutions, universities in particular, has been tested and in some cases found wanting.

NSW Labor Premier Chris Minns gave a flavour of the cross pressures when speaking on Sydney radio on Tuesday.

“We’ve moved significant changes to hate speech laws in New South Wales and we’ve done it because we recognise we live in a multicultural community and yes, you’ve got a right to freedom of speech but someone else has a right not to be vilified or hated on the basis of their race or religion. All of those laws are currently being challenged in the High Court because of the implied freedom of political communication.”…………………………

The conflict has fractured the Australia-Israel relationship, with the Albanese government increasingly critical of Israel’s unrelenting prosecution of the war, and the Netanyahu government turning on Australia.

This culminated with Australia’s recognition of a Palestinian state at the United Nations during the prime minister’s recent trip. The recognition was the end of Labor’s internal journey, which commenced many years before this war began.

The Greens Party has been at the left edge of the political spectrum.

The Australian community was divided about Palestinian recognition: an Essential poll published in late September showed 34% in favour, and 30% against.

The conflict has shattered what used to be a bipartisan Middle East policy, when both main parties strongly supported Israel and also backed a two-state solution for a long-term Middle East settlement.

Over the past two years, the Coalition has been strongly pro-Israel, accusing the Labor government of  deserting an ally and failing to deal robustly with antisemitism in this country.

Opposition leader Sussan Ley used her parliamentary speech on Tuesday’s anniversary to home in on the government’s policy towards Israel.

“To our great shame, under the leadership of the Albanese Labor government, Australia has not stood with the people of Israel, nor with the United States, as they have sought to dismantle Hamas and establish the conditions for peace”.

The local rifts that have come to the surface in Australia were there well before October 7 2023. The war caused them to widen dramatically and explode.

Even if, and when, this conflict subsides, it will leave fractures, anger, bitterness and fear within sections of the Australian community.

Whatever healing takes place almost certainly won’t be complete. For governments, federal and state, intractable policy challenges will remain. https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-two-years-of-a-distant-war-have-brought-much-damage-to-australian-society-265858?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20October%208%202025%20-%203541836106&utm_content=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20October%208%202025%20-%203541836106+CID_fb6124771c1b55570097f86c7e58b5ee&utm_source=campaign_monitor&utm_term=View%20from%20The%20Hill%20Two%20years%20of%20a%20distant%20war%20have%20brought%20much%20damage%20to%20Australian%20society

October 10, 2025 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

Two leaders, two realities: Trump vs Albanese at the UN.

26 September 2025 Roswell , https://theaimn.net/two-leaders-two-realities-trump-vs-albanese-at-the-un/

President Trump has spoken at the United Nations, and now Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has too.

The contrast could not have been starker. Trump rambled like a man who’d just been handed the microphone at a small-town karaoke night – except the song was foreign policy and he didn’t know the words. He wandered through half-baked grievances, boasted about imaginary achievements, and at one point seemed to forget which country he was president of.

Albanese, meanwhile, spoke like an actual world leader – calm, confident, and passionate. He talked about climate action, regional security, and cooperation with the kind of clarity that makes you think, “Ah yes, this person knows what he’s talking about.”

And yet, if you relied on Australia’s right-wing media, you’d think you’d just watched two completely different events. To them, Trump was basically Moses parting the Red Sea with one hand while balancing the U.S. economy on the other. Albanese, apparently “reckless,” was a bumbling tourist who accidentally stumbled into the General Assembly and asked for directions to Times Square.

One commentator even claimed Trump was “extraordinary” – which is technically true if you count all the diplomats burying their heads in their hands. Meanwhile, Albanese’s calm and measured speech was branded “utterly humiliating” and dismissed as nothing but “symbolic gestures,” because apparently international diplomacy should be performed like a WWE entrance.

This is the theatre we live with now: policy and substance don’t make headlines, but a man ranting about wind turbines does. If Trump had started selling selfies from the UN podium, they’d have called it “bold economic diplomacy.”

The world saw two very different leaders this week – one looking like he could chair a serious discussion about global challenges, the other looking like he should be gently escorted back to his seat before he accidentally sanctioned Canada.

September 28, 2025 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

US Threat to World Peace, AUKUS, and Dollar Sovereignty

US threat to world peace, why AUKUS spending risks Australia, and how dollar sovereignty offers a safer path.

Social Justice Australia, by Denis Hay, 17/09/2025 

The US threat to world peace sits at the centre of a heated claim that the United States underpins peace in our region. Is that really true, or just easy politics? The facts tell a different story. Australia has pledged hundreds of billions for the AUKUS defence deal, with an additional $12 billion for the Henderson Defence Precinct, enabling the servicing of US and future Australian nuclear submarines in WA.

Australia now targets more than 2.3% of GDP for defence by 2033 to 2034, while NATO’s counting methods inflate figures by adding items like pensions and infrastructure.

Stat box, big picture:

  • AUKUS cost envelope, 268 to 368 billion dollars.
  • Defence to rise beyond two-point three per cent of GDP by 2033 to 2034.
  • Australians’ trust in the US has fallen to record lows in two decades of polling.

Why accept the line that Washington guarantees peace when ordinary Australians see mounting risks, higher costs, and shrinking control?

The Problem: Why Australians Feel Stuck

Root cause, alliance pressure and spending metrics

Pressure to lift spending, often framed in GDP targets, now runs alongside discussion of higher NATO style thresholds and even a five per cent security envelope in Atlantic debates.

The government dismisses a fixation on GDP, yet the headline numbers continue to climb, and new shipyard commitments lock in path dependency.

Reflective question: Are we buying safety or buying into someone else’s strategy?

Power question: Who benefits when accounting rules redefine defence to push the headline number up?

Consequences for citizens

Australians worry the alliance could drag us into conflict in Asia, even as trust in US leadership falls. The truth is that fear and doubt grow when commitments rise faster than accountability. Who carries the risk if a submarine schedule slips or a crisis erupts in the Taiwan Strait?

The Impact: What Australians Are Experiencing

Everyday effects

AUKUS locks in decades of spending, crowding out housing, health, and climate resilience. The WA maintenance push at Henderson aims to support docking and servicing, including for US boats, tying local industry to the US force structure.

Reflective question: Will your family be safer because a US submarine gets serviced in WA next year, or because your town is flood-ready?

Power question: Why should budget rules expand for weapons while social services are told to tighten their belts?

Who benefits

Prime contractors and allied militaries gain capacity and access. Communities near critical bases, such as Pine Gap, a joint US-Australia intelligence hub central to US operations, often become a focus of protests.

The Hidden Cost for Every Australian

The AUKUS defence deal is not just an abstract number. It means about $368 billion spread across a population of roughly 26.5 million Australians, which equals $13,900 for every man, woman, and child.

Imagine if every Australian family received the value of this public investment in tangible safety and wellbeing:

  • Housing security: Build more than one million new social and affordable homes to end the housing crisis.
  • Health and aged care: Expand Medicare to include dental and mental health, and properly staff aged care.
  • Education and skills: Abolish student debt, guarantee free TAFE and university, and fund lifelong learning.
  • Climate and disaster resilience: Construct nationwide flood defences, bushfire readiness systems, and renewable energy infrastructure.
  • Jobs guarantee: Use dollar sovereignty to ensure meaningful work for every Australian, focused on local and sustainable projects.

Reflective question: Which makes your community safer, a nuclear submarine or a flood levy that holds?

Power question: Why does Canberra accept scarcity for health and housing, but never for warships?

Rally line: We can do better. We must do better.

The Solution: What Must Be Done

Australia dollar sovereignty and reform

Australia issues its own currency. That means we can always purchase what is available in our currency, including public purpose jobs and resilience, without needing foreign approval.

Real constraints are inflation, resources, skills, and the exchange rate, not a household budget analogy. So, the choice to pour hundreds of billions into AUKUS defence deal is political.

Use that fiscal capacity for civil security first, such as climate adaptation, cyber defence, and regional diplomacy.

Reflective question: If we can fund subs, why not fund safety at home?

Power question: Who says the only credible path is more weapons?

Doug Cameron’s Warning on Militarism and Sovereignty

Cameron argues AUKUS erodes sovereignty, risks entrapment, and diverts billions from real security.

  1. Entrapment risk, US access: AUKUS ties Australia to US operations, including US submarine use of Henderson, WA, raising escalation and targeting risks. Reuters
  2. Mega-cost, weak timelines: The AUKUS envelope, up to $368b over decades, risks obsolescence as detection tech advances. Who benefits if subs are outdated by delivery? ABC+1
  3. Bases and nuclear exposure: Pine Gap’s role and HMAS Stirling’s US maintenance periods deepen Australia’s role in US war-fighting networks. Is this the path to peace or a bullseye on home soil? Wikipedia+2Defence+2
  4. Accountability gap: Parliamentary intelligence oversight remains constrained, though reforms are proposed. Why spend the most on a kit without thorough scrutiny? Parliament of Australia+1
  5. Opportunity cost: The $12b Henderson spends and broader AUKUS outlays crowd out housing, health, climate resilience, and jobs. Real security starts with people. SBS

Rally line: Prepare for peace, not war. Ordinary Australians deserve safety, not pre-commitments to foreign conflicts.

Source: Australian Sovereignty and the Path to Peace – Doug Cameron | 2025 Laurie Carmichael Lecture

Policy solutions and demands

      1. Publish complete life cycle AUKUS costs, schedule risks, and opportunity costs in one transparent report each year.
      2. Cap major platform shares of the defence budget and shift funds to cyber, disaster response, and diplomacy.
      3. Require independent reviews of US base roles and accident liability at HMAS Stirling and Pine Gap.
      4. Adopt a regional peace plan with ASEAN and the Pacific that prioritises de-escalation and climate security.
      5. Use dollar sovereignty to guarantee jobs in housing retrofit, flood levees, and bushfire readiness, with measurable outcomes.

Rally line: We can do better. We must do better…………………………………………. https://socialjusticeaustralia.com.au/us-threat-to-world-peace-sovereignty/

September 20, 2025 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

Think Tanker Demands for AUKUS: What Australia Should do with US Submarines.

AUKUS is only going to lead to more submarines collectively in 10, 15, 20 years, which is way beyond the window of maximum danger, which is really this decade.”  

26 August 2025 Dr Binoy Kampmark, https://theaimn.net/think-tanker-demands-for-aukus-what-australia-should-do-with-us-submarines/

The moment the security pact known as AUKUS came into being, it was clear what its true intention was. Announced in September 2021, ruinous to Franco-Australian relations, and Anglospheric in inclination, the agreement between Washington, London and Canberra would project US power in the Indo-Pacific with one purpose in mind: deterring China. The fool in this whole endeavour was Australia, with a security establishment so Freudian in its anxiety it seeks an Imperial Daddy at every turn.    

To avoid the pains of mature sovereignty, the successive Australian governments of Scott Morrison and Anthony Albanese have fallen for the bribe of the nuclear-powered Virginia Class SSN-774 and the promise of a bespoke AUKUS-designed nuclear–powered counterpart. These submarines may never make their way to the Royal Australian Navy. Australia is infamously bad when it comes to constructing submarines, and the US is under no obligation to furnish Canberra with the boats.  

The latter point is made clear in the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act, which directs the US President to certify to the relevant congressional committees and leadership no later than 270 days prior to the transfer of vessels that this “will not degrade the United States underseas capabilities”; is consistent with the country’s foreign policy and national security interests and furthers the AUKUS partnership. Furthering the partnership would involve“sufficient submarine production and maintenance investments” to meet undersea capabilities; the provision by Australia of “appropriate funds and support for the additional capacity required to meet the requirements”; and Canberra’s “capability to host and fully operate the vessels authorized to be transferred.”

In his March confirmation hearing as Undersecretary of Defense Policy, Eldridge Colby, President Donald Trump’s chief appointee for reviewing the AUKUS pact, candidly opined that a poor production rate of submarines would place “our servicemen and women […] in a weaker position.” He had also warned that, “AUKUS is only going to lead to more submarines collectively in 10, 15, 20 years, which is way beyond the window of maximum danger, which is really this decade.”  

The SSN program, as such unrealised and a pure chimera, is working wonders in distorting Australia’s defence budget. The decade to 2033-4 features a total projected budget of A$330 billion. The SSN budget of A$53-63 billion puts nuclear powered submarines at 16.1% to 19.1% more than relevant land and air domains. A report by the Strategic Analysis Australia think tank did not shy away from these implications: “It’s hard to grasp how unusual this situation is. Moreover, it’s one that will endure for decades, since the key elements of the maritime domain (SSNs and the two frigate programs) will still be in acquisition well into the 2040s. It’s quite possible that Defence itself doesn’t grasp the situation that it’s gotten into.”

Despite this fantastic asymmetry of objectives, Australia is still being asked to do more. An ongoing suspicion on the part of defence wonks in the White House, Pentagon and Congress is what Australia would do with the precious naval hardware once its navy gets them. Could Australia be relied upon to deploy them in a US-led war against China? Should the boats be placed under US naval command, reducing Australia to suitable vassal status?

Now, yet another think tanking outfit, the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), is urging Australia to make its position clear on how it would deploy the Virginia boats. A report, authored by a former senior AUKUS advisor during the Biden administration Abraham Denmark and Charles Edel, senior advisor and CSIS Australia chair, airily proposes that Australia offers “a more concrete commitment” to the US while also being sensitive to its own sovereignty. This rather hopeless aim can be achieved through “a robust contingency planning process that incorporates Australian SSNs.” This would involve US and Australian military strategists planning to “undergo a comprehensive process of strategizing and organizing military operations to achieve specific objectives.” Such a process would provide “concrete reassurances that submarines sold to Australia would not disappear if and when needed.” It might also preserve Australian sovereignty in both developing the plan and determining its implementation during a crisis.

In addition to that gobbet of hopeless contradiction, the authors offer some further advice: that the second pillar of the AUKUS agreement, involving the development of advanced capabilities, the sharing of technology and increasing the interoperability between the armed forces of the three countries, be more sharply defined. “AUKUS nations should consider focusing on three capability areas: autonomy, long-range strike, and integrated air defense.” This great militarist splash would supposedly “increase deterrence in both Europe and the Indo-Pacific.”

In terms of examples, President Trump’s wonky Golden Dome anti-missile shield is touted as an “opportunity for Pillar II in integrated air defense.” (It would be better described as sheer science fiction, underwritten by space capitalism.) Australia was already at work with their US counterparts in developing missile defence systems that could complement the initiative. Developing improved and integrated anti-missile defences was even more urgent given the “greatly expanding rotational presence of US military forces in Australia.”

This waffling nonsense has all the finery of delusion. When it comes to sovereignty, there is nothing to speak of and Australia’s security cadres, along with most parliamentarians in the major parties, see no troubles with deferring responsibility to the US imperium. In most respects, this has already taken place. The use of such coddling terms as “joint planning” and “joint venture” only serves to conceal the dominant, rough role played by Washington, always playing the imperial paterfamilias even as it secures its own interests against other adversaries.

August 27, 2025 Posted by | politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

US bases including Pine Gap saw Australia put on nuclear alert, but no-one told Gough Whitlam.

By Alex Barwick for the Expanse podcast Spies in the Outback

When Australia was placed on nuclear alert by the United States government in October 1973, there was one major problem. 

No-one had told prime minister Gough Whitlam.

One of the locations placed on “red alert” was the secretive Pine Gap facility on the fringes of Alice Springs.   

Officially called a “joint space research facility” until 1988, the intelligence facility was in the crosshairs with a handful of other US bases and installations around Australia.

In fact, almost all United States bases around the world were placed on alert as conflict escalated in the Middle East. Whitlam wasn’t the only leader left out of the loop.

A prime minister in the dark 

“Whitlam got upset that he hadn’t been told in advance,” Brian Toohey, journalist and former Labor staffer to Whitlam’s defence minister Lance Barnard, said.  

Toohey said Whitlam should have been told that facilities including North West Cape base in Western Australia, and Pine Gap were being put on “red alert”.  

“There had been a new agreement knocked out by Australian officials with their American counterparts, that Australia would be given advance warning.”

They weren’t.

Suddenly, the world was on the brink of nuclear war. 

Why were parts of Australia on ‘red alert’? 

The Cold War superpowers backed opposing sides in the Yom Kippur War.

The Soviet Union supported Egypt and the United States was behind Israel.

As the proxy war escalated in October 1973, United States secretary of state Henry Kissinger believed the crisis could go nuclear and issued a DefCon 3 alert.

A DefCon 3 alert saw immediate preparations to ensure the United States could mobilise in 15 minutes to deliver a nuclear strike.

The aim was to deter a nuclear strike by the Soviets.

And, it simultaneously alerted all US bases including facilities in Australia that a nuclear threat was real.    

This level of alert has only occurred a few times, including immediately after the September 11 attacks.

Politics, pressure and protest 

The secretive intelligence facility in outback Australia caused Whitlam more trouble beyond the red alert. 

During the 1972 election campaign, the progressive politician had promised to lift the lid on Pine Gap and share its secrets with all Australians.  

“He gave a promise that he would tell the Australian public a lot more about what Pine Gap did,” Toohey said.

But according to Toohey, the initial briefing provided to Whitlam and Barnard by defence chief Arthur Tange left the prime minister with little to say. 

“Tange came along and he said basically that there was nothing they could be allowed to say. And that was just ridiculous,” Toohey said. 

“He said, the one thing he could tell them was the bases could not be used in any way to participate in a war. Well, of course they do.”

Whitlam would cause alarm in Washington when he refused to commit to extending Pine Gap’s future.  

In 1974 on the floor of parliament he said:

“The Australian government takes the attitude that there should not be foreign military bases, stations, installations in Australia. We honour agreements covering existing stations. We do not favour the extension or prolongation of any of those existing ones.”   

According to Toohey, “the Americans were incredibly alarmed about that”.

“As contingency planning, the whole of the US Defence Department said that they would shift it to Guam, a Pacific island that America owned,” he said.

And the following year, allegations would emerge that the CIA were involved in the prime minister’s dismissal on November 11, 1975.

Former Labor defence minister Kim Beazley labels the scuttlebutt as “bulldust”.

“I’d heard that stuff about the Americans getting frightened and therefore getting involved. I put the matter to study, I got a couple of senior public servants to have a look at it, nothing there, nothing there.”

Despite no conclusive evidence, the rumours continue to swirl.

Episode Two of the ABC’s Expanse podcast: Spies in the Outback is now available. This episode explores the wild political tensions surrounding the spy base in Australia’s backyard. Listen here.

August 25, 2025 Posted by | politics international, reference, secrets and lies, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Australia to chart its own course on Palestinian statehood, without Trump’s say-so.

Trump’s return to the White House has already shifted global diplomatic currents, with several leaders recalibrating their positions to maintain favour. By declaring that Australia’s decision will not be subject to U.S. approval, Albanese is signalling a willingness to resist that pressure – even if it means copping criticism from one of the country’s most powerful media empires.

9 August 2025 Michael Taylor, https://theaimn.net/australia-to-chart-its-own-course-on-palestinian-statehood-without-trumps-say-so/

Australia’s decision on whether to recognise a Palestinian state will not be dictated by Washington – and that, apparently, was enough to attract howls of condemnation and disapproval from sections of the Murdoch media.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese confirmed this week that he was unlikely to consult with U.S. President Donald Trump before making any decision on recognition. It’s a simple case of Australia acting in Australia’s national interest, emphasising that the issue will be decided in Canberra, not in the White House.

The reaction from the Murdoch media was swift and fierce. Headlines and opinion columns framed Albanese’s stance as a diplomatic snub to a “key ally,” warning of potential damage to the Australia–U.S. relationship. The coverage fits a familiar pattern: when leaders diverge from U.S. policy – especially under a Republican president – Murdoch media frequently portrays it as reckless or unpatriotic.

At the heart of the dispute is a deeper question of sovereignty. Critics argue that Australia should stand firm on charting its own foreign policy, particularly on sensitive Middle East matters, which have been shaped for decades by complex international law and humanitarian concerns. Recognition of a Palestinian state has long been debated within Australia, with supporters citing the need for a two-state solution and opponents warning of diplomatic repercussions with Israel and the United States.

Trump’s return to the White House has already shifted global diplomatic currents, with several leaders recalibrating their positions to maintain favour. By declaring that Australia’s decision will not be subject to U.S. approval, Albanese is signalling a willingness to resist that pressure – even if it means copping criticism from one of the country’s most powerful media empires.

In a political environment where foreign policy is often filtered through the prism of domestic politics and media narratives, Albanese’s comments draw a sharp line: Australia will make its own call. The real question is whether the public sees that as principled independence – or unnecessary defiance.

Either way, the stance taps into a deeper tradition in Australian foreign policy: the belief that while alliances matter, sovereignty matters more. From Whitlam’s recognition of China to Howard’s refusal to sign the Kyoto Protocol, Australia has occasionally charted its own course against the preferences of powerful allies. Albanese’s decision – or even just his refusal to seek Trump’s blessing – may yet be remembered as another of those moments.

August 10, 2025 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

AUKUS delusions. More rivets pop in submarine drama.

by Rex Patrick | Aug 4, 2025 https://michaelwest.com.au/aukus-delusions-more-rivets-pop-in-submarine-drama/

Announcing a new one-sided subs-deal with the UK, resisting calls for a review, ignoring a US Admiral’s caution, while building hundreds of houses for US military. AUKUS is having a shocker. Former senator and submariner  Rex Patrick reports.

On Friday, 25  July, Defence Minister Richard Marles and Foreign Minister Penny Wong stood beside their UK counterparts at a brief press conference in Sydney. They answered questions on a new 50-year treaty-level agreement between the UK and Australia related to the AUKUS submarine scheme.

The journalists who attended the press conference were not in possession of the text of the agreement, which was not actually signed by Marles and UK Defence Secretary John Healey until the following day, and not in Sydney but rather in Geelong. Without the text of the treaty being released, no hard questions could be asked (see below).

Marles apparently thought it more important to have the text signed a day after the ministerial discussions so that the “Nuclear-Powered Submarine Partnership and Collaboration Agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of Great Britain and Northern Ireland” could be informally named after his hometown, as “the Geelong Treaty”.

Meanwhile, in US Congress

About the same time, the Geelong Treaty was being announced, news was breaking in Australia of the testimony to the United States Senate of the nominee to serve as the next US Chief of Navy, Admiral Daryl Caudle.  What he had to say did not augur well for Australia eventually being provided with three US Virginia-class nuclear-powered attack submarines as envisaged under AUKUS.

“The question of Australia’s ability to conduct undersea warfare is not in question by me or by anyone,” the admiral told the Senate Armed Services Committee’s seapower subcommittee. “But as you know, the delivery pace is not where it needs to be to make good on the Pillar 1 of the AUKUS agreement, which is currently under review by our Defense Department”.

Caudle testified that “There are no magic beans.”

“We do have to understand whether or not the industrial base can produce the submarines required so that we can make good on the actual pact that we made with the U.K. and Australia, which is around 2.2., 2.3 Virginia-class submarines per year.”

“That’s going to require a transformational improvement, not a 10 percent improvement, not a 20 percent, a 100 percent improvement.”

Of course, none of this was really news. The US Congressional Research Service and numerous other well-informed observers have been spelling out these facts for some time, but Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Defence Minister Marles remain wilfully blind to the facts.  Having put all their political chips on AUKUS, they don’t want to see or hear anything negative.  Instead of a pause, they’ve been writing taxpayer-funded cheques to gift United States shipyards.

They quietly slipped the US Government another non-refundable $800M last week – following on from a non-refundable $800M in February.

No control, no warranty

By Monday, the ‘Geelong Treaty’ had been tabled in the Parliament.

A read of the treaty documents revealed the completely lop-sided nature of the partnership with the UK. Whilst Australia gets to have a bit of a say, the UK get to decide the design of SSN-AUKUS.  Australia will be buying and building a British design, and the success, delivery schedule, and cost will be absolutely dependent on the United Kingdom’s currently run-down and struggling submarine industrial base.

And if it doesn’t work in the end, there is no warranty.


During the election campaign, a number of cross-benchers and the Greens started calling for an AUKUS inquiry, a call repeated this week by Senator David Shoebridge. He lodged a motion to establish a Select Committee into what is our most expensive and purportedly most important Defence procurement project ever.

The inquiry motion was originally set to be voted on on Tuesday, but as the week progressed, Senator Shoebridge kept postponing it. That’s a signal that he didn’t have the numbers to get a ‘yes’ vote. The Labor Party has already ruled out an inquiry, and it looks like the Senator is trying to get the Liberal Party on board.

We’ll now find out the inquiry’s fate on 25 August. The Liberal Party are unlikely to support the inquiry. They want to criticise the government’s handling of the US alliance, but they have no intention of questioning AUKUS, which, after all, was first conceived by their man, Prime Minister Scott Morrison.

It’s an all-eggs-in-the-one-$368B-basket capability acquisition full of risk – but it appears as though there will be no oversight.

As the Parliament appears reluctant to review AUKUS, in true Trump tariff negotiation style, the US Defence Department announced its review of AUKUS would not be completed until “fall” (the next three months).

Housing bill waved through

To add icing on the cake, the government’s first Housing Bill in the 48th Parliament, voted through the House on Wednesday by the duopoly, was one to build houses, not for Australians, but for foreign military personnel and their families in Perth.

As Senator Shoebridge tried to have this Bill referred to a Senate Committee, he laid it out:

“In the last parliament, we saw Labor coming up with a million reasons they couldn’t do anything on public housing. They couldn’t help people out on rents, they couldn’t build public housing, and they kept saying it was all the Greens’ fault for not supporting their crap bills. Then, in this parliament, they start with a public housing bill. Well done, Labor! You bring a public housing bill into the chamber. You push it through the lower house. And do you know what public housing they’re building? They’re building public housing for US troops under AUKUS. That’s their public housing bill.”

“Please, minister, you haven’t explained in the bill how much this is going to cost; is it going to come from the Defence budget or some other budget?”

No answer was given, and no referral to a committee occurred.

The AUKUS week closed with some lobbying on Sky by former Secretary of Home Affairs, Michael Pezzulo. Pezzulo is officially disgraced, but is not without expertise on national security issues.

Pezzulo does know something about the financing of Australia’s defence capabilities, and he issued a blunt warning about the scale and urgency of Australia’s AUKUS commitments, saying the nuclear submarine program will demand a national effort on par with Medicare.

“It’s like having the military version of Medicare. It’s something that’s got to become an all-consuming, focused effort that transcends Commonwealth, state, territory governments into industry, academia, the training pipeline through both universities and vocational educational training institutions.”

All that statement does is roll out the trifecta. The US can’t deliver Virginia Class submarines to us; the UK submarine industry is a cluster fiasco; and Australia’s not ready. And, we will have to make AUKUS submarines our number one national priority if we are to have any chance of success.


In 2023 Paul Keating – without knowledge of the total $4.7B that is to be gifted to the United States, or the similar amount that is being gifted to the UK, nor the facts that the US is unlikely to deliver, and that we really don’t have any rights in relation to the SSN-AUKUS – called it “the worst deal in all history”.

Knowing what we know now, Keating was wrong. He should have said “dumbest deal in all history”.

August 9, 2025 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

Assange Joins Historic Anti-Genocide March Across Sydney’s Harbour Bridge

By Joe Lauria,  Consortium News, 3 August 25, https://consortiumnews.com/2025/08/03/assange-joins-historic-anti-genocide-march-across-sydneys-harbour-bridge/

Julian Assange joined at least 90,000 and as many as 300,000 people who marched across Australia’s most famous bridge on Sunday to protest Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, his wife Stella and brother Gabriel Shipton joined Australian journalist Mary Kostakidis and, according to police estimates, 90,000 other people, but according to organizers as many as 300,000, to march across Sydney’s Harbour Bridge on Sunday to demand an end to Israel’s genocide in Gaza. 

The Sydney Morning Herald reported:

“At least 90,000 pro-Palestine protesters walked across Sydney Harbour Bridge and into history through the pelting rain, as a larger crowd than expected used the landmark as a symbol, bringing the city to a standstill and leading police to sound the alarm of a potential crowd crush.

In the face of the sheer size of the protest against the Israeli government’s actions in Gaza, which organisers say drew between 200,000 and 300,000 people, police were forced to ditch plans for the march to end at North Sydney and redirected the crowd. … The last major march across the bridge was 25 years ago, when 250,000 people marched in support of reconciliation [with  Indigenous Australians.]”

Kostakidis is in court accused of racial hatred by the Zionist Federation of Australia for her social media reporting and commentary critical of the Israeli government’s genocide in Gaza.

[Consortium News was on the bridge and will be providing a full video report.].

The New South Wales premiere and police both tried to stop the march from happening by making protestors liable to arrest for blocking traffic. It took a Supreme Court ruling on Saturday to let it go ahead. About four times as many people turned up than organizers had expected — even in a driving winter rain — because of the concerted effort to stop it, an organizer told The Sydney Morning Herald. 

The paper quoted Palestine Action Group organiser Josh Lees as saying said the march was “’even bigger than we dreamt of’ after people travelled from across the country to attend. He called the event a ‘monumental and historic’ success. ‘Today was just a huge display of democracy,’ he said.”

The massive turnout shows the revulsion a good number of Australians feel for Israel’s ongoing slaughter and for their government’s complicity. “Netanyahu/Albanese you can’t hide. Stop supporting genocide,” the protestors chanted.

Police were not prepared for the outpouring of outrage. The Herald said:

“NSW Police acting deputy commissioner Peter McKenna said the march came ‘very close’ to a ‘catastrophic situation’ and that officers had been forced to make a snap decision to turn tens of thousands around to avoid a crowd crush as people exited for North Sydney. McKenna said part of the problem was the organisers’ application to march stated that 10,000 people were likely to attend, not the 90,000 people the police estimated turned up.”

August 7, 2025 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

Dare To Hope

Caitlin Johnstone, Aug 04, 2025, https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/dare-to-hope?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=170050544&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

At least 100,000 Australians, including WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, marched for Gaza across the Sydney Harbour Bridge in the pouring rain at a demonstration on Sunday.

It wasn’t that long ago when I sincerely wondered if we’d ever see Assange’s face again, let alone in public, let alone in Sydney, let alone heading up what had to be one of the largest pro-Palestine rallies ever held in Australia. Dare to be encouraged. The light is breaking through.

The western political/media class is fuming with outrage about images of Israeli hostages who are severely emaciated, which just says so much about how dehumanized Palestinians are in western society. Everyone stop caring about hundreds of thousands of starving Palestinians, it turns out two Israeli hostages are starving in the same way for the same reason.

Israel’s Foreign Ministry has announced that in order to improve “public diplomacy” efforts the term “hasbara” will no longer be used, because people have come to associate it with lies and propaganda.

The Times of Israel reports:

“Long referred to as hasbara, a term used to denote both public relations and propaganda that has been freighted with negative baggage in recent years, the ministry now brands its approach as toda’a — which translates to ‘awareness’ or ‘consciousness’ — an apparent shift toward broader, more proactive messaging.

That “negative baggage” would of course be public disgust at the nonstop deluge of lies that Israel and its apologists have been spouting for two years to justify an act of genocide. Westerners have grown increasingly aware that Israel and its defenders have a special word for their practice of manipulating public narratives about their beloved apartheid state, so they’re changing the word.

Simply stopping the genocide is not considered as an option. Simply ceasing to lie is not considered as an option. They’re just changing the word they use for their lies about their genocide.

One of the reasons Israel’s supporters love to hurl antisemitism accusations at its critics is because it’s a claim that can be made without any evidence whatsoever. It’s not an accusation based on facts, it’s an assertion about someone’s private thoughts and feelings, which are invisible. Support for Israel doesn’t lend itself to arguments based on facts, logic and morality, so they rely heavily on aggressive claims about what’s happening inside other people’s heads which cannot be proved or disproved.

It’s entirely unfalsifiable. I cannot prove that my opposition to an active genocide is not in fact due to an obsessive hatred of a small Abrahamic religion. I cannot unscrew the top of my head and show everyone that I actually just think it’s bad to rain military explosives on top of a giant concentration camp full of children, and am not in fact motivated by a strange medieval urge to persecute Jewish people. So an Israel supporter can freely hurl accusations about what’s going on in my head that I am powerless to disprove.

It’s been a fairly effective weapon over the years. Campus protests have been stomped out, freedom of expression has been crushed, entire political campaigns have been killed dead, all because it’s been normalized to make evidence-free claims about someone’s private thoughts and feelings toward Jews if they suggest that Palestinians deserve human rights.

A Harvard professor of Jewish studies named Shaul Magid recently shared the following anecdote:

“I once asked someone I casually know, an ardent Zionist, ‘what could Israel do that would cause you not to support it?’. He was silent for a moment before looking at me and said, ‘Nothing.’”

This is horrifying, but facts in evidence indicate that it’s also a very common position among Zionists. If you’re still supporting Israel at this point, there’s probably nothing it could do to lose your support.

August 5, 2025 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

Anthony Albanese says Israel’s denial of starvation in Gaza ‘beyond comprehension’

ABC News, By national affairs correspondent Jane Norman, 29 July 25

In short:

Anthony Albanese has expressed his astonishment at claims made by Israel’s prime minister that “there is no starvation in Gaza”, telling Labor MPs that statement is “beyond comprehension”.

The prime minister made the comments in response to a question from a Labor backbencher about when Australia would move to recognise Palestinian statehood.

What’s next?

Overnight, US President Donald Trump also appeared to dispute Mr Netanyahu’s statement, but Opposition Leader Sussan Ley later declined to say whether she believed starvation was occurring.

Anthony Albanese has expressed his astonishment at claims made by Israel’s prime minister that “there is no starvation in Gaza”, telling Labor MPs that statement is “beyond comprehension”.

The prime minister made the comments in response to a question from a Labor backbencher about when Australia would move to recognise Palestinian statehood.

Mr Albanese — who has been sharpening his criticism of Israel’s actions in the Gaza Strip — appeared to directly criticise Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who posted a clip to X saying “there is no starvation in Gaza, no policy of starvation in Gaza”.

That assertion was repeated in Canberra yesterday by Israeli’s deputy ambassador to Australia, Amir Meron.

“Those claims that there’s no starvation in Gaza are beyond comprehension,” Mr Albanese told the Labor caucus, according to a spokesperson.

The prime minister outlined Australia’s pre-conditions for recognition, including “democratic reforms” in the Palestinian territory, but indicated these obstacles were not insurmountable, referencing a famous quote from Nelson Mandela that “it always seems impossible until it’s done”.

……………………………………………………….. The prime minister’s intervention came amid growing international concern about both the number of deaths at aid centres managed by the Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation and the level of hunger in the enclave………………………………………………………………… https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-29/pm-criticises-israels-denial-of-starvation-in-gaza/105585494

July 30, 2025 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

Out of Step with the World: Australia’s Refusal to Recognise Palestine is a Moral Failure

27 July 2025Michael Taylor, https://theaimn.net/out-of-step-with-the-world-australias-refusal-to-recognise-palestine-is-a-moral-failure/

In a world that is finally waking up to the urgent need for justice and peace in the Middle East, Australia has chosen silence and hesitation. While 147 of the 193 United Nations member states have formally recognised the State of Palestine – including France, Spain, Ireland, and Norway – Australia continues to sit on its hands. This refusal is not only out of step with global momentum; it is out of step with the values of fairness, dignity, and the will of the Australian people.

Recognition of Palestine is not an endorsement of violence, nor is it a rejection of Israel’s right to exist. It is a simple acknowledgement that the Palestinian people – stateless for 76 years – deserve the same rights and recognition afforded to others. It is a step toward equality, toward dialogue, and ultimately toward peace.

Yet Australia clings to a failed policy of “not yet” – as though Palestinian dignity must forever be postponed for fear of offending a powerful ally. In doing so, our government aligns itself not with justice or international law, but with the shrinking minority of countries who continue to look the other way.

This decision does not reflect the views of the Australian public. Poll after poll shows a majority of Australians support Palestinian statehood and an end to the occupation. We are a people who believe in the fair go, in standing up for the underdog, in peace over power. And yet, our government refuses to act – cowed by geopolitical caution and domestic political pressure.

Refusing to recognise Palestine is not a neutral act. It is a political choice – one that undermines the international consensus, emboldens the status quo, and tells the Palestinian people that their suffering is invisible.

Australia once stood tall in the fight against apartheid. We helped build international pressure that led to its end in South Africa. Why, then, do we hesitate now?

If we truly believe in a two-state solution – if we truly believe in peace – then we must recognise both states. It is time for Australia to find its moral courage and join the vast majority of the world in recognising Palestine.

Justice delayed is justice denied.

July 28, 2025 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

Sanction Israel Now – APH Convergence

22 July 2025 AIMN Editorial, https://theaimn.net/sanction-israel-now-aph-convergence/

NATIONAL CONVERGENCE ON CANBERRA DEMANDS THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT SANCTION ISRAEL NOW

Advocates for justice and human rights from across the continent will converge at Parliament House Canberra from Sunday, 20 July 2025 to Tuesday, 22 July 2025 to demand that the Australian government immediately impose sanctions on the state of Israel.

Over the last 77 years, the Israeli government has openly committed genocide and crimes against humanity against the Palestinian people without consequence. Over the last 21 months, we have witnessed an escalation of these atrocities as Israel flaunts its human rights violations and contraventions of international law before the eyes of the world.

Despite international law compelling states including Australia to take action to prevent these atrocity crimes, the Australian government has failed to take meaningful action by imposing boycotts, divestments and sanctions on the genocidal state. Instead, it has opted to remain friends and allies with, and supply weapons to, a state openly committing gross human rights violations.

“Palestinian men, women and children are being massacred and starved to death before the eyes of the world. All eyes are on Gaza but no one is willing to do anything to help ” said Nasser Mashni, Australia Palestine Advocacy Network President.

Israel has sought to cripple Gaza by imposing a blockade, bombing hospitals and manufacturing a famine. Repeated human rights violations have been documented while states, including Australia remain reluctant to take concrete action.

Noura Mansour, Democracy in Colour National Director said that “We are witnessing a humanitarian and global catastrophe. We have been asking the international community to stop these atrocities for over 77 years. The escalation and atrocities we are witnessing today are a direct result of Palestinians being ignored since 1948.”

The Australian government remains complicit in the genocide, occupation and crimes against humanity being committed against the Palestinian people by the Israeli government.

We remain steadfast in demanding the Australian government take immediate action to pressure Israel to abide by international law by imposing sanctions.

“We have been constantly demanding that the Australian government impose sanctions and an arms embargo on Israel for over 21 months. Despite the constant bombardment, starvation and brutality, the Australian government is reluctant to take any concrete action. Instead, it has shamefully chosen to take the side of the oppressor” said Activist and Organiser, Sarah Baarini.

We call on the community from every corner of the continent to converge at the centre of decision making on this colony, for the opening of Parliament, to send a clear and strong message that the people remain united and demand that the Australian government

SANCTION ISRAEL NOW

“We will not be passive in the face of injustice. Every second that passes without meaningful action taken by those in power is another second too late. Time is truly of the essence. We are already 77 years too late – we can not afford to wait a second more. We will not stop and we will not rest – we will continue to resist and demand justice until Palestine is free, from the river to the sea” said Dan, Renegade Activist and Political Staffer.

ENDORSED BY:

Academics for Palestine – South Australia

Academics for Palestine WA

ACT Greens

ANMF nurses and midwives for Palestine

ANU 4 Palestine

Anak Bangsa Malaysia

Australia Palestine Advocacy Network

Australia’s Voice

Australian MADE (Muslim Adolescent

Development & Education) Inc

Australian Greens First Nations Network

Australian Social Workers for Palestine

ASU for Palestine

Banyule Palestine Action Group

Canberra Islamic School

Canberra Palestine and Climate Justice

Central Coast Friends of Palestine

Central West New South Wales 4 Palestine

Climate Activists for Palestine

Climate Justice Alliance Northern Rivers

Coalition for Justice and Peace in Palestine

Connecting the dots

Conversations For Palestine

Darebin for Palestine

Defend Dissent Coalition

Democracy in Colour

Disrupt Burrup Hub

Disrupt Wars

DrummersforPalestine

Education4Palestine

Extinction Rebellion

Extinction Rebellion ACT

Extinction Rebellion Peace – XR Peace

Fairfield for Palestine

Families For Palestine

Food Not Bombs Gadigal/Sydney

Fowler for Palestine

Free Gaza Australia

Free Palestine Central Vic

Free Palestine Coalition Naarm

Free Palestine Far North Queensland

Free Palestine Frankston

Free Palestine Gippsland

Free Palestine Melbourne

Free Palestine Newcastle

Free Palestine Sunbury

Free Palestine Townsville

Free Palestine Wurruk

Friends of Palestine Western Australia

Green Left

Greens (WA) Inc

Happily Made

Health Workers 4 Palestine (South

Australia)

Healthcare Workers for Palestine WA

Hobsons Bay 4 Palestine

Hunter Asylum Seeker Advocacy

Hume for Palestine

Independent and Peaceful Australia

Network (IPAN)

Independent and Peaceful Australia

Network ACT

Inner West for Palestine

Institute for Collaborative Race Research

IPAN Geelong and Southwest Victoria

Ireland Palestine Solidarity ‘Australia’Islamic Association of Monash Mosque

Islamic Council of Victoria

Jewish Council of Australia

Jews Against the Occupation ‘48

Jews for Palestine WA

Justice for Palestine Magan-djin

Law Students For Refugees

Loud Jew Collective

Lutruwita Socialist Alliance

MAA International

Maribyrnong 4 Palestine

Melbourne for Palestine

Menzies for Palestine

Merri-bek & Northern Suburbs 4 Palestine

Mountains for Palestine

Mparntwe for Falastin

Mums For Palestine

Muslim Collective

Muslim Votes Matter

Naarm Frontline Medics

National Amnesty Refugee Network

Newcastle Mums For Palestine

Nillumbik 4 Palestine

No AUKUS Coalition Victoria

No Weapons for Genocide

Northern Naarm Action for Palestine

Northern Rivers Friends Of Palestine

NTEU for Palestine

Our Race Community

Palestine Action Group Canberra

Palestine Action Group Muloobinba

Palestine Action Group Sydney

Palestine Action Group Warrnambool

Palestine Justice Movement Sydney

Peoples Climate Assembly

Perth Doctors Medical Aid For Palestine

Prams for Palestine

Queensland Muslims Inc.

Readers and Writers against the Genocide

Red Spark

RESISTANCE

Rising Tide

Sit Intifada

Socialist Alliance

South Australian Grassroots Ecosystem

(SAGE)

Stop Arming Israel

Students for Palestine

Students for Palestine WA

Students For Palestine UTS

Sundays For Peace – Wagga Wagga

Sydney Hearts in Action

Tasmanian Palestine Advocacy Network

Teachers and Families for Palestine,

Northern Territory

Teachers and School Staff for Palestine

NSW

The Greens NSW

The Greens SA

The Initiative for a Moral Economy

The Socialist Party

The Victorian Greens

Tomorrow Movement

Total Liberation Alliance

Treaty Council Worldwide

Unionists for Palestine WA

Wage Peace

WA Socialists

Watermelon Rebellion

Women’s Climate Justice Collective

Yarra Ranges For Palestine

July 22, 2025 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics international | Leave a comment

Australia must rethink AUKUS and assert its sovereignty

16 July 2025 AIMN Editorial, By John Sherman  , https://theaimn.net/australia-must-rethink-aukus-and-assert-its-sovereignty/

Australia stands at a crossroads, facing mounting pressure from an AUKUS partnership that increasingly compromises its sovereignty. The trilateral agreement with the United States and United Kingdom, initially framed as a strategic alliance to bolster regional security, has evolved into a complex web of demands that risks binding Australia to U.S. interests for decades. This shift raises serious concerns about our foreign policy autonomy and economic relationships with key trading partners, particularly China.

The original AUKUS framework promised mutual benefit, but recent U.S.-driven stipulations have tilted the balance, treating Australia as a subordinate rather than an equal partner. Australians are expressing a growing unease: AUKUS is now a leash on our independence. The agreement’s expanding scope now threatens to dictate Australia’s foreign policy, potentially straining ties with Asia-Pacific neighbours vital to our economy. This is not the partnership we signed up for.

Defence Minister Richard Marles must take a firmer stance. His apparent acquiescence to these demands undermines Australia’s interests. If he cannot renegotiate terms that prioritise our sovereignty, he should step aside for leadership capable of navigating this complex geopolitical landscape. Australia deserves a minister who can assert our position as a confident middle power, not one tethered to U.S. policy.

The Trump administration’s approach, as seen in its dealings with African nations, offers a cautionary tale. Countries like Nigeria and South Africa have rejected similar U.S. agreements laden with restrictive conditions, opting instead for partnerships that respect their autonomy. Australia should take note. Our alliances must serve our national interests, not entangle us in great-power rivalries that destabilise the region.

Global challenges – climate change, resource scarcity, and economic recovery – demand unity, not division. Australia must champion a future where nations collaborate as equals, not as pawns in a superpower’s strategy. By reevaluating AUKUS and asserting our independence, we can lead by example, fostering a world that prioritises collective progress over zero-sum conflicts. The time for bold, principled leadership is now.

July 17, 2025 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

A Vassal’s Impulse: Australia Backs US Strike on Iran

The Australian position, along a number of European states, also failed to acknowledge the General Conference Resolutions of the International Atomic Energy Agency (in particular GC(XIXI)/RES/444 and GC(XXIV)/RES/533) declaring that “any armed attack on and threat against nuclear facilities devoted to peaceful purposes constitutes a violation of the United Nations Charter, international law and the Statute of the Agency.”

29 June 2025 Dr Binoy Kampmark, https://theaimn.net/a-vassals-impulse-australia-backs-us-strike-on-iran/

The initial statement from Australian government sources was one of constipated caution and clenching wariness. Senator Penny Wong’s time as head of the Department of Trade and Foreign Affairs has always been about how things come out, a process unsatisfyingly uncertain and unyielding in detail. Stick to the safe middle ground and sod the rest. These were the cautionary words of an Australian government spokesperson on June 22: “We have been clear that Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile program has been a threat to international peace and security.”

That insipid statement was in response to Operation Midnight Hammer, a strike on three nuclear facilities in Iran by the US Air Force, authorised by US President Donald Trump on June 22. With such spectacular violence came the hollow call for diplomatic prudence and restraint. There was an importantdifference: Tehran, not Israel or Washington, would be the subject of scolding. Iran would not be permitted nuclear weapons but jaw jaw was better than war war. “We note the US president’s statement that now is the time for peace,” stated the spokesperson. “The security situation in the region is highly volatile. We continue to call for de-escalation, dialogue and diplomacy.”

Within twenty-four hours, that anodyne position had morphed into one of unconditional approval for what was a breach of the United Nations Charter, notably its injunction against the threatened or actual use of force against sovereign states in the absence of authorisation by the UN Security Council or the necessity of self-defence. “The world has long agreed Iran cannot be allowed to get a nuclear weapon, and we support action to prevent this. That is what this is,” accepted Wong.

This assessment was not only silly but colossally misguided.It would have been an absurd proposition for the US to make the claim that they were under imminent threat of attack, a condition seen as necessary for a pre-emptive strike. This was a naked submission to the wishes of a small, destabilising and sole (undeclared) nuclear power in the Middle East, a modern territorial plunderer celebratory of ethnonational supremacy.

The Australian position, along a number of European states, also failed to acknowledge the General Conference Resolutions of the International Atomic Energy Agency (in particular GC(XIXI)/RES/444 and GC(XXIV)/RES/533) declaring that “any armed attack on and threat against nuclear facilities devoted to peaceful purposes constitutes a violation of the United Nations Charter, international law and the Statute of the Agency.”

Wong also misrepresented the circumstances under which Iran was told they could negotiate over their nuclear program, erroneously accepting the line from the Trump administration that Tehran had “an opportunity to comply”. Neither the US diplomatic channel, which only permitted a narrow, fleeting corridor for actual negotiations, nor Israel’s wilful distortion of the IAEA’s assessment of Iran’s uranium enrichment plans and prevarication, ever gave chance for a credible resolution.Much like the calamitous, unlawful invasion of Iraq in 2003 by a crew of brigand nations – the merry trio of US, UK and Australia stood out – the autopilot to war was set, scornful of international law.

Wong’s shift from constipated caution to free flow approval for the US attack, with its absent merits and weighty illegalities, was also a craven capitulation to the warmonger class permanently mesmerised by the villain school of foreign relations. This cerebrally challenged view sees few problems with attacking nuclear facilities, the radioactive dangers of doing so, and the merits of a state having them in the first place.

The US attack on Iran found hearty approval among the remnants of the conservative opposition, who tend tospecialise in the view that pursuing a pro-Israeli line, right,wrong, or murderous, is the way to go. Liberal Senator and former Australian ambassador to Israel, David Sharma, thought the Albanese government’s initial response “underwhelming and perplexing,” claiming that support for this shredding of international law “a straightforward position for Australia to adopt.” Sharma is clearly getting rusty on hislaw of nations.

His side of politics is also of the view that the attacked party here – Iran – must forgo any silly notion of self-defence and retaliation and repair to the table of diplomacy in head bowedhumiliation. “We want to see Iran come to the negotiating table to verify where that 400 kilos of enriched uranium is,” stated a very stern opposition home affairs minister, Andrew Hastie. “I’m very glad to see that Penny Wong has essentially endorsed our position and I’m glad we have bipartisanship on this.”

Australia’s response has been that of the weary poltroon. Little has been asked about Canberra’s standout complicity in assisting the US imperium fulfil its global reach when it comes to striking targets. The role of the intelligence signals facility in Pine Gap, cutely and inaccurately called a joint venture, always lends its critical role to directing the US war machine through its heavy reliance on satellite technology. Wong, when asked about the role played by the facility in facilitating the attacks on Iran, had little to say. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was also cold towards disclosing any details. “We are upfront, but we don’t talk about intelligence, obviously. But we’ve made very clear this was unilateral action taken by the United States.”

At least on this occasion, Australia did not add its forces to anillegal adventure, as it all too wilfully did in 2003. Then, Iraq was invaded on the spurious grounds that weapons of mass destruction not only existed but would somehow be used either by the regime of Saddam Hussein or fictional proxies he might eventually supply. History forever shows that no such weapons were found, nor proxies equipped. But the Albanese government has shown not only historical illiteracy but an amnesia on the matter. Unfortunately, it’s the sort of amnesia that has become contagious, afflicting a goodly number of Washington’s satellites, vassals and friendly states.

June 30, 2025 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment