Whether the Liberals’ Dave Sharma wins in Wentworth on Saturday or not, it’s clear whom he represents: the extremist government of the corrupt Benjamin (or “Bibi”, as Dave would call him) Netanyahu, with whom he forged such close ties during his stint as Australia’s ambassador to Israel.
Not Israelis, not Australian Jews, not even the so-called “Israel Lobby”. Just one particular, powerful political grouping within the Israeli political system, one committed to preventing any “two-state solution” and instead achieving recognition of the status quo — an endless occupation in which Palestinian territories are slowly but systematically, and illegally, annexed, while the rights and land and, frequently, the lives of the occupied people are curtailed by force.
In flagging a following of Trump in moving our embassy to Jerusalem, the Morrison government is abandoning any pretence it remains committed to a two-state solution or is not siding with Netanyahu and his apartheid agenda of one state and two populations: one free, one imprisoned. It is also signalling to the rest of the international community, which refuses to legitimise Israel’s occupation and annexation, that it has abandoned its long-held position on the issue.
And all for what? A handful of votes of hardline Israel supporters in Wentworth who would never have not voted Liberal anyway? In a byelection that should, by any rational measure, be impossible to lose? Sharma would have to suffer an 18% swing to lose — an implausible outcome despite the Liberals’ attempts to scare voters back into the fold with spurious “internal polling” stories handed to friendly outlets. And at the cost of anger from neighbours like Indonesia and Malaysia who are orders of magnitude more important to Australia’s foreign policy, economic and security interests than Netanyahu’s apartheid regime?
It’s a bizarre trade-off, one that reflects remarkable misjudgement. And misjudgement is now the key word about the Morrison government. That’s not the view of its opponents or commentators, but the government itself, which has sought to explain its support for Hanson “it’s OK to be white” motion as a rolling series of misjudgements. Porter’s office made an error in determining the government’s response. Cormann’s office made an error in not correcting the error from Porter’s office. They all erred afterward in trying to reframe the motion as against racism full stop, rather than admitting they screwed up on the night.
And that’s the most charitable explanation — albeit one undermined by various Coalition figures saying there was nothing wrong with the motion afterward. Liberal Senator Mathias Cormann went out yesterday and took one for the team, and as Senate leader he gets to wear the blame, but it’s Christian Porter — he of the vexatious prosecution of Witness K and Bernard Collaery — who seems like the real culprit, and we still don’t know how “accidental” his role was. After all, he’s only the bloke who’s supposed to be in charge of the nation’s laws, so you’d assume his office could do things like read Senate motions from parties known for racial fear-mongering.
There’s a lot of talk about the transactional costs of leadership changes, which is usually code for the antics of political delinquents like Kevin Rudd and Tony Abbott. But each new prime ministership brings in new people to the job of governing, which is a constant exercise in judgement, in weighing up different options, selecting between bad alternatives. It’s harder than ever to do that properly in a political environment that’s 24/7, has multiple news cycles each day and constant pressure from social media (Cormann and Porter had to deal with the aftermath of the Hanson debacle, which went off like a bomb on Twitter, while they were in cabinet, which is when Porter wrongly decided trying to reframe the stuff-up as a victory over racism).
Experience can give you perspective and guide you in making those judgements, even if — as Cormann, the government’s most experienced senior figure, showed yesterday — it doesn’t protect you against errors. But your core values should also be an important guide — in the middle of a political crisis, what is really important to you?
At the moment, the impression is that not merely is the Morrison team inexperienced, but it doesn’t really believe in anything beyond keeping power. And that’s a recipe for further misjudgements.
Every government we have had since Howard 1 has been merely concerned about keeping power.
Off course all governments are concerned about keeping power, but usually not “merely”.
Bernard
I agree generally but “one committed to preventing any “two-state solution” Come on! Only the complete destruction of Isreal will satisfy the Palestinians.
Ah, that old canard again. Keep repeating the lie until it becomes the truth, eh Jimbo. After all, it worked so well for Goebbels.
I’ve yet to see any evidence that Israel will accept anything short of the complete destruction of the Palestinian people, as evidence by their frequent violations of nearly every single aspect of the Camp David peace accords.
Meanwhile, when was the last significant act of terrorism committed by Palestinians…..without provocation by Israeli military/para-military actions?
Many Israeli politicians, including the current P.M. have stated there will never be a Palestinian state, as evidenced by this weeks approval of yet another illegal settlement. Israel screams about the right to self- defence but apparently that doesn’t apply to the Palestinians. You can’t claim self-defence when you are stealing from, imprisoning and even killing your alleged attacker.
Probably because there is already a Palestinian state. It’s called Jordan.
How do boots taste? Never really been into licking them, myself.
Jews rightly feel great anger about the holocaust. However, the way Israel treats the Palestinians is abhorrent. Do they not feel any sympathy for the Palestinians? When will they agree to the two state solution? Is it their plan to take Palestinian land inch by inch and drive the original inhabitants out? Read Ilan Pappe’s book ‘Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine’. Makes your eyes bleed.
I haven’t read Ilan Pappe’s book Luckyduck, (birds rule, OK?) but I read a very interesting article in the Saturday Paper’s “The Briefing” recently written by Molly Crabapple titled “My Great-Grandfather the Bundist.”
This is a Jewish group I have not heard of before. Their motto was, “There, where we live, that is our country.”
To quote from her excellent article: “..the Bund, a revolutionary society…whose story was interwoven with the agonies and triumphs of Jews in Eastern Europe and whose name has been all but erased.
Founded in 1897 (in today’s Lithuania) ..the Bund was a sometimes-clandestine political party whose tenets were humane, socialist, secular and defiantly Jewish. …Though the Bund was largely obliterated by Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, the group’s opposition to Zionism better explains their absence from current consciousness. Though the Bund celebrated Jews as a nation, they irreconcilably opposed the establishment of Israel as a separate Jewish homeland in Palestine. Instead, Bundists adhered to the doctrine of…”Hereness”. Jews had the right to live in freedom and dignity wherever it was they stood. …
In Israel, the Bund has been either ignored or belittled. “(They) are perceived as individuals who stubbornly clung to an unrealistic solution for Jews’ persecution in Europe, with the ‘right’ solution being the one offered by the Zionists – immigration to Palestine,” …Zionist ideologues have a self-serving motive for framing it this way. For Jews, there could be only two choices: march like sheep to the gas chamber, or become a brave Israeli, bravely suppressing Arabs….Jewish ethnographic-nationalism is a poison like all ethnographic-nationalisms…it has continued to reap a harvest of repression and death…..What does Hereness mean in our age of mass migration? An attempt, I believe, to find the self in exile, to square homeland with the freedom to leave”.
Crikey, I am fed-up with your “awaiting moderation” nonsense. It is beyond pathetic.
Eloquent. Thankyou.
Regrettably, the result of Palestinian intransigence after Rabin’s assassination and refusal to stop the “drive them into the sea” rhetoric and civilian killings has led to this situation where the majority of Israel shrugged and decided their best option is to go with Netanyahu and his policies of doing whatever it takes to protect Israelis with complete disregard for the lives of the Palestinians.
It’s easy to scream apartheid and such from here, but I firmly believe most countries (including Australia) would have taken one look at people who suicide bombed school buses and do exactly what Israel has done. It’s human nature. People who one-eyed support the Palestinians are as bad as people who one-eyed support the Israelis. The whole situation is terrible and won’t be resolved by giving EITHER side carte blanche. It can only be resolved if both sides can agree to put all existing grievances in the past (in the style of South Africa after apartheid) and first put a complete stop to all violence, with serious punishments for EITHER side if they break the ceasefire to be enforced by external actors. There can be no “oh they haven’t withdrawn from settlements yet so it’s OK to fire mortars at civilians” and then can be no “those kids looked at us funny so we shot them”.
Unfortunately I’m not sure how we get there without one or other side demonstrating some unilateral good faith. Maybe once Netanyahu finally leaves office, or if a new popular leader arises on the Palestinian side outside of Hamas.
As someone who has closely followed the intricacies of Middle East Politics for the better part of 30 years, I can honestly say that your timeline of events is utterly skew-whiff. Never forget that Israel *created* Hamas, initially, to undermine the PLO…..a move that spectacularly blew up in their face. Rabin was murdered by one of his own, simply for agreeing to a Peace Accord that benefited Israel more than the Palestinians. Yet from the minute the accords were signed, Israel was violating their side of the bargain. Which is exactly what finally triggered the second Intafada in the early 2000’s.
So please stop trying to engage in victim blaming. By your way of thinking, Warsaw got what it deserved for rising up against the Nazis during WWII, & Hungary got what it deserved for standing up to the Soviet Union.
For someone who has closely followed the intricacies of middle east politics for the better part of 30 years, you obviously haven’t learned anything and have a very biased and skewed view.
Just one example of your misunderstandings is that in 1964, Yasir Arafat founded the PLO. The PLO went on to split and became the PA and Hamas.
This absurd narrative that Israel created Hamas is what gave you away. Straight from the anti-Israel book of propaganda. Which makes it an antisemitic statement.
Arky, although I agree with your even-handed approach, I believe the onus should be on Israel to renounce its imperial fantasies. The Israelis have, after all, colonized traditionally Palestinian territory on the basis of an invented people and an invented nation and have followed the common tragic pattern in history where a subjugated and oppressed people become the oppressors. It was the victory of the 1967 war that made them drunk with success and turned them into expansionists. Yes, the Palestinians, especially under Arafat, have played very badly and squandered opportunities and yes, we here would probably have behaved in a similar fashion. Yet it remains a fact that Israel holds all the cards and we need to put pressure on it wherever possible until it dumps this opportunistic fanatic, Netanyahu.
“The Israelis have, after all, colonized traditionally Palestinian territory on the basis of an invented people and an invented nation and have followed the common tragic pattern in history where a subjugated and oppressed people become the oppressors.’
How have the Israeli’s done that?
The colonisation trope is a myth and the idea is simply propaganda.
People across the world share the same values. These can be represented on continua from fair to unfair, courageous to cowardly, honest to dishonest, trust worthy to untrustworthy, respectful to disrespectful and loving to unloving. In the matters discussed in this article and on may others – immigration, tax, welfare, education spending, same sex marriage, climate change, female representation in government – the LNP government in its various forms over the last 5 years is dishonest, untrustworthy, disrespectful, unfair, unloving and cowardly. The most recent examples of horse racing on the opera house and voting for ‘okay to be white’ demonstrate how out of touch this mob are.
What a fascinating concept – “People across the world share the same values. “. Citation required.
Systems Leadership: Creating Positive Organisations, Macdonald, Burke & Stewart. Those who see others as holding values ‘different’ from their values or as ‘unAustralian’ are expressing their preoccupation with divisiveness.
Oh Bernard, is that potentially the sound of the scales finally falling from your eyes? Most of us have known for 5 years how useless, incompetent & lacking in moral fibre this government is. Yet the press corp has been all too willing to turn a blind eye to their many failings.
All Morison did was to shift the whole conversation this week to Jerusalem. Was it an attempt to sway the voters of Wentworth? I don’t think it was. It has been on agenda for some months. Was it a cynical attempt to buy votes? No, it was opportunism and cunning. Is the embassy move that important to Jews in Wentworth? I don’t think so. The move to Jerusalem will happen eventually. Jews by nature are patient about those things. Is it a political ploy? Yes and all you morons fell for it.