Australia and Palestine-Israel: The Threat of the Far Right

The government of Australia, along with Israel and the US, recently voted against the UN resolution to elect Palestine as chair of the Group of 77, enabling it to act like a full member state during 2019. That same week, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced that he is considering recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and moving the Australian embassy there.

In many ways, such moves and announcements are no surprise: Australia’s foreign policy on Palestine and Israel has always been unapologetically pro-Israel and anti-Palestine. This stems from two main reasons:

First, both countries are settler colonial projects based on white supremacy. Indeed, former Israeli Ambassador to Australia Naftali Tamir, in a 2006 interview with Haaretz, categorized Israel and Australia as “two white sisters in Asia,” and spoke of how they share the same race – a different one to “yellow and slanted-eyed Asians.” The colonialist rhetoric of Australia’s current ruling Liberal Party echoes such sentiments. Some of its members argue that colonization has brought many benefits to the First Nation Peoples of Australia, while others go so far as to deny that Australia was ever colonized – just as Zionists deny that Palestine was occupied and ethnically cleansed, claiming that it was “a land without a people for a people without a land.”

Second, Australia’s foreign policy is largely a reflection of US foreign and domestic politics. This is seen not only in its policies on Palestine-Israel, but in the rise of far-right political movements following the election of Donald Trump. Most recently, Liberal Party ministers voted in support of a blatant white supremacist motion that called on the Australian Senate to acknowledge the “deplorable rise of anti-white racism and attacks on Western civilization” – dubbed “It’s OK to be White” – put forward by far-right, anti-immigrant Senator Pauline Hanson. Of course, such support should not be surprising in a country that denies medical attention to suicidal asylum seekers held for years in offshore detention camps or that considers special visas for white South African farmers because, just like Australians, they “love cricket, beaches, and barbecue.

Australia must recognize its place as an Asian nation with key trade with countries like Malaysia and Indonesia, whose pro-Palestine policies differ greatly than those in the US Share on X

Hence despite the fact that Morrison’s statement on the embassy move is consistent with the framework outlined above, it is a shift even further to the right from his predecessors’ position. Earlier this year, former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and former Foreign Minister Julie Bishop opposed the decision of the Liberal Party’s Federal Council to follow Trump’s lead and move the embassy.

Neighboring countries such as Indonesia and Malaysia expressed their dismay regarding Morrison’s statement, and the move threatens to  jeopardize Australia’s relations and status in the region. Indonesia even issued a statement that it would put a major trade agreement with Australia on hold if Morrison proceeds with moving the embassy.

Further, the Australian media described the prime minister’s statement as shortsighted, silly, and a desperate attempt to both appeal to his far-right base and win the byelection in Wentworth, Sydney’s Eastern suburbs, by appealing to Jewish voters, who make up around 13% of the area’s population. This assumed all Jewish residents of Wentworth are Zionists and would welcome such alt-right policies – an assumption that proved false, as Wentworth voted against the Liberal Party. This leaves the party one seat short of a majority in the House of Representatives, though the federal government remains intact.

Policy Recommendations

1. The conversation around the embassy move missed two important aspects – legality and morality – which should be brought to the fore in debates around Australia’s pro-Israel policies. Discourse around the move needs to emphasize its illegality under international law, as well as its immorality, particularly the fact that it goes against universal values and Australian national values of democracy and commitment to human rights.

2. Civil society organizations and pro-Palestine groups have been organizing demonstrations and protests, as well as lobbying and petitioning, in order to send a message to Morrison that his policy will not be welcomed or supported by the Australian people. While this is a critical step, the momentum must now be sustained, regardless of the byelection’s results and the loss of the Liberal Party candidate, in order to continue pressuring a government that has historically undermined Palestinian rights.

3. Australia should reshape its foreign policy to bring it more in line with the country’s geopolitical landscape and national interests, rather than continuing with race-based policies and the importation of US policy regardless of whether it is suitable for the Australian context. Australia must recognize its place as an Asian nation with key trade relations with countries like Malaysia and Indonesia, whose pro-Palestine policies differ greatly than those in the US. Pressure from the public, the media, and civil society groups on Australia’s more left-leaning Labor and Green Parties could help spur a change in rhetoric and discourse on this front and, ultimately, bolster a change in Palestine-Israel policy.

Al-Shabaka Policy Member Noura Mansour is a Palestinian educator, writer, activist and community organizer, from Acre city. She studied Political Science and Education and received...

Latest Analysis

 Politics
Since October 2023, Israel’s assault on Gaza has produced one of the most catastrophic humanitarian crises in recent history—an unfolding genocide enabled by world powers and continuing unabated despite the sweeping global solidarity it has sparked. Alongside relentless bombardment and mass displacement, the Israeli regime is waging a deliberate campaign of starvation. In response to this Israeli-manufactured catastrophe, several European states have begun recognizing or signaling their intent to recognize the State of Palestine. Most recently, France announced its intention to recognize a Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly in September. The UK has stated it will follow suit unless Israel abides by a ceasefire and recommits to a two-state solution. The recent wave of symbolic recognitions that began in 2024 now appears to be the only step many European powers are willing to take in the face of genocide, following nearly two years of moral, material, and diplomatic support for the Israeli regime as well as near-total impunity. This roundtable conversation with Al Shabaka policy analysts Diana Buttu, Inès Abdel Razek, and Al Shabaka’s co-director, Yara Hawari, asks: Why now? What political or strategic interests are driving this wave of recognition? And what does it mean to recognize a Palestinian state, on paper, while leaving intact the structures of occupation, apartheid, and the genocidal regime that sustains them?
 Politics
In March, Israel shattered the ceasefire in Gaza by resuming its bombing campaign at full force and enforcing a total blockade on humanitarian aid—ushering in a new phase of the ongoing genocide. In response to mounting international criticism, the Israeli regime introduced a tightly controlled aid scheme designed not to alleviate suffering, but to obscure its use of starvation as a weapon of collective punishment. Through the so-called Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), Israel has transformed humanitarian aid into a tool of control, coercion, and forced displacement. Israeli forces have additionally blocked UN and other aid agencies from accessing over 400 distribution points they once operated throughout Gaza. They consequently forced two million Palestinians to rely on just four GHF sites, most near its southern border in what appears to be a deliberate effort to push mass displacement toward Egypt. Investigations have also revealed how US-based private contractors are actively profiting from the GHF’s deadly operations. In this policy lab, Yara Asi and Alex Feagans join host Tariq Kenney-Shawa to discuss how the GHF fits into Israel’s genocidal strategy—and to expose the network of individuals and companies profiting from what has been a death trap masquerading as humanitarian assistance.
 Politics
​​The October 7, 2023, Al-Aqsa Flood operation aimed to revive Palestinian armed resistance and reassert the cause in Arab and global consciousness after years of marginalization. It dealt a major blow to Israel’s deterrence, rupturing its image as a secure colonial outpost entrusted with protecting Western strategic interests. It also exposed cracks in its militarized social contract that rests on the regime’s ability to protect its settler population. While the operation imposed new political realities on the Israeli regime, it has come at a staggering cost to Palestinian life: Israel’s genocidal assault on Gaza has unleashed one of the worst humanitarian crises in recent memory. Yet the anticipated wave of Arab solidarity following the operation failed to materialize or translate into concrete policy shifts. Instead, the moment laid bare the entrenched ties between Arab regimes and Israel’s settler-colonial project that are rooted in mutual interests, regime preservation, and a shared antagonism toward Palestinian resistance. This commentary argues that these alliances—sustained by repression and strategic-economic cooperation and reinforced by Western complicity—transformed a potential turning point for isolating the Israeli regime into an opening for intensified colonial expansion and regional dominance.
Al-Shabaka Tariq Dana
Tariq Dana· Jul 22, 2025
Skip to content