Sanctions Without Bite: Australia’s Reluctance to Confront Israel’s Occupation

The Albanese government’s decision to prepare new sanctions against Israel but reject a trade ban on goods produced in Israeli settlements reveals a troubling inconsistency. On one hand, Foreign Minister Penny Wong acknowledges the concerns of Australian businesses and the potential unintended consequences of a blanket ban. However, this reluctance raises questions about Australia’s commitment to standing up for international law and human rights.

The fact that Australia has been advised not to bid on construction tenders for settlement developments is hardly a position of leadership, especially when it comes to combating the rapid expansion of settlements in the West Bank. Wong’s assertion that her government is pursuing “further targeted measures” sounds like a delaying tactic rather than a genuine effort to bring pressure to bear on Israel.

The timing of these developments is also noteworthy. The war in Gaza has been raging for months, with Australian aid workers being caught in the crossfire and killed by Israeli soldiers. Wong’s consideration of how to respond to Israel’s decision not to press charges against the soldiers responsible highlights Australia’s inability to hold its ally accountable for its actions.

The UK has recently announced plans to ban commercial activity with Israeli settlements, which are considered illegal under international law. Former Labor cabinet minister Ed Husic sees this move as a significant development and urges Australia to follow suit. However, so far, it seems that Australia is content to lag behind its allies in taking concrete action against Israel’s occupation.

Husic criticizes the Australian government’s stance, saying: “You can’t stop world opinion.” Many Australians believe their country should be doing more to support Palestinian rights and challenge Israeli aggression. The Greens’ foreign affairs spokesman, David Shoebridge, puts it bluntly: “The world is moving and the Albanese government is standing still.”

As Australia continues to dither on this issue, concerns arise about what other concessions will be made in the name of maintaining a relationship with Israel. Will we see more empty rhetoric about supporting human rights, or will we finally take concrete action to match our words? The recent history of Australian foreign policy suggests that it’s a delicate balancing act between championing human rights and maintaining good relations with its ally.

The recognition of Palestinian statehood and regular voting against Israel at the United Nations are significant steps forward. However, they’re tempered by a reluctance to impose meaningful sanctions on Israeli entities. It’s almost as if Australia wants to have it both ways: be seen as a champion of human rights while still maintaining good relations with its ally.

The International Court of Justice has already weighed in, declaring settlement activity in the West Bank and East Jerusalem “illegal.” It’s only a matter of time before other countries follow suit. As pressure mounts on the Albanese government to take a tougher stance against Israel’s occupation, it remains to be seen whether Australia will finally live up to its promise.

Australia’s decision to prepare new sanctions without imposing a trade ban on Israeli settlements is a half-measure that doesn’t live up to its promise. If we truly believe in standing up for human rights and international law, it’s time to take a firmer stance against Israel’s occupation – before it’s too late.