Australia's bid for a seat at the Security Council requires a review of its foreign policy. Former foreign minister Alexander Downer admitted this need saying to the media in order to woo the necessary support "Australia would have to adopt more nuanced foreign policy, especially in the Middle East."
Many in Australia are unaware of the damage inflicted by the former prime minister John Howard and Downer to Australia's reputation and image internationally because of the compromises the former government made to Australia's foreign policy on the Middle East.
Downer illustrated this compromise in a speech he gave to the annual general meeting of the United Israel Appeal of NSW on 30 November 2005, he said 'The practice at the time when I first began as Foreign Minister was for the Australian Government to vote in "good company"- and by good company I use diplomatic speak for voting with people like the North Americans, the European Union and other developed countries. So I set about changing our practice ...and now where we see an unbalanced resolution condemning Israel, we vote against it - irrespective of who stands beside us. And by doing so and through our active lobbying efforts, we hope to gradually make others stand up for what they believe in. There are no ifs, no buts about our support for Israel and the great things it stands for. The Australia Government is an unqualified supporter of Israel. We will not be lulled into silence or convinced by others to take the easy stance.'
And on 22 October 2004 the Australian Jewish News (AJN) reported Downer's comments on Australia's vote against a UNGA resolution on 20 July 2004 that called on Israel to comply with a ruling issued by the International Court of Justice, which found the racist wall Israel is building inside the 1967 Palestinian occupied territories violates international law, saying 'In a nanosecond, I said we will not change our vote, we will vote against this, even if we're the only country in the world that votes with Israel on this resolution, we'll still do it because this resolution is wrong.' The resolution was supported by 150 countries, abstained by 10 and opposed by a group of six countries-Australia, the United States, Israel and corrupt banana republics Micronesia Marshall Islands and Palau.
Needless to say, 150 countries, including all of Europe, New Zealand and Canada, as well as his department did not see anything wrong with the resolution, but what was wrong was the Liberal Government's blind and biased policy towards Israel to please and appease Israel and its extremist lobby in Australia.
Australia, together with this handful of countries repeatedly voted against UN resolutions condemning Israel's occupation, the building of settlements, collective punishment and violations of Palestinian human rights.
Australia's biased stand contradicts with its own national interests as it admits peace and stability in the Middle East are in Australia's strategic national interest. In his Iraq update of May 2003, John Howard said 'we must recognize that the Middle East is highly relevant to Australia...Australia also has major economic, political and strategic interests in the Middle East.' Accordingly, the Howard government justified its participation in the war against Iraq because the Iraqi regime "destabilizes the Middle East". Doesn't Israel with its occupation of Palestinian and Arab territories, its continued aggression, oppression and violations, destabilize the Middle East? Why then this double standard?
Downer admitted how his policy isolated Australia from the international community making it the odd one out when the AJN of 28 July 2006 reported him saying 'We have probably been more supportive of the Israelis than 99 percent of the world'.
A former Australian ambassador in the Middle East Ross Burns wrote in "The Australian" newspaper on 7 May 2007, the current 'Australian government's policy of effectively abandoning the UN resolutions will not serve the national interest'.
Howard and Downer prided themselves as being more supportive of Israel than even the United States. Ariel Sharon, Israeli Prime Minister said during his meeting with Downer on 27 January 2004 'Australia is the most friendly country to Israel'.
Throughout the years, Arab governments expressed, through their ambassadors, individually and collectively, their concern and discontent with the unjustified bias in the Australian Middle East policies.
In addition, these policies pushed the Secretary-General of the Arab League Dr Amr Moussa to express for the first time in the history of Australia-Arab relations the Arab League's concern with Australia's stand and bias against Arab rights in a letter to Foreign Minister Downer on 9 December 2001.
Dr Moussa made a further criticism of Australia's policies through the media on 27 July 2004 saying 'The Australian government has been consistent of late in adopting an antagonistic stand against Arab causes, one after the other, and its support of Israel's position, the last of which was its voting against the UN General Assembly resolution regarding the illegal racist wall Israel is building in the 1967 occupied Palestinian territories, which is condemned by the International Court of Justice and the General Assembly' and he was reported by Al Jazeera on 29 July 2004 asking 'Why this antagonistic policy by Australia against the Arabs? They should get off our back and leave us alone'.
There is no principled reason for Australia to have adopted such an extreme and biased stand towards Israel; this makes Australia a partner to the crimes Israel is committing against the Palestinian, Lebanese and other Arab peoples.
The government cannot justify its biased policy on the grounds of votes as it is in the Arab and Muslim communities' favor and not the Jewish community's. The population of the Jewish community in Australia is around 100-120,000 (about 0.5% of the total population), which can influence, according to the last federal election results, two federal seats; while the Arab and/or Muslim population is around 600,000 (about 3.0% of the total population) which can influence 14 federal seats, noting that neither the Jewish, Arab nor Muslim communities are homogeneous in their voting. And if the issue was looked upon from Australia's trade interests it also favors the Arab and Muslim countries and not Israel. The Arab market is one of the biggest markets for Australia. It is over $12 billion with the balance of payment heavily in Australia's favor while Australia's trade with Israel is around $700 million with the balance of payment heavily in Israel's favor. And if the issue was looked upon from rights, justice, international law, UN resolutions and who is the occupied and who is the occupier it is also on the Arab side and not Israel's. Nor should political parties compromise Australia's national interests for political donations.
Surveys show that the Australian community is aware of this biased policy and split nearly in the middle on the Arab Israeli conflict. An opinion survey conducted by McNair Gallop on 29 August 2006 showed that 42% believe Australia's Middle East policy is pro-Israeli while 4% believe it is pro-Arab and 39% believe it is even-handed. Another survey conducted by UMR and reported by the Sydney Morning Herald on 24 March 2006 showed that Australian public opinion is nearly divided in half between sympathetic to Israel (24%) and sympathetic to the Palestinians (23%) with 33% having no sympathy with neither and 20% not sure.
Australia's biased stand comes when the Palestinians and the Arabs are making compromises and peace initiatives and showing openness and flexibility to Israel. On the other hand, Israel continues its intransigence, settlement building and oppression.
Furthermore, Arab governments have always shown friendship and amity towards Australia and their aspirations to strengthen trade and investment relations, which have increased manifold in the last few years. Added to this throughout the history of Australia-Arab relations not once did an Arab country express any antagonistic stand towards Australia or damage Australia's national interests.
Palestinian and Arab moderation and compromises made for the sake of peace should encourage the Australian government to improve its policies and conduct, not go backward and appease Israel's intransigence and violations. Australia is neither helping its image and reputation nor stability and peace in the Middle East but inflaming hatred, frustration and anger and encouraging extremism; it does not serve Australia's national interest nor its relations with the Arab countries.
There is an urgent need for the new federal Labor government to review Australia's Middle East policy. The somehow evenhanded policy on paper, bias policy towards Israel in practice approach, must end.
— Ali Kazak is a former ambassador of Palestine and head of delegation.
