Greg Sheridan is doubtless now too long in the tooth to change his journalistic ways. But it really is time that he recognised the force of that immortal observation by Shakespeare’s contemporary, Francis Bacon, that ‘Speaking in perpetual hyperbole is comely in nothing but love’.

No Sheridan article seems complete without some person or policy being labelled ‘insane’, ‘deranged’, ‘obscene’ or the ‘worst ever’, or some variation on these themes, and our foreign minister is subjected to a full such linguistic barrage for her address to the UN General Assembly last week (‘Penny Wong’s UN speech shows Labor has abandoned Israel’, The Australian, 1/10).

His judgment is not one that will be shared by any genuinely fair-minded observer. The core of her speech was a passionate and articulate defence of the fundamental principles of the UN Charter, a cry for peaceful resolution of all the terrible conflicts now roiling the world, not just in the Middle East, and a demand that the principles of international humanitarian law – devoted to the protection of innocent civilians – be universally respected in any state’s military actions, however otherwise justifiable.

Penny Wong did not hold back in describing and condemning the horror of the Hamas October 7 attack, and there is nothing in anything she said in New York – or that any other member of the Albanese government has said anywhere – that suggests indifference to the scourge of antisemitism, or in any way plays into the hands of those who are hostile to Israel’s very right to exist.

What she does say about the scarifying 40,000 death toll so far in Gaza is that ‘Palestinian citizens cannot be made to pay the price of defeating Hamas’ and that ‘Lebanon cannot become the next Gaza’. And in doing so she simply echoes the response of political leaders right around the world, including in those Western countries with whom Australia traditionally most identifies.

Sheridan’s most withering criticism is directed at our foreign minister’s renewed declaration – which he describes as made with ‘sublime and fatuous undergraduate certainty’ – of Australian support for the early recognition by the UN of Palestinian statehood, not just ‘as the destination of a peace process, but a contribution of momentum towards peace.’

Australia is hardly alone in believing, as Wong put it, that a two-state solution – with strong built-in guarantees for the security of both – is the only hope not just of breaking the endless cycle of violence between Israelis and Palestinians, but strengthening the forces of peace and undermining extremism right across the region. Nor is she, and Australia, alone in believing that for the UN to formally recognise Palestinian statehood – as some 140 countries have already individually done—would be a helpful circuit-breaker, in an environment where Israel opposition to even contemplating such a solution is currently so ingrained.

As I have argued elsewhere, the basic case for such recognition is that doing so is vital to restore a balance that has tipped overwhelmingly in favour of Israel. No peace negotiation can succeed if the parties at the table are completely mismatched. For the foreseeable future, the best – and possibly the only – way to counter the current mismatch, giving Palestinians extra leverage and bargaining power, is to show that their self-determination cause has legitimacy not only in the Islamic world and the global south, but also among traditional pillars of the global north, like the UK, Australia, and other US allies and partners.

There are many, more sympathetic to Palestinian aspirations than Sheridan and those who sail with him will ever be, who nonetheless argue that, however much the underlying dynamics might change for the better with such a development, formal recognition of Palestinian statehood is an empty, quixotic gesture. They will say that a two-state solution now looks utterly unattainable, owing to ever more entrenched Israeli hostility, and to the territorial fragmentation created by Israel’s increasingly unrestrained West Bank settlement-building.

All true enough, but the dream of a two-state solution must be kept alive. For the world to recognise Palestine, in an attempt to revitalise a serious two-state negotiation, is not to reward Hamas or Hezbollah but to act in Israel’s own best long-term interests. As Bob Hawke and many others have pointed out over the years, Israel potentially can be a Jewish state, a democratic state, and a state occupying the whole of historical Judea and Samaria. But it cannot be all three at the same time.

The reality is without a political solution that satisfies legitimate Palestinian aspirations, Israel will never be free of the spectre of terrorist attack. My own decades of experience with conflict prevention and resolution, including years of talking to all sides in the Middle East, have drummed home the truth that despair can all too easily turn into rage, and then into indefensible outrage. By the same token, the threat of violence diminishes rapidly during those periods of genuine hope for a just and dignified settlement.

At a time of dramatically heightened tension with Iran, and all the renewed sense of insecurity that comes with it, it has never been more important for Israel to defuse the visceral anger of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories and beyond. Most of the rest of the world is now telling Israel that the best way to start is to accept the force of Palestinians’ claim to statehood. If Israelis really want a more secure future, it is time for them to listen.

1 October 2024

https://johnmenadue.com/sheridan-wrong-on-wong/

THE DEEP STATE OF AMERICA (SEE megalomaniacs.... ) IS PLEASED TO SEE OTHER STATES BECOME "REACTIONARY" TO ITS VARIOUS CONSPIRACIES, PLOTS AND SECRET PLANS OF FUTURE DESTRUCTION... THE FOGHORNS OF THE DEEP STATE, LIKE THE STUPID GENERAL ABOVE, PRE-SOFTEN THE GROUND FOR MORE CRAP DESIGNED FOR WHAT THE FRENCH CALL "ZIZANIE" OR WHAT WE CALL CHAOS. CHAOS SELLS WEAPONS, DIVIDES PEOPLE, CREATES DISTRUST AND MAKE WAR MORE PALATABLE THAN UNCERTAINTY.

IN ALL OF THIS, AMERICA CAN SPIN HER "RIOT BATON" AND HIT ANYONE, NO MATTER WHO, WITH THE SELF-APPOINTED UNIFORM OF THE GLOBAL GENDARME... BUT MOST OF THE TIMES, IT'S BEST FOR THE DEEP STATE TO STIR CONFLICTS AND LET THE PROTAGONISTS KILL EACH OTHER... AS GARETH EVANS SAYS:

"Most of the rest of the world is now telling Israel that the best way to start is to accept the force of Palestinians’ claim to statehood. If Israelis really want a more secure future, it is time for them to listen."

BUT THIS WILL NEVER HAPPEN... THE DEEP STATE WILL MAKE SURE OF THAT...

SAME WITH CHINA. THE DEEP STATE WANTS TO DESTROY CHINA...

MEANWHILE, NO-ONE IN THE WEST IS ALLOWED TO LISTEN TO RUSSIA'S VIEWS... AND UKRAINE IS FASCIST.

AND THE WORLD IS GOING WHERE THE FASCIST DEEP STATE WANTS... 

READ FROM TOP

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

Last week, Indonesia, our biggest and closest neighbour, deposited its instrument of ratification of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) at the UN. This was a major international and regional development, a good-news story with a very positive impact on international security, but we’ve heard virtually nothing about it from our government and very little in the media.

It should be treated as major news.

Another neighbour, the Solomon Islands also ratified the TPNW last week; other states signed up too, bringing the total number of signatories to 98. That’s pretty good for a treaty which only entered into force in 2021; and more countries will join in coming years. This is important at a time when two of the nine nuclear armed states (Russia and Israel) are overtly threatening to use their nuclear weapons (the other seven nuclear states also threaten to do this; they’ve just been a little less open in saying so).

The Indonesian ratification is also a sober reminder that there are still around  12,500 nuclear weapons in existence, many of them far more destructive than the Hiroshima bomb, and a reminder that the world still lives under the very real – indeed growing – threat of nuclear destruction.

Indonesia’s actions should make Australians ask why our own government remains at odds with the vast majority of our neighbours. Most of the South Pacific states, Southeast Asia, and New Zealand clearly oppose the threat of nuclear weapons.

Why is Australia intent on pleasing Washington’s and London’s military adventurism rather than joining states which support the real rules-based order – that is, the laws and values of the United Nations, which has declared these weapons of mass destruction immoral and clearly illegal? Why are we ignoring the security concerns of our near neighbours and many other like-minded states opposing nuclear weapons?

Most Australians don’t know much about Indonesia. It is a vibrant country of 280 million people, a secular democratic state with a Muslim-majority population, the largest in the world. Its transformation in recent decades has been impressive, and good for the region and the world. With strong economic growth and a rising middle class, it is tipped to be among the top five world economies within a few decades. It has an overwhelmingly young population (a quarter are aged under 14), is an inevitable part of Australia’s world via our inescapable geography and will surely become an increasingly important trading partner.

Indonesia is a leading member of the ten-state Association of Southeast Asian Nations. ASEAN has played a strong institutional role in creating a (mostly successful) region of peace, prosperity and democracy. Decades ago, it was not at all clear that this would be the outcome in a region long plagued by colonial plunder, disputed borders, varying religions and systems of governance.

ASEAN has created a Zone of Peace, Freedom and Neutrality (ZOPFAN) something surely to be welcomed in a world where a domestically embattled United States is desperately trying to retain regional dominance at any cost, including courting nuclear disaster, as it attempts to thwart an economically and militarily rising China. ASEAN states have made clear their wish not to be caught up in such a dangerous conflict. The region has long made its stance against nuclear weapons clear in the 1995 Southeast Asian Nuclear Weapon Free Zone (SEANWFZ).

Indonesia is also a founding member of the 120-nation Non-Aligned Movement, a grouping which has considerable soft-power influence on the international stage. The majority of non-aligned states view nuclear weapons not just as weapons of horrific destruction, but also as instruments of continuing domination and exploitation. Many formerly colonised states are asking the nuclear states to listen to them and to consider their security preferences. They have a point: nuclear weapon states effectively hold the entire world to ransom, as even a ‘small’ nuclear war would ultimately affect the entire globe.

Today, nine of the ten ASEAN members have signed or ratified the TPNW (as has ASEAN observer Timor-Leste), but Indonesia’s ratification is especially important because it signals a clear commitment by one of the world’s largest states to work towards the global elimination of these weapons.

Even the Philippines, another prominent ASEAN member and a US ally which has recently increased its security collaboration with the US has ratified the TPNW and vows to stay clear of any involvement in nuclear weapons.

All this suggests that Canberra should be paying more attention to the security wishes of its near neighbours. ASEAN and South Pacific states are deeply aware of the need to eliminate the catastrophic dangers that come with nuclear weapons.

As the Philippines (and other examples) have shown, Australia can, if it wishes, remain an ally of the US and join the TPNW. It will have to renounce its (self-assumed) policy of being under the US nuclear umbrella and it will need substantially to amend the secretive Joint Facilities in Pine Gap and elsewhere – but it’s time that we did these things anyway.

It is quite possible for us to revert to conventional weapons deterrence and maintain a reasonable defence capability. We should re-prioritise diplomacy and dialogue rather than rely on weapons which risk destroying humanity, other species and possibly our entire environment.

It is time we asked ourselves: where does our future lie? Is it with allies like the United States and others who clearly have no qualms about violating international law in a profound way, viz their complicity in an ongoing genocide? (As for China, its actions in its immediate arena might be troubling, but its rise does not pose a direct military threat to Australia, unless we were to join in a US war against Beijing).

By signing the TPNW, Australia will be on the right side of history and be more in sync with its region. Indonesia and other Asia-Pacific neighbours are showing the way. It’s time to work towards a peaceful and prosperous future with them, not a future blighted by the danger of nuclear annihilation.

https://johnmenadue.com/on-nuclear-weapons-how-long-will-australia-continue-to-be-out-of-step-with-its-nearest-neighbours/

READ FROM TOP

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.