Prime Minister Anthony Albanese calls Israel's blocking of aid into Gaza an ‘affront to common decency'
Australia is among 29 countries that issued a joint statement overnight calling for urgent action by Israel to allow aid to enter Gaza.
'The humanitarian suffering in Gaza has reached unimaginable levels,' the statement said. 'Famine is unfolding before our eyes.'
'Humanitarian space must be protected and aid should never be politicised.'
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said Israel's actions in blocking aid to the region was 'not defensible'.
'It's certainly not something that's consistent with international law,' he told ABC radio on Wednesday.
'We're also seeing people killed while trying to get access to food and water. Now, in 2025 that's completely unacceptable.
'It is an affront to common decency and community humanity what is happening in Gaza.'
Israel has denied responsibility for the lack of food in the Gaza Strip, accusing Hamas of stealing aid shipments.
It has also denied there is starvation among the population, although it has throttled the flow of food to Gaza for months, according to international human rights groups.
The prime minister's latest comments come two days after he announced Australia would recognise Palestinian statehood at September's UN General Assembly, joining the UK, France and Canada in the move.
The shift means Australia's foreign policy has diverged from that of the US, a key ally that has for decades opposed formal recognition of Palestine.
However, the White House has declined to directly criticise Australia for its actions in recognising Palestine after US President Donald Trump suggested a similar move from Canada could affect trade talks.
A spokesman told Nine newspapers the president had an open mind on the status of Palestine, despite not backing statehood.
Albanese said the US would have a critical role to play in peace talks.
'One of the things that has defined president Trump's position internationally on global affairs is that he is an advocate for peace and he's been an advocate for peace in the Middle East for a long period of time,' he said.
While some have argued Australia's decision to break from the US could imperil the bilateral relationship, Flinders University international relations expert Jessica Genauer said the government's diplomatic calculus had helped dampen any impact.
'Because Australia waited until other important countries all said they're planning to recognise Palestine ... I don't think it will be singled out by the US,' Genauer said.
'The Trump administration is opposed to countries recognising Palestine, but I think that they would put Australia in with a whole group of other countries and it wouldn't particularly be detrimental to Australia's relationship.'
Australia will join more than 140 UN member states in recognising Palestine, but Opposition Leader Sussan Ley said the prime minister's priorities were wrong.
'He's clearly distracted by what he's been talking about now for weeks with respect to Palestinian recognition, that is actually not going to make the world a safer place,' she told Seven's Sunrise program.
The coalition has pledged to reverse the recognition decision should it win the next election.
Crossbench senator Fatima Payman, who defected from Labor in 2024 after criticising the government's stance on the Middle East, said recognising statehood was overdue but could not be an end point.
'Symbolism matters, but saving lives matters more so when we're thinking about what Australia needs to do next, it's to make sure that they keep that pressure on Israel,' she told ABC radio.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
7NEWS
3 minutes ago
- 7NEWS
Vladimir Putin praises Donald Trump's ‘energetic and sincere' peace efforts ahead of Alaska summit
Russia's Vladimir Putin sounded positive Thursday on the eve of his talks with US President Donald Trump in Alaska, saying he believed the American leader was making 'quite energetic and sincere efforts' toward peace in Ukraine. A day ahead of their summit, Putin convened a meeting of advisers 'to inform you about how the negotiation process on the Ukrainian crisis is going,' the Kremlin said in a readout translated by NBC News. The Russian leader said the Trump administration 'is making, in my opinion, quite energetic and sincere efforts to stop the fighting, stop the crisis and reach agreements that are of interest to all parties involved in this conflict.' Those efforts are intended 'to create long-term conditions of peace between our countries and in Europe, and in the world as a whole,' he added, particularly if the negotiations extended to cover strategic offensive weapons treaties. This suggests that a deal on nuclear arms control could be part of the talks. Russia suspended its participation in the New START 'reduction in strategic offensive arms' agreement in 2023. Earlier Thursday, Putin aide Yuri Ushakov said the summit would start with head-to-head talks between Trump, Putin and their translators at 11.30am local time (5.30am Saturday AEST) and would be followed by a joint news conference. The White House later confirmed this. Trump 'wants to exhaust all options to try to bring this war to a peaceful resolution,' Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News. The top-level Russian delegation will include Putin, Ushakov, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Defense Minister Andrei Belousov, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov and Putin's longtime friend and investment envoy Kirill Dmitriev, Ushakov said on a call with journalists in Moscow. The primary topic of the meeting will be Ukraine, he said, but he added that he expected the 'huge, and unfortunately hitherto untapped, potential' of economic ties between the US and Russia would also be discussed. As well as Putin's openly stated goal of subjugating Ukraine, he also wants to end Russia's exile from the Western financial system following economic sanctions imposed by Washington, the European Union and others. Trump has not yet lifted these punishments but has expressed a desire to end Russia's economic pariah status. The Trump-Putin summit has prompted howls of dismay and anxiety across Ukraine and Europe, which have not been invited to the talks and fear what the American president may agree to with his Russian counterpart about the conflict raging on their continent. They have been confined to their own diplomatic scrambling, including dozens of calls between Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and other leaders, culminating in a video call between these parties and Trump himself Wednesday. Zelenskyy said that Putin 'is bluffing' in saying he wants peace. On Thursday, the Ukrainian leader flew to London and met his British counterpart, Prime Minister Keir Starmer, for what both called a 'productive meeting.' As well as the prospect of Britain financing the small drones that have become central to Ukraine's battlefield defense, the pair discussed the Alaska talks, 'which present a viable chance to make progress as long as Putin takes action to prove he is serious about peace,' a spokesperson from Starmer's office, No.10 Downing St, said in a statement. After Wednesday's call with Zelenskyy, Starmer and others, Trump said he had assured them that there would be 'very severe consequences' — without elaborating what those might be — if Putin did not agree to end the war during their sit-down discussion. Two European officials and three other people briefed on the call told NBC News that he told them he would not discuss possible divisions of territory with the man flying in from the Kremlin.
Perth Now
3 minutes ago
- Perth Now
Horror author Stephen King brands Donald Trump's presidency a 'horror story'
Stephen King has branded US President Donald Trump a "horror story" who he wants to see leave the White House in disgrace. The acclaimed horror author - whose books include The Shining, It and Carrie, among many others - has nothing but total contempt for President Trump and his right wing politics. King, 77, would like to see Trump's second term in office end with an impeachment. Asked in a reader interview with The Guardian newspaper what he would write if he had to invent an ending for Trump's America, King replied: 'I think it would be impeachment – which, in my view, would be a good ending. I would love to see him retired, let's put it that way. The bad ending would be that he gets a third term and takes things over completely.' 'It's a horror story either way. Trump is a horror story, isn't he?' Misery writer King has been an outspoken critic of Trump, 79, and used his X account to brand the White House incumbent a "spoiled child". Posting on the social media platform, he wrote: Deep down in his heart, I believe Trump knows he's an incompetent a**hole. "Trump is like a spoiled child. When he doesn't get his way, he throws a tantrum." Trump has been impeached twice by the House of Representatives, but acquitted by the Senate on both occasions; first in 2019 for obstruction of Congress and secondly in 2021 after the Capitol attack that occurred on January 6 with the House of Representatives charging Trump with "incitement of insurrection" due to his allegations of election fraud. In September, the movie adaptation of King's short novel The Long Walk is released starring Mark Hamill, Cooper Hoffman, Ben Wang and Charlie Plummer. Set in a dystopian alternate version of America ruled by a totalitarian regime, Hamill plays the Major, a military commander who oversees an annual and gruelling walking competition. Star Wars actor Hamill - who played Jedi Knight Luke Skywalker in the sci-fi franchise - previously spoke about how his role as the Major in The Long Walk is 'unlike anything [he's] ever done before' in his career. During an interview with Discussing Film, Hamill, 73, said: 'Well, he's amoral. I mean, for you to be able to do what he does … he's got to be some kind of sociopath. 'There's no sort of backstory for him, but you know he's a really troubled person. And sadistic and … just all those terrible things.'
West Australian
2 hours ago
- West Australian
Michaelia Cash: Anthony Albanese's Palestinian statehood push is a reward for terror
When Anthony Albanese announced that Australia would unilaterally recognise a Palestinian state, he claimed it was a 'practical contribution to peace'. It was nothing of the sort. It was a gift to Hamas, proof of which came just 48 hours later when Mr Albanese was praised by the terrorist group for his decision. When terrorists congratulate your foreign policy, you are doing something very wrong. The endorsement of Sheikh Hassan Yousef, co-founder of the terrorist group Hamas, of Mr Albanese's decision to recognise Palestine as a state should horrify all Australians. That's the same listed terrorist organisation responsible for the massacre of October 7, the kidnapping of hostages, and the ongoing rocket fire into Israel. You do not achieve peace by rewarding terrorists. All Australians should be appalled at the massive propaganda victory Mr Albanese has handed Hamas on a platter. Mr Albanese has been proven to be completely out of his depth on this vital foreign policy matter. He told Australians Hamas would reject his position to recognise a Palestinian state. The decision does not make the world a safer place, expedite the end of the conflict, deliver a two-state solution, see the free flow of aid, support the release of hostages or put an end to the terrorist group Hamas. Mr Albanese's decision is effectively unconditional recognition. It will go ahead in September, no matter what. Recognition before the hostages are freed, before Hamas is defeated, and before any security guarantees are in place is not diplomacy. It is dangerous naivety. It hands Hamas one of the strategic objectives they sought when they unleashed their campaign of terror in 2023. Recognition should come at the end of a genuine peace process, not at its beginning. It should be the culmination of negotiations in which both sides make real compromises, leading to a secure Israel and a secure Palestine living side by side. That was the bipartisan consensus in this country for decades. By breaking from that cautious, measured approach, Mr Albanese has abandoned the position that recognition must be conditional on the renunciation of terrorism, the release of hostages, and the recognition of Israel's right to exist. If recognition is to mean anything, it must be tied to clear, enforceable conditions. Mr Albanese himself has said these include: no role for Hamas in a future Palestinian state; full demilitarisation; recognition of Israel's right to exist in peace and security; free and fair elections; governance reform, financial transparency, and education oversight to prevent incitement to violence. But here's the problem: none of these conditions have been met. And worse still, Mr Albanese has given no timetable for when they must be. How will these conditions be enforced? What proof will be required? And if they are broken, will recognition be revoked, or will Labor simply turn a blind eye? These are basic questions any serious government would answer before making a major foreign policy decision. Mr Albanese has answered none of them. In truth, the Palestinian Authority, which Mr Albanese claims can deliver these guarantees, has a poor record of honouring its commitments. It has failed to comply with the Oslo Accords, continues to make payments to convicted terrorists and their families, and has not held proper elections in nearly 20 years. Worse, just last year, the Palestinian Authority signed the 2024 Beijing Declaration with Hamas, agreeing to form an interim unity government that would include Hamas, the very terrorists Labor now says will have 'no role' in a Palestinian state. Polling from the Palestinian Centre for Policy and Survey Research — based in Ramallah — shows about 40 per cent of Palestinians currently support Hamas. In Gaza, almost half still back them to govern. Recognising a Palestinian state now risks legitimising a terrorist organisation with significant public support, entrenching their power rather than isolating them. The US has been clear: it does not support unilateral recognition. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said that similar recognition by France actually caused talks with Hamas to collapse. Mr Albanese should also answer a simple question: what state is he recognising? A state with no agreed borders? No single government in control of its territory? No demonstrated capacity to live in peace with its neighbours? Australians want the war in Gaza to end. So do I. But that will not happen because of a symbolic gesture from Canberra. It will happen only when the conditions for peace are in place — and that means removing Hamas from the equation entirely. Until then, recognition is not just premature. It is reckless. And the Albanese Government's decision will be remembered as a political gesture that rewarded terror, weakened our alliances, and made lasting peace harder to achieve.
