Thousands march across Sydney Harbour Bridge in Gaza protest
On a wet and windy Sunday, hundreds of Palestinian flags could be seen fluttering in the breeze as protesters marched to spotlight suffering in Gaza.
Rally organiser Palestine Action Group intended to draw attention to what the United Nations has described as "worsening famine conditions" in Gaza.
Organisers expected tens of thousands to march from the Sydney CBD across the bridge to North Sydney, although numbers may have affected by heavy rain.
Police yesterday sought an order to prohibit the protest but Supreme Court Justice Belinda Rigg rejected the application, meaning protesters will have immunity and protections from offences such as blocking or obstructing traffic or pedestrians.
ADVERTISEMENT
A large police presence was mobilised to ensure safety, with the bridge closed to motorists for most of today.
"We ask that all the participants who are coming into the city to take part in this public assembly, listen to police, be respectful, understand that there will be large crowds," acting deputy commissioner Peter McKenna said.
"We will have police right along the route and we'll be making sure this is done as safely and peacefully as possible."
Police warned they would take swift action against anyone who sought to hijack the peaceful protest. Several Labor MPs defied state premier Chris Minns, joining the march alongside multiple Greens and independent colleagues.
In support of the demonstration, the Jewish Council of Australia described the occasion as "momentous".
ADVERTISEMENT
"We stand with and join those marching across the bridge and call for immediate action to stop the Gaza genocide," executive officer Max Kaiser said in a statement.
Executive Council of Australian Jewry CEO Alex Ryvchin said there was "a lot of dismay in the community and wider society that a single judge has overruled a decision of the police and the elected government made in the interests of public safety".
Similar demonstrations were planned on Sunday in Melbourne and Adelaide.
More than 60,000 Palestinians have been killed in the war in Gaza, according to local health authorities, while the United Nations says dozens of people have died in recent weeks due to starvation.
Israel's military campaign began after militant group Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, 2023, killing 1200 people and taking more than 251 hostages.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
42 minutes ago
- NZ Herald
Brazilian judge places ex-President Jair Bolsonaro under house arrest
A Brazilian judge has placed former President Jair Bolsonaro under house arrest for breaking a social media ban, escalating a dramatic standoff between the court and the far-right politician accused of plotting a coup. Bolsonaro, an ally of United States President Donald Trump, is on trial at the Supreme Court
Otago Daily Times
5 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
New laws mulled in wake of Sydney Harbour Bridge protest
Protest laws could be repealed or expanded following a march across an iconic Australian landmark, as activists plan for more demonstrations. The pro-Palestine movement, boosted by a march across the Sydney Harbour Bridge which made news across the nation and around the world, hopes to build on its momentum. The march across the bridge and back in pouring rain on Sunday came after opposition from police, and a court's overruling approval that has politicians worrying about the rare occurrence becoming common. Further protests are planned on August 24 in Sydney, Melbourne, Canberra, Adelaide and Perth with hopes more can be organised in other cities. Ahead of the state's parliament resuming on Tuesday, New South Wales Premier Chris Minns says his government is examining whether a legal precedent has been set by the Supreme Court judgment that allowed the protest to proceed. "No one should believe it's open season on the bridge," he told reporters on Monday. But new laws might be needed to stop future bridge protests. Mr Minns was "not ruling anything out" but said any legislation could not be rushed. Federal Opposition Leader Sussan Ley encouraged the premier to look at "what might happen next". "Because we can't continue to have these protests that shut down such an important area of a major city," she told reporters. In her determination declining to prohibit the march, Justice Belinda Rigg said the bridge would have been closed to traffic regardless of whether the protest was authorised or not. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said demonstrations were an important part of democracy and highlighted the peaceful nature of the Sydney march. "Australians want people to stop killing each other, they want peace and security ... they don't want conflict brought here," he said. Mr Minns has faced some internal dissent from other Labor MPs over protest legislation. NSW Greens MP Sue Higginson has also flagged plans to seek the repeal of laws limiting protest, first introduced by the previous coalition government but expanded under Labor. Palestine Action Group organiser Josh Lees, defendant of the court action NSW Police took in an unsuccessful attempt to have the demonstration ruled unlawful, says nationwide protests are being planned for August 24. "We want to build on this massive momentum we have now," he told reporters. Despite concerns of regular marches across the bridge, Mr Lees said the group had no plans for a repeat crossing any time soon and accused the premier of having an anti-protest agenda. "His stance is pretty clear and he's passed a raft of anti-protest legislation already," Mr Lees said. "We're going to have to keep fighting for our rights to demonstrate."
NZ Herald
7 hours ago
- NZ Herald
The 109-year-old pact that looms over European moves to recognise a Palestinian state
To many Arabs, who view it as a great betrayal, it seeded a legacy of strife and bloodshed in the Middle East. The real-time crisis unfolding in the Gaza Strip — the starving children, the Israeli restrictions on aid, the Palestinians killed as they try to collect food — undoubtedly had a greater impact on Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain and President Emmanuel Macron of France than the stains of the past. Yet their momentous decisions have cast a light on the shadowy roles of both countries in a region where they once vied for influence. 'The history is so relevant,' said Eugene L. Rogan, a professor of modern Middle Eastern history at the University of Oxford in England. 'It shows there's always a chance for historical actors who screwed up in the past to make up for their mistakes.' Rogan praised the moves towards recognition for reasons both past and present. On its current course, he said, Israel was opening the door to unthinkable treatment of the Palestinians: expulsion from Gaza or worse. Recognising a Palestinian state does Israel a favour by opening the way to 'a form of cohabitation that is sustainable', he said. Speaking at the United Nations, the British Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, cited another century-old document in arguing that recognition would redress a historical injustice: the Balfour Declaration, issued a year after the signing of Sykes-Picot, which endorsed 'the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people'. It had a proviso that 'nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine'. After 21 months of relentless Israeli attacks in Gaza, with the spectre of famine across the enclave, Lammy said that Britain had a responsibility to act on behalf of the territory's long-oppressed Palestinian population. 'His argument is that it's time to make good on the second half of that promise,' said Rogan, whose books include The Arabs: A History. 'At the time of the Balfour had a worldwide empire, which in 1917, they could not imagine losing. David Lammy is operating in a postcolonial, post-EU Britain. But he's using history as a legitimating factor.' Lammy said that Britain could be proud that it 'helped lay the foundations for a homeland for the Jewish people'. Yet the country's motive in backing what later became Israel was less moral than strategic, Rogan said. It was seeking a client community in Palestine that would prevent the territory from falling into enemy hands. London feared the territory could be used as a launchpad for attacks on the Suez Canal, which was then controlled by Britain. Moreover, Britain backed away from its pro-Zionist stance as it found it hard to reconcile a Jewish state with preserving relations with the Arab world. In a later document, the White Paper of 1939, Britain proposed that the Jewish homeland would be created within a majority-Arab Palestinian state and that Jewish immigration to Palestine be limited to 75,000 for five years. 'Israel was not created because of the Balfour Declaration; it was created in spite of the Balfour Declaration,' said Michael B. Oren, an Israeli American historian who served as Israel's ambassador to Washington and later as a deputy minister in the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Oren argued that the decisions of Britain and France to recognise a state would not hasten an end to the conflict in Gaza but prolong it. By offering this concession to the Palestinians now, he said, the West had given Hamas even less incentive to agree to a ceasefire. He chalked it up to a bid for relevance by two postcolonial powers. 'These are former Middle Eastern powers that want to feel like Middle Eastern powers,' said Oren, who wrote Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East. 'There's a pathetic quality to it.' Others argue that if these moves had no impact, they would not have drawn the furious reactions they did from Netanyahu and other Israeli officials. The addition of Britain and France — plus Canada and Malta, which said last week that they, too, would back recognition at the United Nations General Assembly in September — means that more than three-quarters of the UN's 193 member states will have recognised a Palestinian state. France had a less direct stake in Palestine than Britain did after ceding its claims in the Sykes-Picot treaty. But its move towards Palestinian recognition represents another fateful turn in its relationship with Israel. From 1945 to 1967, France was Israel's biggest backer in the West. Part of that was rooted in its wrenching experience with decolonisation. In 1954, France faced an anti-colonial uprising in Algeria, where the nationalists were backed by Egypt's nationalist president, Gamal Abdel Nasser. France, viewing Israel as a bulwark against Nasser, drew close, supplying the country with Mirage fighter planes and nuclear technology that became the foundation of its undeclared nuclear weapons programme. But in 1967, days before Israel launched a military strike against Egypt, de Gaulle, then France's president, imposed an arms embargo on Israel and shifted his gaze to the Arab states. Gérard Araud, who served as France's ambassador to Israel from 2003 to 2006, said that rupture cast a long shadow. 'I felt there was always a sense of 'Don't trust the French,'' he recalled. By supporting Israel in the Arab-Israeli war of 1967, the United States had in any case supplanted France as its No. 1 ally. France went on to become the first Western country to develop close ties to the Palestine Liberation Organisation, which represents Palestinians internationally and is led by the President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas. The decision to recognise a Palestinian state nevertheless carries significant political risk for Macron, Araud said. France has both the largest Jewish and the largest Muslim communities in Western Europe. It has been scarred by a string of Islamist terrorist attacks. In recognising Palestinian statehood, historians said, France and Britain would do well to recognise their diminished sway over a region they once ruled. Such recognition was sorely lacking for decades after the authors of Sykes-Picot divvied up the Middle East, with lasting consequences. 'Neither country understood that the age of colonialism was over,' Araud said. 'They behaved as if they were still all powerful. It's not the most glorious page of history for either country.' This article originally appeared in The New York Times. Written by: Mark Landler Photographs by: Saher Alghorra ©2025 THE NEW YORK TIMES
