Australia hits back after Netanyahu calls PM Albanese ‘weak politician'
For decades, Australia has considered itself a close friend of Israel, but the relationship has swiftly unravelled since Canberra announced last week it would recognise a Palestinian state.
Netanyahu drastically escalated a war of words on Tuesday night, calling his Australian counterpart Anthony Albanese a 'weak politician who betrayed Israel'.
Australian Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke said it was the sign of a frustrated leader 'lashing out'.
'Strength is not measured by how many people you can blow up or how many children you can leave hungry,' Burke told national broadcaster ABC.
'What we've seen with some of the actions they are taking is a continued isolation of Israel from the world, and that is not in their interests either.'
Through the 1950s, Australia was a refuge for Jews fleeing the horrors of the Holocaust.
The city of Melbourne at one point housed, per capita, the largest population of Holocaust survivors anywhere outside of Israel.
Netanyahu was infuriated when Australia declared it would recognise Palestinian statehood next month, following similar pledges from France, Canada and the United Kingdom.
In the space of nine days since that decision, relations between Australia and Israel have plummeted.
Abandoned Australia's Jews
Australia on Monday cancelled the visa of far-right Israeli politician Simcha Rothman—a member of Netanyahu's governing coalition—saying his planned speaking tour would 'spread division'.
The tit-for-tat continued yesterday, when Israel retaliated by revoking visas held by Canberra's diplomatic representatives to the Palestinian Authority.
Then came Netanyahu's social media outburst. 'History will remember Albanese for what he is: A weak politician who betrayed Israel and abandoned Australia's Jews,' he said on X.
Israel finds itself increasingly isolated as it continues to wage war in Gaza, a conflict triggered by the October 2023 attack by Palestinian militant group Hamas.
UN-backed experts have warned of widespread famine unfolding in the territory, where Israel has severely restricted the entry of humanitarian aid.
New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said last week that Netanyahu had 'lost the plot'.
Relations between Australia and Israel started fraying late last year following a spate of anti-Semitic attacks in Sydney and Melbourne.
Netanyahu accused the Australian government of harbouring 'anti-Israel sentiment' after a synagogue was firebombed in December. — AFP
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Straits Times
3 hours ago
- New Straits Times
As Netanyahu expands Gaza war, some reservists express misgivings
AS Israel seeks to expand its offensive in Gaza, a measure of how the country's mood has changed in the nearly two-year-old conflict is the discontent evident among some reservists being called up to serve once again. Shortly after the October 7, 2023 attack on southern Israel by Palestinian group Hamas, Israelis dropped everything – honeymoons, studies and new lives abroad – to rush home and fight. Now, some voice disillusionment with political leaders sending them back into battle, as the military prepares to take control of Gaza City, the enclave's biggest urban centre. According to a study conducted by Agam Labs at the Hebrew University which measured sentiment about the new campaign among more than 300 people serving in the current war, 25.7 per cent of reservists said their motivation had decreased significantly compared with the start of the campaign. Another 10 per cent said their motivation slightly decreased. Asked to describe their feelings about the campaign, the biggest group – 47 per cent – of responders expressed negative emotions towards the government and its handling of the war and hostage negotiations. In March, before the latest offensive was announced, the Israeli news outlet Ynet reported that the amount of reservists reporting for duty was 30 per cent below the number requested by military commanders. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed to destroy Hamas after it attacked Israel in Oct. 7, 2023 in the bloodiest single day for Jews since the Holocaust, killing 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages to Gaza, according to Israeli tallies. But the war has dragged on, with Hamas still putting up a fight and Israelis condemning their prime minister for failing to reach a deal with the resistance group to win the release of hostages despite many mediation efforts. Reservists were among thousands of Israelis who took part in a nationwide strike on Sunday, one of the biggest protests in support of families of hostages, calling on Netanyahu to reach an agreement with Hamas to end the war and release the remaining captives. One of those angry protesters was Roni Zehavi, a reservist pilot who stopped serving out of principle after more than 200 days of service when the last ceasefire fell through. He said that when reservists were enlisted, they did everything required without saying a word. But then questions such as "where is this going?" started to pop up, he recalled. Reservists accused the government - the most far-right administration in Israel's history – of perpetuating the war for political reasons. "This war is entirely political, it has no goal except to keep Benjamin Netanyahu as prime minister," he told Reuters. "He is willing to do everything necessary, to sacrifice the hostages, fallen soldiers, dead citizens - to do what he needs so that he and his wife will stay in power. It's the tragedy of the state of Israel and it's the reality." Asked for comment about the disenchantment voiced by some reservists, the Israeli military said it sees great importance in the reserve service and each case of absence is examined. "In this challenging security reality, the contribution of the reservists is essential to the success of missions and to maintaining the security of the country," it said. Netanyahu has so far resisted calls to establish a state inquiry - in which he could be implicated - into the security failures of the October 7 attack. He has said such an investigation should not be launched as long as the war is still under way. Some of his far-right coalition partners have threatened to bring down the government should the war end without meeting all its stated goals. When Israel called up 360,000 reservists after the October 7 attack, the largest such compulsory mobilisation since the 1973 Yom Kippur War, it received an enthusiastic response. The mood among some reservists appears different now. "I will not be part of a system that knows that it will kill the hostages. I'm just not prepared to take that. And I really fear that, to the point where it keeps me up at night," one combat medic told Reuters. Israel has lost 898 soldiers and thousands have been wounded in the Gaza war, the country's longest conflict since the 1948 war that accompanied its creation. Its military response to the Hamas attack has killed over 61,000 people in Gaza, including many children, according to Gaza health authorities. Military service is mandatory in Israel, a small nation of fewer than 10 million people, but it relies heavily on reservists in times of crisis. Reserve duty is technically mandatory, though penalties for evasion often depend on the willingness of the direct commander to enforce punishment. Like many other reservists, special forces Sergeant Major A. Kalker concluded that Israel's military and political leadership has failed to formulate a sound day-after plan for the war. "There's a lack of vision, both in the political and the senior military leadership, a real lack of vision," he said, but added that shouldn't amount to refusing to serve. "Bibi (Netanyahu) is the king of not making decisions ... like treading water."
The Sun
7 hours ago
- The Sun
Australia rebukes Netanyahu over weak leader comments
SYDNEY: Australia has issued a sharp rebuke to Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu following his description of the Australian prime minister as weak. The diplomatic clash emerged after Canberra's decision to recognise Palestinian statehood last week. Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke responded directly to Netanyahu's comments on Wednesday. Burke stated that strength is not measured by how many people you can blow up or how many children you can leave hungry. He characterized Netanyahu's outburst as the sign of a frustrated leader lashing out. The minister further noted that Israel's actions continue to isolate the country from the international community. Netanyahu's criticism came via social media platform X on Tuesday night. He called Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese a weak politician who betrayed Israel and abandoned Australia's Jews. The relationship between the two historically allied nations has deteriorated rapidly. Australia's announcement to recognize Palestinian statehood follows similar moves by France, Canada and the United Kingdom. Diplomatic tensions escalated further this week with visa cancellations. Australia revoked the visa of far-right Israeli politician Simcha Rothman, a member of Netanyahu's coalition government. Israel retaliated by revoking visas for Australian diplomatic representatives to the Palestinian Authority. These developments occurred within a nine-day period following Australia's statehood decision. Australia has long considered itself a close friend of Israel since the 1950s. The country served as a refuge for Jews fleeing the horrors of the Holocaust during that period. Melbourne once housed the largest per capita population of Holocaust survivors outside Israel. This historical context makes the current diplomatic rift particularly significant. The ongoing conflict in Gaza has increased Israel's international isolation. UN-backed experts warn of widespread famine in the territory due to restricted humanitarian aid. New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon recently stated that Netanyahu had lost the plot. Relations between Australia and Israel began fraying late last year following anti-Semitic attacks in Sydney and Melbourne. Netanyahu previously accused Australia of harboring anti-Israel sentiment after a synagogue firebombing in December. The current exchange represents the most serious diplomatic confrontation between the two nations in recent history. - AFP
Malay Mail
8 hours ago
- Malay Mail
Asean and the FPDA: Twin anchors of Malaysia's security outlook — Phar Kim Beng
AUGUST 20 — When Asean was established on August 8, 1967, its founding members envisioned a regional order built on dialogue, cooperation, and resilience. For South-east Asia, still emerging from the shadows of colonial rule and Cold War confrontation, Asean was a bold attempt to craft a zone of stability. Four years later, in 1971, Malaysia and Singapore joined hands with Australia, the United Kingdom, and New Zealand to launch the Five Power Defence Arrangements (FPDA). This pact was no accident of history; it was a deliberate complement to Asean's vision of regional security. The FPDA was born just a year after Asean declared the Zone of Peace, Freedom, and Neutrality (Zopfan) in Kuala Lumpur in 1970. Zopfan was a political statement of intent: South-east Asia must not become the playground of great power rivalry. But declarations alone could not guarantee safety. The Vietnam War was raging, and the withdrawal of British forces east of Suez left Malaysia and Singapore vulnerable. The FPDA filled this gap. While Zopfan embodied Asean's diplomatic quest for neutrality, the FPDA offered a hard security safety net—anchored not in alliance obligations but in consultation and cooperation. The importance of the FPDA for Malaysia cannot be overstated. Unlike Nato, it does not bind members to collective defence. Instead, it institutionalises regular consultations and joint military exercises, ensuring Malaysia and Singapore are never isolated in the face of aggression. Over the years, exercises such as Bersama Shield and Bersama Lima have done more than sharpen tactics; they have nurtured interoperability, exposed Malaysian forces to advanced operational practices, and prepared them for United Nations peacekeeping deployments. These engagements are Malaysia's only consistent multinational military training opportunities—an invaluable supplement to its limited defense capacity. When Asean was established on August 8, 1967, its founding members envisioned a regional order built on dialogue, cooperation, and resilience. — Picture by Raymond Manuel At the same time, Asean and the FPDA should not be seen as competing pillars of security. They are symbiotic. Asean, with its emphasis on consensus and dialogue, creates the political environment that makes cooperative security possible. The FPDA, in turn, provides a practical mechanism for capacity-building, ensuring that Malaysia and Singapore remain confident participants in Asean's broader vision of regional stability. Together, they reflect Malaysia's dual strategy: embrace neutrality and diplomacy through Asean, while anchoring deterrence and preparedness through the FPDA. Half a century on, both institutions face new tests. The rise of China, the resurgence of US strategic primacy, and tensions in the South China Sea demand careful balancing. Here, Asean continues to serve as the convenor of dialogue through the Asean Regional Forum, East Asia Summit, and the ongoing negotiations on a Code of Conduct in the South China Sea. The FPDA, meanwhile, has adapted to include non-traditional security threats—counterterrorism, humanitarian assistance, and disaster relief—broadening its relevance in an era where security is no longer defined solely by state-to-state conflict. Critics often argue that the FPDA is a relic of the Cold War. Yet its enduring value lies in flexibility. It reassures Malaysia and Singapore without constraining them in rigid treaty commitments. Similarly, Asean, though derided as slow-moving, has preserved South-east Asia as one of the least conflict-prone regions in the world. Neither is perfect, but both are indispensable. For Malaysia, the lesson is clear. Asean and the FPDA are not parallel tracks but complementary ones. They represent two sides of the same coin: Asean provides the diplomatic shield, while the FPDA delivers the operational muscle. In a region where great powers jostle for influence, Malaysia's security will continue to rest on the twin anchors laid down in 1967 and 1971. * Phar Kim Beng is a professor of Asean Studies and Director of the Institute of Internationalization and Asean Studies at the International Islamic University of Malaysia. ** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
