On Thursday, the U.N. General Assembly voted overwhelmingly in support of a resolution demanding that Israel end its occupation of Palestine within 12 months. Shamefully, Australia was one of the 43 countries to abstain from voting. Why did we make this decision?

Foreign Minister Penny Wong said that Australia wanted to support Palestine’s resolution only if it was going to “reflect closely the International Court of Justice opinion” and laid out “a pathway to peace”. Wong is referring to the ICJ’s ruling in July, which found Israel’s occupation of Palestine (in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem) to be illegal and ordered it to withdraw.

Australia’s U.N. ambassador James Larsen, in his statement to the General Assembly, said that because it “goes beyond the scope of the advisory opinion, the resolution distracts from what the world needs Israel to do.” Hence, we abstained.

How exactly did the Palestinian resolution “go beyond” the ICJ ruling?

These are the specific clauses that I think the Australian government refused to support. Make of them what you will:

It demands countries to abstain from diplomatic trips to Israel, on the basis that Israel is conducting an illegal occupation of Palestine. Fairly obvious why the Australian government would be against this, as it considers Israel an ally despite… everything. With APAN reporting that federal Parliamentarians took more sponsored trips to Israel than any other country between 2018 and 2022. 

It demands countries avoid engaging in trade or investment with Israel that would assist in maintaining the illegal occupation of Palestine. Australia’s government and other businesses have many existing commercial relationships with the Israeli government and businesses that directly support the occupation. To name just one: In February, Australian Defence awarded an almost $1 billion contract to Israeli military manufacturer Elbit Systems. Elbit manufactured weapons and surveillance tech are used on Palestinians in the Occupied territories, and in March an Elbit attack drone was used to kill humanitarian workers, including Australian Zomi Frankcom. 

It demands countries stop providing arms and related equipment to Israel, where there is reason to believe it will be used in Occupied Palestine. Although the government has tried to deny this, Australia manufacturers parts for Lockheed Martin F35 fighter jets, which the IDF uses to bomb Gaza. Anthony Albanese says this doesn’t count, because Australia provides the parts to the U.S. (Lockheed Martin is an American company).

It asks countries to implement sanctions on those upholding Israel’s illegal occupation. This clause is kind of a mixed bag, because while Australia has announced sanctions for Israeli settlers who have attacked Palestinians, it is refusing to impose sanctions on government and military officials conducting the actual occupation. There are also around 1000 Australian citizens believed to be currently serving in the IDF, who would be complicit if Israel is found to be conducting a genocide. If those citizens participate in any war crimes, they can be prosecuted for those in the international courts and in Australia. Some experts believe the Australian government has not done enough to warn these citizens of the risk. 

There are two more clauses that go further than the ICJ ruling, but do exactly what Australia says it wants by specifying the next steps to peace. It is ironic (perhaps hypocritical is a better word?) that Australia would abstain from supporting a resolution that says:

• The U.N General Assembly should hold a specific conference to work out how best to implement the resolutions relating to Paletine, the two-State solution, and peace in the Middle East, and;

• That the U.N Secretary-General and Human Rights Commissioner should present proposals for they will follow up on Israel’s human rights violations identified in the ICJ ruling.

So, there you have it. These are the requests made by a people under siege that Australia found “disappointing”.

Anyway, what was Israel doing while all this was going on? Detonating thousands of bombs they had hidden in pagers in Lebanon (a war crime), killing at least 30 people including two children, and following it up with a round of air strikes for good measure. 

Take care of yourselves and each other today.

– Crystal
Founder & Chief of Everything at Zee Feed
Follow me on Instagram or TikTok

Smart stuff on the Internet 💭

All the stuff I found on the web that made me think, smile, or have an ‘aha!’ moment. Spend your Sunday reading them – you'll be better off for it:

The Diddy prosecution could change the game. Cassie is why. on MSNBC
Cassie Ventura’s bravery proves the power in coming forward against abusers. This is a really thorough piece on the charges against P. Diddy (he was arrested on Tuesday), the extensive evidence that has been compiled, and how Cassie’s civil case against him last year laid the groundwork for it all. “The breadth and volume of the evidence in the Combs case, as disclosed by prosecutors to date, goes far beyond what we typically see in sex crimes prosecutions.”

Hey kids, can’t afford a home? That’s okay, Labor’s got some sick memes for you instead on Crikey
This one’s by me! “Adopting youth slang, participating in trends and sharing memes is no substitute for listening to young people and taking action in their interest. A more cynical perspective on Labor’s meme strategy might be that the party never believed its policy would be popular, or helpful, to young people struggling to find a home, and therefore did not see the point in educating them on it.”

College Students Not Reading Is an Issue, So Teachers Are Adjusting How Classes Look on Teen Vogue 
Interesting to think about in relation to Adelaide Uni stopping in-person lectures. “To some instructors the notion of trimming syllabi or increasingly excerpting assigned reading feels like an insult to the intelligence of students — not to mention their tuition money. Jennifer Frey, a philosophy professor and the dean of the Honors College at the University of Tulsa, says she sees such moves by colleagues as a ‘tyranny of low expectations’.”

We’re living in the era of ‘main character syndrome’. But what if we’re just not that important? on Guardian UK
“Therapy culture has done many good things for the world (if you don’t believe me, ask your dad when the last time he cried was). But it’s not a cardinal sin to question the end goal of this monetised, individualised cult of knowing ourselves. Is there a strength to having an unknowable self, of thinking about ourselves less?”

If you found this email thought-provoking, will you share it with a friend? Sharing helps us grow 🌱 and makes you look really smart.