Australia’s arms export comes under scrutiny. Is Canberra ‘complicit’ in Israel-Gaza war?

Australia’s export of weapons to Israel amid the Israel-Gaza war has sparked controversy, with recent senate hearings confirming Canberra has issued new permits for military equipment exports to Israel since the start of the crisis. There are also existing permits that allowed Australian manufacturers to supply weapons parts for the manufacture of F-35 jets. Israel has used F-35 jets in its Gaza offensive. Critics said Canberra’s actions could contradict its legal obligations under international humanitarian law, which prohibit arms transfers that could be used to commit human rights violations, while advocacy groups argue these exports could implicate Australia in Israel’s war crimes. “As you know, Israel is currently being investigated for alleged genocide … and is accused by the United Nations and multiple human rights organisations of serious war crimes. Australia is now being accused of complicity,” Andrew Bartlett, president of the Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR) advocacy group, wrote in an open letter to Canberra this week. For months, researchers, humanitarian groups, war protesters and Australia’s third-largest political party, the Australian Greens, have sought clarity over Australia’s exports of weapons and parts to Israel. Australian defence officials said in senate hearings on June 5 and 6, they had granted eight new permits to export military equipment to Israel since the war began, although they said they were for Australian defence items that required repair by Israel manufacturers. Since 2019, Australia has issued around 247 permits that relate to Israel, with 66 still active. They include exports of goods that require repair, as well as weapons and dual use goods. The hearings also revealed Australia provides more than 70 critical components to the production of F-35 combat jets. Contracts to deal exports of weapon parts from more than 75 Australian companies into the Joint Strike Fighter global supply chain, which manufactures F-35 jets, were valued at roughly A$4.6 billion (US$4 billion). “We are part of a consortium on the F-35 capability. That is all exported to a central repository in the US … it doesn’t relate specifically to the conflict in Israel,” said Hugh Jeffrey, deputy defence secretary of strategy, policy and industry. “I think the question of whether or not the F-35 is being employed in the crisis in Israel is not material to the question of whether or not we grant an export permit.” Jeffrey said, however, the permits were consistent with international legal obligations. Since the war began, Canberra has denied supplying weapons directly to Israel, but former diplomats and academics said in an open letter to Canberra this week that those words were an “exercise in semantics”. The senate hearing was Canberra’s clearest confirmation yet of how Australia is involved in the Gaza crisis. This could implicate Australia in alleged war crimes, given that Israel is under investigation for genocide by the International Court of Justice, say anti-war advocates such as the AWPR. The AWPR, which has raised concerns about the defence relationship between Australia and Israel, told This Week in Asia that Canberra had been inconsistent in its communication about exports to Israel and had not been transparent about defence-related decisions. While Australia had failed to act to stop Israel’s war in Gaza, so far, it had not committed any war crimes, the group said. Michelle Fahy, a researcher of the Australian arms industry, also said in local press during the hearings last week that Lockheed Martin – the world’s largest weapons manufacturer – had deleted from its website text that said Australia had supplied components to the F-35 fleet it is building. Lockheed Martin is in charge of the US-led Joint Strike Fighter programme to build fighter jets like the F-35. This Week in Asia sought comment from Lockheed Martin, but has not yet received a response as of publication time. Greens Senator David Shoebridge has accused the defence department of failing to ensure Australia met international responsibilities. “There’s a moral vacuum here, and you don’t care,” he said during the senate hearings. Canberra has accused the Greens of spreading misinformation about Australia’s involvement in the war. In a radio interview this week, Defence Minister Richard Marles said the Greens’ allegations of Australia supplying weapons to Israel was a “total lie”. He clarified that, of the eight new export permits to Israel, seven of them related to equipment that were worked on in Israel and returned to Australia and one permit involved the export of a non-lethal item. In older permits, Australia also sent “dual use technology” parts to Israel, but they were not military equipment, Marles added. When asked if Australia should take more responsibility over sending weapons parts to a “central pool”, Marles said Australia had its “eyes wide open” about its contribution to the F-35 supply chain, but that going down this path could get “complex”. “Qantas and Virgin purchase Boeing aircraft. Boeing supplies military planes to the Israeli defence force. What are we now saying if we walk down this path?” International law Nations have obligations to “ensure respect” for international humanitarian law under the Geneva Conventions, said Lawrence Hill-Cawthorne, an associate professor of Law at the University of Bristol, in April. In February, the United Nations said ignorance about where parts were used would not preclude countries that sent them from breaking humanitarian laws. “Such transfers are prohibited even if the exporting State does not intend the arms to be used in violation of the law – or does not know with certainty that they would be used in such a way – as long as there is a clear risk,” the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights said in a statement. The UN had urged the US and Germany as well as Australia, France, Canada and Britain to stop military exports to Israel. The Arms Trade Treaty, which regulates the international trade of arms, also makes clear that parts and components of weapons are also considered weapons. A Dutch court set an international precedent in February using the treaty to order the Netherlands to stop supplying F-35 fighter jet parts to Israel, saying there was a “clear risk” they would be used by Israel to commit serious violations of international humanitarian law.

Australia’s arms export comes under scrutiny. Is Canberra ‘complicit’ in Israel-Gaza war?

.css-1mniedq{color:inherit;font-weight:inherit;font-size:inherit;font-family:inherit;line-height:inherit;}Critics say Canberra’s actions contradict its legal obligations under international law, while advocacy groups say such exports could implicate Australia

Critics say Canberra’s actions contradict its legal obligations under international law, while advocacy groups say such exports could implicate Australia