Australia set to back watered-down United Nations resolution on Palestine
By James Massola and Matthew Knott
Australia is set to vote in favour of a United Nations resolution that would expand Palestinians’ right to participate at the world’s premier global forum, but stops short of granting full membership.
As negotiations on the resolution continued ahead of a vote in the UN’s General Assembly overnight, Australian government sources speaking on background said a watered-down version of the original motion circulated by the United Arab Emirates contained major concessions by the Palestinians and Arab nations.
Foreign Minister Penny Wong.Credit: Getty Images
Ahead of the vote, Australia’s former UN ambassador, Mitch Fifield, urged the Albanese government against voting for full Palestinian membership of the world’s premier global forum.
But in a call that underscored divisions within Labor over the emotive issue, Victorian MP Maria Vamvakinou, a long-time supporter of Palestinian statehood, spoke out to urge the government to vote yes at the UN.
The UN resolution would extend Palestinians’ right to participate as an observer at the UN, able to submit proposals, reply regarding the positions of a group and raise procedural motions.
It still expresses the aspiration for Palestine to attain membership of the global body but explicitly rules out a vote in the General Assembly. Crucially, the draft expresses support for Israel’s right to peaceful existence.
In an interview with Radio National on Friday morning, Foreign Minister Penny Wong said Australia would consider the final resolution that came before the General Assembly, but refused to say ahead of time how Australia would vote.
“We will look at what the text [of the resolution] says, we will look at what the actual meaning of the resolution is … we are focused on the situation on the ground, we want a humanitarian ceasefire, we want the release of hostages, we want increased humanitarian aid, and obviously, we will be speaking to our friends and partners internationally,” she said.
“Australia does support a two-state solution, it is not a question of if we will recognise a Palestinian state, it is a question of when.”
She dismissed suggestions that voting yes or abstaining would reward Hamas. “Let’s remember the two-state solution, that is a Palestinian state alongside the state of Israel, is actually the opposite of what Hamas want. Hamas wants conflict, this is about long-term peace.”
Asked when Australia could recognise a Palestinian state, the foreign minister said that historically, Australia had taken the view that recognition of Palestine would come at the end of a negotiated peace process. Now, however, there was a developing view that recognition could contribute to securing a peace deal.
Wong cautioned, however, that if Australia recognised Palestine at the UN, it would not automatically be followed by bilateral recognition. “One does not necessarily lead to the other at the same time.”
Fifield, a former Liberal Party senator who served as Australia’s UN representative from 2019 to 2023, said the government should not take any action that could be seen as a reward for militant group Hamas’s October 7 attacks on Israel, which led to the deaths of 1200 people. Gazan health authorities report the deaths of more than 34,500 people since the Israeli invasion of the strip began.
Display monitors show the result of voting in the United Nations General Assembly in December for a ceasefire. Credit: AP
“UN member states should ensure Hamas never think October 7 can deliver a political dividend,” Fifield said.
Vamvakinou told this masthead that “Australia should vote yes”.
“This is a critical and important opportunity for the global community to recognise the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people to self-determination through the establishment of Palestinian statehood,” she said.
Wong also entered the debate on university campus protests over the war in Gaza, saying she believed some of the language used had been antisemitic.
Australian universities have been roiled in recent weeks by pro-Israel and pro-Palestine protests, and encampments have been set up on some campuses.
Sydney and Monash universities have urged students protesting against the war in Gaza to stop using phrases such as “intifada” and “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”.
“Intifada” is an Arabic word for popular uprising, but the Anti-Defamation League, founded a century ago to counter the vilification of Jews, argues it is a slogan that calls for indiscriminate violence against Israel.
Monash ordered the removal of “Zionist not welcome” slogans earlier this week after receiving legal advice it was vilification.
Asked about pro-Palestine protests on university campuses, Wong told Radio National breakfast on Friday that she had a problem with the chant “from the river to the sea”.
“I’ve always believed that what that says is contrary to a two-state solution,” she said.
Asked if she thought some of the language used on campuses was antisemitic, Wong said: “Yes, I do.”
Cut through the noise of federal politics with news, views and expert analysis. Subscribers can sign up to our weekly Inside Politics newsletter.