Trump’s Board of Peace

After meetings early in August between Trump’s Board of Peace (BoP) and Hamas, a 15-point plan was developed which was to ensure that Gaza would never again threaten Israel’s security. However, Israel was not a party to the discussions which envisaged that Hamas would hand over its weapons in phases and Israel would carry out corresponding withdrawals. Netanyahu immediately rejected the proposal saying, the Israel defence Force (IDF) would not move out of Gaza until Hamas had given up all of its weapons. Netanyahu went a step further saying, “As long as I am Prime Minister, Iran will not possess nuclear weapons”.^[i]

Subsequently, Trump’s envoy Jared Kushner met with Netanyahu and it was agreed that instead of a phased handover of weapons, Hamas would be required to hand over all of its weapons. Demilitarisation would include every weapon and every tunnel and would require all Hamas weapons to be fully decommissioned. Only after the wholesale disarmament had been verified by an American general appointed by the BoP would Israel be required to withdraw its troops to the Gaza border.^[ii]

Even after Hamas agreed to the plan, it soon became clear that Hamas was determined to remain in control. Kushner acknowledged that it was difficult to trust the militant group.

The Recognition of the State of Israel – A Brief History

In 1800, Jerusalem had 8,750 inhabitants: 4000 Muslims, 2750 Christians and 2000 Jews. By 1922 the total population was 62,600 of which 34,400 were Jews. After pogroms in Russia, a new wave of Zionists began to arrive in Palestine. The situation became more pressing when Hitler came to power and more refugees began arriving.

British Prime Minister Lloyd George informed his Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour that he supported a Jewish national home in Palestine. This led to the Balfour Declaration in 1917. In 1937, the Peel committee recommended the partitioning of Palestine so that there would be a Jewish state in the Galilee and on the coastal plain while the remaining territory, including the Negev would go to the Arabs. The Zionists accepted the plan, but the Arabs rejected it.

In February 1947, Britain produced a new partition plan which provided for a Jewish state in eastern Galilee, the Upper Jordan Valley, the Negev, and the coastal plain with the Arab state in the rest of the country. In November 1947, the UN Gen Assembly voted to accept the plan. The Zionists agreed, but again, the Arabs refused. When the Zionists were offered something by the great powers, they always accepted even if it fell short of what they wanted. In the end they got everything. The Arabs continually said “NO” and in the end were left with nothing.

The Wars that Followed

Ben-Gurion proclaimed the birth of the State of Israel on 14 May 1948. This led to five armies, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon invading Israel the very next day. After defeating the invaders, Israel embarked on making West Jerusalem its working capital.

In May 1967 a coalition of Arab forces involving Egypt, Jordan and Syria mobilized in preparation for an attack on Israel. However, Israel launched a pre-emptive strike in June and destroyed almost the entire Egyptian Airforce. This led to Israel occupying not only Jerusalem but also the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, the Sinai peninsula, and the Golan Heights. Israel’s prime minister, Levi Eshkol was willing to return the occupied territories to Syria, Egypt and Jordan in return for peace but there was no question of returning the Old City of Jerusalem to the Arabs.

On 6 October 1973 (Yom Kippur, The Holiest day in the Jewish calendar), a coalition of Arab states led by Egypt and Syria launched a surprise attack, catching Israel off guard. Egyptian troops crossed the Suez Canal into the Sinai Peninsula and Syrian forces pushed into the Golan Heights before Israel’s counteroffensive halted the Syrian advance and encircled the Egyptian army. The war ended on 25 October 1973 having led to the death of 2,650 Israeli soldiers and 8,500 Arab soldiers. However, the war set the stage for the Camp David Accords and the 1979 Egypt-Israel Peace.

Menachem Begin’s Likud party came to power in 1977 and, in 1978 Egypt and Israel signed the Camp David Accords, with Egypt recognising the state of Israel and Begin promising to withdraw from the Sinai peninsula.

In May 1995, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) representative, Feisal Husseini said, “I dream of the day when a Palestinian will say ‘Our Jerusalem’ and will mean Palestinians and Israelis, and Israel will say, ‘Our Jerusalem’ and will mean Israelis and Palestinians”. 700 prominent Israelis signed a statement saying, “Jerusalem is ours – Muslims, Christians, and Jews”. Hopes for peace were high but were dashed when, in February 1996, Hamas launched a series of suicide bomb attacks in Jerusalem, Ashkelon and Tel Aviv, killing 57 Israelis.^[iii]

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Trump

Benjamin Netanyahu’s brother, Yonatan Netanyahu was killed on 4 July 1976 while leading Operation Entebbe in Uganda. The Israeli commandos freed the hostages who had been seized by Palestinian and German militants. The death of his brother had a severe impact on Netanyahu and it turned the fight against terrorism into a personal mission. For Netanyahu, peace was only possible through strength.

Israel’s Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated in November 1995 and in June 1996, Benjamin Netanyahu became Israel’s Prime Minister at the age of 46. However, he was defeated in Israel’s 1999 elections, but was re-elected Prime Minister in 2009 and he then presided over a centre-right government for 12 Years until 2021. His tenure was interrupted when a coalition led by Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid formed government in June 2021 but Netanyahu returned to power in 2022 in a coalition with far-right and ultra-Orthodox parties.

The Oslo Accords

United Nations Resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) were passed in the aftermath of the 1967 Six-Day War and the 1973 Yom Kippur War respectively. The Resolutions called for Israel’s withdrawal from the occupied territories in exchange for Arab recognition of Israel’s right to live in peace.

Oslo Accord 1 was signed in 1993 and Oslo Accord 2 in 1995. It was part of a process to achieve a peace treaty based on Resolutions 242 and 338. Negotiations resulted in the recognition of Israel by the PLO and recognition of the PLO by Israel. Oslo also brought about the Palestinian Authority (PA) to manage Palestinian governance over parts of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Tragically, the signing of the Accords led to the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995 by a right-wing Israeli fanatic.

The First Intifada

The First Intifada began in1987, only ending in1993. It involved violent protests, riots and terrorist attacks by Palestinians against Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. When Israel deployed 80,000 soldiers this was duly criticised by Human Rights Watch as “disproportionate”. During this Intifada 1,087 Palestinians including 240 children were killed. 100 Israeli civilians and 60 Israeli soldiers were also killed and more than 1,400 Israeli civilians and 1,700 soldiers were injured – it really was “disproportionate”!

The Second Intifada

The second Intifada, 2000 - 2005 was a Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation. This brought an end to the peace framework which had been established by the 1993 and 1995 Oslo accords and led to the death of 3,000 Palestinians and 1,000 Israelis. This was caused by Palestinian frustration over the collapse of the Camp David Summit in 2000 when it failed to produce a final roadmap for a Palestinian state.

Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades launched intensive campaigns against Israel including numerous suicide bombings targeting Israeli civilians. In 2002 Israel constructed a massive network of concrete walls and electronic fences to halt the suicide bombers which the Palestinians called an “apartheid wall”, but it did prove to be successful.

Hostilities drew to a close in February 2005 when the newly elected PA President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon agreed to a ceasefire and reaffirmed a commitment to the “roadmap for peace”. The conflict had led to Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip in 2005, the dismantling of all Israeli settlements and evacuation of Gaza. However, this paved the way for Hamas to win the 2006 elections and led to its takeover of Gaza in 2007.

The Second Intifada and the 9/11 attacks in New York led to Washington’s declaration of a global struggle against Islamist radicalism and, in July 2024 the Knesset rejected the establishment of a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River by 68 votes to 9.

The Hamas Attack – October 7

The Hamas attack on 7 October 2023 resulted in the death of 1,200 Israeli civilians and the capture of 250 Israeli hostages. That event gave Netanyahu’s government a mandate for a harsh military response. However, the scale of destruction wrought by Israel on Gaza impacted Israel’s international legitimacy and support from Western governments gave way to criticism.

However, in response to criticism levelled at Israel over its war against Hamas and suggestions of “genocide”, Colonel Richard Kemp who served 29 years in the British Army argued that Israel’s military made more effort than any other army to prevent civilian casualties. British commentator, Douglas Murray defends Israel’s actions in Gaza, asserting that the IDF takes extensive measures to warn civilians and to minimize casualties using texts and leaflets to urge civilians to move out of danger before strikes. Murray blames the civilian suffering on Hamas which deliberately embeds itself and its weaponry within civilian infrastructure and uses Palestinian civilians as human shields.

The War on Iran

After October 7 Netanyahu brought force to bear in Gaza which expanded into a war by the US and Israel against Iran beginning on 28 February 2026. Their attack on Iran included heavy strikes on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. However, the deeper the US became involved, the more parts of American society questioned the price of the alliance. Support from a significant part of the American establishment began to fray.

Israel receives $3.8 billion in annual US military aid under a 10 year agreement from 2018 to 2028. Netanyahu has begun speaking about Israel giving up American financial assistance which comprises only 8% of Israel’s defence budget which amounts to US$45 billion per year. This would at least stop criticism by Anti-Zionists in the US of the US aid. Notably, only a few days ago the US Treasury Department reported that US gross debt had surpassed US$40 trillion, dwarfing the entire annual output of the US economy!^[iv]

Settler Violence on The West Bank

The West Bank is home to about 3 million Palestinians and 500,000 Israelis. It is divided into Areas A, B, and C. Both Area A comprising 18% and Area B comprising 22% are under the Palestinian Authority (PA). Area C, about 60% is under the control of Israel.

In recent years there has been increasing settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank. Israel’s right-wing Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir has given free rein to attacks by the settlers as has Defence Minister Israel Katz. Qusra, a village in the West Bank has become a recent flashpoint for settler violence. The military’s failure to stop the settlers has triggered criticism both within and outside Israel leading to widespread calls for Israel to put an end to the settler violence.^[v]

The US Ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee who is a strong supporter of Israel has condemned the settlers as “Israeli terrorists”. His and other criticisms may be justified, but what is not heard from Israel’s critics is that neither Iran nor its proxies – Hamas, Hezbollah and others are interested in a two state solution and they have never, to this day abandoned their aim of eliminating the State of Israel and the Jewish people. Given the opportunity, they will bring another Holocaust. Who really is guilty of genocidal intent?

Israel’s Next Election

Israel’s Opposition is opposed to the politicization of the army and the police and it, together with many Israelis are appalled by the settler violence in the West Bank. The Next election is due to be held on 27 October 2026. The Opposition is currently running neck-and-neck with Netanyahu’s party, but the outcome of the election is by no means certain.

The attack on 7 October 2023 has left such a deep scar in Israel that many believe the country has no choice but to pursue its enemies aggressively or risk another massacre. The idea of a Palestinian state was buried on 7 October and there is little chance of any movement towards a two-state solution in the foreseeable future.^[vi]

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

Subscribe now

^[i] Times of Israel, Netanyahu rejects the 15-point Gaza plan - 9 Aug 26

^[ii] The Australian, Netanyahu and Kushner agree US general to verify Hamas disarmament – 18 Aug 26

^[iii] A History of Jerusalem, by Karen Armstrong - 1996

^[iv] The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), Israel can stand on its own – 26 May 26

^[v] WSJ, Israel Puts village on Lockdown over settler violence -13 Aug 26

^[vi] Foreign Policy (FP), Why Israel’s coming election might be its Most Pivotal – 6 Aug 26

Ever since early in 2026, there has been a daily avalanche of media reports about One Nation and its leader, Pauline Hanson. The extent of the news coverage from multiple sources is nothing short of astounding.

Hanson overtakes Albanese as the preferred Prime Minister

Support for One Nation has doubled among voters aged between 18 and 34 and there is also a growing number of younger, female and ethnic voters identifying as One Nation supporters. A recent Newspoll reported a rise in voter support to 31% with One Nation leading both Labor and the Coalition. A recent Sky News Pulse/YouGov poll showed that 50% of Australian voters believe that One Nation was ready to govern with a further 33% saying that the party would be ready by the next election.

The Hanson phenomenon shows no sign of running out of steam, with its appeal broadening well beyond its traditional base. The increasing slice of the vote for One Nation is coming from both Labor and the Coalition and the primary vote for One Nation in NSW and Victoria now rivals that in Hanson’s home state of Queensland.^[i]

Hanson has convinced many Australians that she is one of them and she understands their everyday concerns. If the current rise in One Nation’s support continues into 2028, One Nation could be sitting on the government benches.^[ii]

The Bondi Massacre

The Bondi Beach massacre on 14 December 2025 was the worst terrorist attack in the nation’s history. It was a shock awakening as to how far Australia had strayed from its promise of tolerance and security after more than two years of anti-Semitic hatred and Islamist threats. The Sydney Harbour Bridge protest four months earlier amounted to an Islamist-dominated threat against Israel, its supporters and Jewish Australians. Hanson blamed the Prime Minister saying, “He has blood on his hands” adding, “The wrong people have been brought here with the wrong ideology, people who will not assimilate into Australian culture and values”.

Nine days after Bondi, the Brisbane Times reported that One Nation had been flooded with new members within hours of the massacre, with Hanson’s chief of staff, James Ashby claiming 300 members had signed up in one hour, with thousands more added over the course of that week. In her later National Press Club talk, Hanson addressed hate speech and Islamist extremism in strong language, saying she would restrict immigration from places “Immersed in extremism like radical Islam”. There was nothing surprising about Hanson’s statement or the way so many voters welcomed it.^[iii]

Keeping Australia Safe

On 31 July 2026, One Nation published its proposed legislation to keep Australia safe. It aims to prevent the return of people who leave Australia to fight with terrorists. The proposed “Protecting Australians from Foreign Terrorist Fighters” Bill reflects the measures which the Labor and Coalition governments could have taken to prevent ISIS terrorists from returning, but they failed to do so. One Nation’s proposed legislation shows what could and should have been done to ensure the safety of the Australian community. The proposal also amends the Counter-Terrorism Act to add “The foreign terrorist fighter exclusion order” plus the Australian Passports Act by conferring power on the responsible minister to refuse Australian travel documents to anyone charged or convicted of a terrorism offence. The proposal will also amend the Criminal Code making it an offence to organise or facilitate the entry into Australia of anyone who has engaged in terrorism related conduct.

Hanson’s Appearance at the National Press Club

Pauline Hanson made her first appearance at the National Press Club on 17 June 2026 having first entered politics 30 years earlier. The Press Club President, Tom Connell described Hanson as one of the country’s most influential political figures. Her speech was hijacked by an activist group, GetUp when a protest banner was unfurled behind Hanson. It was quickly removed and the Press Club referred the incident to the Australian Federal Police.

Hanson banned the ABC, The Guardian and The Age from attending her meetings. Quizzed as to the reasons for doing so, Hanson said, “I’m not putting up with their rubbish, their spin and their lies. I want truth and honesty. You get it from me. I expect it back from the media”.^[iv]

As for Prime Minister Albanese, he announced he would not tune in to watch Hanson’s address and instead would watch the State of Origin match which for him would be “Much more fulfilling”. That’s our PM!

Monoculture

Hanson spoke of her vision of a “monocultural” Australia, the core characteristics of which include homogeneity in which most of the population belongs to the same ethnic or cultural group as well as an expectation that those coming to Australia should adopt Australia’s language, values and practices. She called for migrants to identify first as Australians.

It was inevitable that Australia’s former Prime Minister, John Howard would join the debate over “monoculture “and “multiculturalism”, but in doing so he did not do himself or the Liberals any favours. His first observation was that he did “Not know what monoculture means in the context of immigration”. Then he said, “I have always felt uncomfortable with the expression ‘multicultural’”!

All Howard needed to do was to read what One Nation published on 26 June 2026 when Hanson wrote, “The Socceroos represent my vision of a monocultural Australia: people from different backgrounds and cultures and nations all wearing green and gold, representing one nation under one flag, and succeeding under the same set of rules”. She added, “If we are going to accept you, you must accept us”. She was, of course referring to the multicultural Australian soccer team. Despite their coming from different cultures and nations, they observed our rules and values.

One Nation is dedicated to fighting radical Islam and the threat it represents to the peace of this country. One Nation would deny migrant entry into Australia from countries which promote extremist ideology, Islamist threats and anti-Semitism. The Australian public expects migrants to accept Hanson’s concept called “Monoculture” which requires migrants to adapt to Australian customs and culture. Clearly Multiculturalism and monoculture are not mutually exclusive.^[v]

Winning Support From the People

When the Liberal leader, Angus Taylor held a fundraising dinner in Perth on 11 June 2026 there were just over a dozen people present, paying $2,000 per head. More than 50 people attended Hanson’s fundraiser dinner on the same night, also in Perth with each attendee paying $15,000. The room was packed with senior business people from mining, agriculture and energy.

Hanson’s party is also attracting support and money on Australia’s east coast from businesses which have had enough of the two major parties. The Sydney businessman Angus Aitken who donated $1Million, held a private dinner for Hanson at his home with one attendee remarking that there was close to $90 billion of wealth around the table. Aitken spoke of the pro-Palestine rallies, the Bondi terror attack and the government permitting ISIS brides into Australia and he described the Prime Minister as “The worst Prime Minister in my memory and it’s hard to believe anyone could be worse than Malcolm Turnbull as PM, but he is”.^[vi]

A Super Progressive Movie

On Australia Day, One Nation released its animated feature film, A Super Progressive Movie, which attacks “woke” culture and political opponents including Albanese, while celebrating Hanson. Although publicly available, Parliament House cancelled the screening of the trailer at the last minute claiming that it was “likely to cause offence”. Hanson’s response was that no one has the right to be “unoffended”.

No one can accuse Hanson of being too timid to say what she thinks. This has enabled her to benefit from the confusion and lack of conviction displayed by the Coalition. Nor can anyone accuse Hanson or her team of telling political lies. Indeed, they often get into strife for being too forthright about what they truly believe.

Labor launched a “Stop One Nation” fundraising appeal to combat Hanson’s growing popularity. However, One Nation’s “Fire the Liar” campaign was launched shortly after that and its campaign surged past $4 million in donations in only five days. One nation was reported to have received more than 65,000 individual donations, using part of those funds to send Fire the Liar billboard trucks into Albanese’s electorate.

Moving Forward

Hanson announced Warren Pickering as One Nation’s Victorian State leader. She also said Colleen Harkin, a former member of the Liberal Party’s state administrative committee had joined One Nation. Another new One Nation member, Catherine Lucre explained why she had abandoned Labor, claiming that Labor’s “Socialist agenda is not compatible with Australian life”.

Hanson also said the party would soon announce its Lower House candidates in 84 of 88 seats. In Addition, One Nation policies would be released prior to the election so that people would know what its policies are. The Victorian election in November is expected to be a major test for One Nation as will the New South Wales election early in 2027.

James Ashby, One Nation’s chief of staff has a new role as the Party’s national director with oversight across all operations and elections. The veteran policy advisor, Chris Taylor who previously served as Morrison’s senior staffer has been recruited to run Senator Hanson’s office and to finalise One Nation’s policy agenda. Taylor noted that One Nation’s primary vote in Newspoll had surged to 30%, saying Hanson was “building the strongest team One Nation has ever had”.^[vii]

One Nation in NSW is not restricted to Western Sydney. The electorate of Wentworth in Sydney’s eastern suburbs has also recorded an increase in One Nation supporters. The Wentworth branch currently has 300 members but aims to have 800 by the end of the year. Speaking at a recent gathering, Western Sydney lawyer, Tony Nikolic was adamant that those turning up to One Nation meetings were not “Neanderthals or rednecks”, but included “barristers, doctors and professors”. They were showing up and saying they were sick of what the major parties were not doing.^[viii]

Conclusion

Hanson has not changed what she stands for and her views have not changed in 30 years. She knows her audience and she is no fence-sitter, nor does she speak out of “both sides of her mouth”. This is the reason why her language, which some scoff as being “bogan” is so successful. She comes across as genuine and relatable to many Australians. Who can forget Hanson’s famous statement in 1996 when she was asked if she was “xenophobic” to which she responded, “Please explain – what do you mean by that?” There is nothing fake about Pauline Hanson.

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

Subscribe now

^[i] The Australian, Uncharted Territory – 20 June 2026

^[ii] Sydney Morning Herald, Voters prefer Hanson as PM – 15 June 2026

^[iii] Chris Kenny in The Australian, “Bondi lit the fuse” – 20 June 2026

^[iv] The Conversation, Hanson bans major media outlets – 3 Aug 26

^[v] The Australian (AU), John Howard declares Hanson’s monoculture push is “pointless” – 3 Aug 26

^[vi] Janet Albrechtsen, Serious money talks – and listens to Hanson – 10 June 2026

^[vii] AU, Ashby to be One Nation party boss, Chris Taylor becomes chief of staff – 3 Aug 26

^[viii] Sydney Morning Herald, Not neanderthals or rednecks – 25 July 26

Hatred

Israel’s ambassador to Australia, Hillel Newman writes that he has never seen such levels of hatred of Jews as he witnesses in Australia. He has served in two Muslim countries but did not see these levels of hatred there, but on the streets of Australia, he sees “pure anti-Semitic hatred”. The demonstration at the Sydney Opera House took place even before Israel’s incursion into Gaza. It was a “celebration” of the slaughter of 1,200 Israeli Jews. Even worse, there were thousands of protests around the planet and not only in Australia.

At an early stage of the Israeli military operation against Hamas, these same protesters were already making ridiculous claims of “genocide”. Genocide is the intention to exterminate a people. Countries committing genocide do not warn a civilian population to evacuate for their own safety nor do they bring in tons of food and aid, as Israel has done.^[i]

A Fish Rots from the Head [A Proverb referring to Failures of Leadership]

Back in August 2025 Australia’s Labor government announced its decision to recognise a Palestinian state when Prime Minister Albanese said, “Our government has made it clear that there can be no role for the terrorists of Hamas in any future Palestinian state”. He claimed that Australia had received that commitment from the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. However, there is no sign of that commitment being honoured. Instead, Hamas remains armed and committed to the destruction of Israel.

To make matters worse, when Labor’s recent conference endorsed a two-state solution dropping its demands for Hamas to disarm and for the Palestinian Authority to reform, Australia’s Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles acknowledged that Labor’s new policy platform was flawed. Marles nevertheless threw his weight behind the decision, claiming that this did not change the government’s position that Hamas must disarm and have no role in a Palestinian state – which Cloud Cuckoo Land was Australia’s Deputy Leader on? Worse, Australia’s Foreign Affairs Minister, Penny Wong denied that the platform was watered down, arguing that “it still criticised Hamas”. In the end Albanese presided over a policy which is directly and explicitly critical of Israel. A pro-Israel Labor member remarked that the result “made it look like the party had embraced Hamas”.^[ii]

When New South Wales Premier Chris Minns attempted to protect the Jewish community, he was confronted by a revolt from his own Party members over plans to ban pro-Palestine chants. His government introduced laws banning protests in some areas for up to three months in the wake of the Bondi Beach attacks. Remarkably, those laws were later struck down by the NSW Court of Appeal.^[iii]

Hospitals in Australia Are Not Spared

A medical conference to deal with the latest techniques in treating gunshot wounds was abandoned when anti-Israel doctors threatened to picket the conference if Israel’s expert, Dr Elon Glassberg shared his country’s successful methods to reduce battlefield mortality from gunshot wounds. This kind of hostility is turning hospitals into war zones instead of safe spaces for patients.

This pattern continues across the country as hospitals tolerate conduct against Jews which would have triggered disciplinary action had it targeted any other minority group. The hospital oversight board has chosen to ignore complaints about numerous doctors who have posted anti-Semitic content.

A Jewish Melbourne pediatrician found Australia so toxic that she moved to Israel where she now works at the Sheba Medical Centre in Tel Aviv as part of a team of Jewish, Arab , Muslim, Christian and Druze doctors and nurses treating children from all communities, including Gazan children who continue to be brought to Israel for treatment.^[iv]

The Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion

The Australian Prime Minister rejected calls for a Commonwealth Royal Commission after the Bondi attack. He even argued that no such royal commission had been called following the Port Arthur massacre nor the Lindt siege. Instead, his pathetic response was to say, there is “No place in Australia for this kind of hatred and it has to stop”! That was the PM’s response even though the influence of groups such as Islamic State and Al Qaeda to ignite terror attacks has returned and the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) chief, Burgess has said that ASIO is facing a perfect storm of terror attacks. In stark contrast, NSW Premier Chris Minns provided an example of leadership when he announced that he would bring a State Royal Commission.^[v]

Royal Commissioner Virginia Bell

Eventually, on 8 January 2026 the Labor government was persuaded to establish a “Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion”, and requested the former High Court Justice, The Honourable Virginia Bell AC to serve as Commissioner. The key issues before the Commission are: Tackling antisemitism; Making recommendations to assist law enforcement against antisemitism; The circumstances surrounding the Bondi terrorist attack; Recommendations for strengthening social cohesion in Australia. Commissioner Bell was requested to report before the end of 2026.

The Commission was to engage in successive public hearings, the first of which commenced on 4 May 2026 while the sixth hearing is due to run from 28 to 31 July 2026 when it is expected to consider how social cohesion can be enhanced.

The government had attempted to block Commissioner Bell from considering whether it had directed intelligence agencies to reduce counter-terrorism resources in the period prior to the Bondi massacre. However, the Commissioner’s interim report stated that the proportion of funding allocated to counter-terrorism had “significantly declined” from 2020 to 2025. The Commissioner decided that the “public interest” overruled cabinet confidentiality and she rejected the request to keep the evidence secret.^[vi]

A Sample of the Evidence at the Royal Commission

Katherine Mannix, a former senior researcher for ABC TV submitted details of how the “ABC’s consistently biased reporting has caused anti-Semitism in Australia to grow”, explaining that by presenting Hamas’ case to the public, while seeking the appearance of objectivity, ABC reporters had contributed to an environment where Jews are portrayed not as the victims but as perpetrators and “genocidal murderers of children”. Mannix also said there was “No doubt that the ABC’s hate filled news coverage over the last two years gave significant assistance to the dreadful cause of Islamic extremism”.

Another submission to the Royal Commission asserts that across more than 1000 reports on the ABC and SBS, at least 97% were negative towards Israel. The harm caused is “Seen in Jewish children who hesitate to speak about Israel at school. It is seen in university students who hide their Zionism. It is seen in employees who keep silent after anti-Semitic incidents. It is seen in families deciding whether it is safe to attend public Jewish events and it is seen in the security arrangements now required around Jewish life”.

An ABC Alumni submission blames the Israelis for bringing this upon themselves and dismisses the gleeful celebrations in Australia after October 7 and the threatening chants against Jews at the Opera house as “a small minority” while arguing that it was Israel’s actions which brought an estimated 90,000 to the Harbour Bridge protest, while failing to mention the terrorist flags, hate preachers and chants of “Death to the IDF”.^[vii]

A principal at an Australian Jewish school appeared before the Royal Commission outlining the hateful rhetoric at his school such as Nazi salutes, people yelling “F- - - the Jews” and Jewish children being spat on. Following his appearance at the Commission, he has been called a “paedophile, a monster, a supporter of baby killing, a warmonger, a Nazi, a normaliser of genocide, a child eater, an evil specimen” – much of it posted directly on the school’s Facebook page.^[viii]

Defining Antisemitism

The definition taken from the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), endorsed by federal and state governments and adopted by the Royal Commission, provides that “Anti-Semitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews”. Almost every nation in Europe has adopted this definition and in February 2025, following recommendations from Australia’s Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, 39 universities represented by Universities Australia “unanimously endorsed” a definition of anti-Semitism which, while different, drew heavily on the IHRA definition.

However, the public broadcasters, ABC and SBS have declined to adopt that definition. Islamic and pro-Palestinian groups have also opposed the definition saying that it stifles free speech and legitimate criticism of Israel.^[ix]

New Laws to Combat Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism

The conduct experienced in Australia is not much different from Nazi threats, the display of Nazi symbols, Nazi salutes or Nazi memorabilia. Australian and State laws do prohibit the public display of Nazi symbols, including performing the “Sieg Heil” gesture. Surely, the murder in December 2025 of 15 innocents for the “crime” of being Jews demanded immediate and effective legislation including severe penalties against such crimes.

Eventually, on 21 January 2026 it was announced that in response to the Bondi terrorist attack, the Albanese Government had passed legislation to combat anti-Semitism, hate and extremism. The government introduced the toughest federal hate crime laws in Australian history, described as Laws “Combating Anti-Semitism, Hate and Extremism”. These laws specifically target those who seek to spread hatred, radicalise our youth or disrupt social cohesion in Australia. This legislation also expands and strengthens Commonwealth criminal offences to address these issues through new and increased penalties and expanding prohibited hate symbol offences.

What is Social Cohesion?

“Social Cohesion” is said to refer to the bonds which bring people together, acting as “social glue”. It involves connections, trust and mutual respect and a collective commitment to the common good. Laws can mandate compliance and can ban hate speech. However, it seems most unlikely that even with the best will in the world, social cohesion can realistically be imposed, or that legislation can be expected to bring about or build social cohesion.

Conclusion

Commissioner Bell is making enormous efforts over an extended period to hear evidence and to investigate the issues which have caused so much difficulty in Australia. There is every reason to hope and expect that when she does report, the people of Australia can look forward to real and meaningful recommendations and change. If the government then takes meaningful steps to ensure that the new legislation to combat anti-Semitism, hate and extremism is vigorously and effectively applied then there may be some light at the end of the tunnel.

That will require real commitment, conviction and courage. If so, Australia could emerge as a beacon of hope.

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

Subscribe now

^[i] The Australian (AU), I have seen less Jew-hatred in Muslim countries – 9 July 2026

^[ii] AU, Marles concedes flaws in Labor conference stance on Israel – 27 July 2026

^[iii] AU, NSW Premier faces Party revolt over protest laws and slogan bans – 30 June 2026

^[iv] AU, How did hospitals become the frontline in the anti-Semitic onslaught? – 28 June 2026 will call

^[v] AU, Warring groups united by hatred of Jews, ASIO warns – 25 June 2026

^[vi] Sydney Morning Herald, Government bid to hide counter-terror details from Commission -28 May 2026

^[vii] The Australian, Damning evidence the ABC fanned the flames of hatred - 23 May 2026

^[viii] Sydney Morning Herald, The commission heard testimony, then came the abuse – 26 May 2026

^[ix] Sydney Morning Herald, the definition of anti-Semitism -19 May 26 and 15 July 25 will

The world watched in horror on 11 September 2001 as a plane hurtled into the World Trade Centre in New York, killing 3,000, reviving memories of the day in 1972 when Black September broke into Munich’s Olympic Village and murdered 11 Israeli athletes and coaches. There is no end to the carnage. The Bali bombing in October 2002, by Jamaah Islamiah, resulted in the slaughter of 202 holidaymakers including 88 Australians.

In January 2015, Charlie Hebdo employees were targeted by two French born Muslim brothers (members of Al Qaeda), murdering 12 and injuring 11. Several other terrorist attacks across France followed. In 2017 a suicide bomber detonated a bomb in the Manchester Arena in Britain, killing 22 people attending a concert. Then, in March 2024 gunmen stormed a Moscow concert Hall killing 145 people and injuring more than 500. The Islamic State group (IS) claimed responsibility.

On 14 December 2025, 15 Jews were murdered while attending a Hanukkah celebration at Bondi Beach. This followed the slaughter of Jews in Israel on 7 October 2023, the worst such attack since the Holocaust. IS and Al Qaeda have reemerged, with the West in their sights.

All of these attacks, and more can be traced back to the Iranian regime.^[i]

The US and Israil go to War Against Iran, Once Again

Israel and the US have demanded that Iran dismantle its nuclear program and end its support for militant groups including Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza, but Iran has displayed no intention of complying and on 28 February 2026, the US and Israel launched large-scale airstrikes targeting Iran’s military assets, nuclear facilities, and its top leadership, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

For Israel, the Iranian threat is existential. Israel cannot accept Iran having nuclear capabilities controlled by a regime which openly calls for the destruction of Israel. The only way to achieve safety for Israel, is to facilitate and to enable the Iranian people to bring regime change and to have a government which is willing to end Iran’s nuclear ambitions. However, Washington has never committed the resources necessary to bring regime change to Iran and the Trump administration appears unwilling to take on the burden of a prolonged Gulf war.

Multiple reports now suggest that the Trump administration believes a nuclear deal is unlikely and may not be achievable and the US could settle for a deal in which Iran declares the Strait of Hormuz open, but preserves its nuclear aims. Without a long-term US commitment to provide Israel with the support it needs to preserve the gains of the war so far, Israel may be forced to act alone.^[ii]

A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)

In early April 2026, Trump announced a two-week ceasefire after receiving a 10 point plan from Iran which appeared to be a workable basis for negotiation. However, the next day Tehran released a framework which included numerous items which were nonstarters for the US, including the right to enrich uranium.

Then, on 17 June 2026 the US and Iran signed an MOU which was intended to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, and to suspend the war for 60 days during which period Iran was required to allow free passage of commercial vessels through the Strait. However, the MOU did not resolve the issues which produced the crisis in the first place, in particular whether Iran would be permitted to continue enriching uranium, the fate of its stockpile of enriched uranium, and the scope of international inspections.

Despite the MOU, military action continued around the Strait, putting a strain on the ceasefire and Hezbollah vowed to keep fighting Israel. The back-and-forth attacks which followed added pressure to the preliminary peace deal.^[iii]

Trump demanded that Iran stop its proxies in Lebanon from causing trouble, threatening that, “If they don’t, we’ll hit Iran very hard again, just like we did last week, only harder!” However, the continued fighting led Iran to announce that it had closed the waterway even though Trump had warned, “You close it, and you won’t have a country!” Trump also said the US might be forced to “militarily complete the job” and if that happened, “The Islamic Republic of Iran would no longer exist”. Trump’s threats were counterproductive and led Iran to suspend talks.

The MOU Goes Up in Smoke

On 7 July Iran attacked three cargo ships which sailed close to the coast of Oman, contrary to Iran’s directions that all shipping in the Straight was required to follow Iran’s map. In response to that attack, the US launched attacks on more than 80 Iranian targets including its air defence systems, command and control networks, and antiship missile sites. The US also revoked its sanctions waiver on Iran which had allowed Tehran to sell oil - the only lifeline Iran had to sustain its economy.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) responded by launching retaliatory strikes on US military targets in Bahrain and Kuwait.

Trump responded saying the MOU was “effectively over”. In an angry tirade Trump referred to the Iranian leadership as “scum” adding, “They’re sick, there’s something wrong with them”. His remarks were grossly inappropriate, childish and plainly unhelpful. Iran’s Foreign Minister responded, “The US regime, having reneged on its commitments, bears responsibility for the dangerous consequences of this escalation”.^[iv]

Despite Trump’s insults and threats, there remained a glaring absence of any strategy, planning, direction or clear aim on the part of the US President.

Israeli Settlers

More than 700,000 Israeli settlers reside in the West Bank and East Jerusalem although most of the international community considers these settlements to be illegal. However, Israel’s far right Minister, Smotrich’s goal is to prevent the creation of a Palestinian state and Israel’s National Security Minister, Ben Gvir’s call to “burn all of Lebanon” has sparked international condemnation. In addition, Israel’s Defence Minister, Katz warned that Iran’s Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei (the son of Ali Khamenei who succeeded his father) was “marked for death”. These remarks did not serve Israel’s interests and if anything, have harmed its international standing, leading Iran’s Foreign Minister Araghchi to call on the US to “muzzle its pets in Tel Aviv” and prevent Israel from militarily threatening Iran.^[v]

Israel and its military campaign is becoming a defining issue for the US Democratic Party. A top Democrat, Adam Smith who described himself as a “strong supporter of Israel’s right to exist” was “critical of the Netanyahu government, especially its West Bank policies”. There is increasing international condemnation of the expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, including among members of the Republican Party.^[vi]

The Ali Khamenei Funeral

The first day of public morning for Ali Khamenei fell on 4 July 2026, coinciding with America’s celebration of the 250^th anniversary of its independence. As the coffin emerged in the square, the huge crowd erupted with cries for vengeance. Mourners chanted “Death to America and Death to Israel” and Iranian clerics were reported to have said that the killing of “The criminal American president” and “The wicked Prime Minister of the Zionist regime” was a religious duty, and “assassinating them must not be neglected under any circumstances”.^[vii] Iran and the US were due to resume peace talks after the six-day funeral ended but this was thrown into doubt by the ongoing attacks and counter attacks by both Iran and the US.

Conclusion

On 13 July 2026, Alexander Downer wrote in The Australian newspaper saying about Trump, “Drop the jaw-jaw and turn up the heat on the IRGC”. While Downer credited Trump for having the courage to take on Iran, Trump was unclear in articulating his war aims. He needs to make it clear that he would destroy Iran’s capacity to project power and would take action to terminate its nuclear weapons program. Downer criticised Trump for talking too much, saying his messages were “Contradictory and replete with exaggeration”. Trump needed to close the Strait of Hormuz to ensure a speedy and decisive military victory, not through an MOU but by the use of military might.

Downer reminded his readers that successful wartime leaders had shown a streak of ruthlessness in pursuit of victory and he mentioned, among others, Churchill and Roosevelt as well as Margaret Thatcher. Instead, Trump appeared hesitant and he lacked the necessary ruthlessness. Downer emphasized that the war had to be prosecuted with a clarity of aims and ruthless implementation to achieve its objectives.^[viii]

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

Subscribe now

^[i] Gemma Tognini, writing in The Australian – 27 June 2026

^[ii] Foreign Affairs, How to save the US-Israel alliance – 1 July 2026

^[iii] WSJ, Trump threat to militarily complete the job in Iran – 28 June 2026

^[iv] Al Jazeera, Iran-US strikes resume. What does it mean for peace – 8 July 2026

^[v] Times of Israel, If Trump’s Tel Aviv pets not controlled, Iran will school them -1 July 5, 2026

^[vi] Wall Street Journal (WSJ), Military Danger of anti-Israel Panic – 1 July 2026

^[vii] The Australian, Iran clerics call for assassination of Trump and Netanyahu – 1 July 5, 2026

^[viii] Downer is the longest serving Minister for Foreign Affairs in Australian history having held the portfolio for nearly 12 years from March 1996 to December 2007.

The 1950-1953 Korean War

Shortly after the end of World War II, the US initiated an arbitrary partition of Korea at the 38^th parallel. Although the leader of North Korea at the time, Kim Il Sung attempted to reunify the peninsula his attempts were defeated. The rift between the North and South became permanent after the 1950-1953 Korean War which ended in an armistice rather than a peace treaty, leaving the two sides technically at war, a situation which prevails to this day.

Today, North Korea (NK) condemns Washington’s missile sales to South Korea as “War exports” warning that this will deepen the existing tensions on the Korean peninsula. In the circumstances, the aim of NK is to eliminate those threats by strengthening its own defenses. NK portrays its military buildup as a response to pressure from Washington and describes its nuclear and missile program as essential deterrence against foreign interference.[i]

Xi Jinping visits North Korea

China’s leader, Xi Jinping visited Pyongyang in June 2026. It was Xi’s first foreign visit of the year, underscoring the growing convergence of China’s and NK’s interests. During Xi’s visit, Kim referred to ties with China as “The most important top priority” for NK, reaffirming Beijing as NK’s principal backer. In recent years, NK has also expanded its diplomatic profile through closer engagement with Russia, while revitalizing relations with China and also reaching out to the US. These events have inevitably elevated Pyongyang’s international recognition and standing.

Xi held the upper hand in his recent meetings with both Presidents Trump and Putin. However, with NK’s leader, Kim Jong Un (Kim) the stakes for Beijing are high due to three significant matters: Tokyo’s remilitarisation, the South Korean-US alliance, and Taiwan’s creep towards secession. China has only one formal defence treaty and that is with NK, making NK the neighbour which China can neither control nor afford to lose. However, Kim can also not afford to alienate his biggest source of aid. In 2025, China’s exports to NK surged to US$2.3 billion and in 2026 passenger train services between Beijing and Pyongyang restarted after a six year hiatus.[ii]

A Flourishing North Korea

North Korea’s economy is flourishing in ways not seen before. This has been aided by arms sales and troop deployments to Russia as well as supplies and financing from China. Visitors today describe NK as unrecognizable, especially in the capital, Pyongyang where Chinese electric vehicles whiz through the streets and car dealerships sell BMWs. The domestic production of cell phones has hit half a million per year and smartphones are widespread.

During the past year, NK has completed major construction projects, including Pyongyang’s largest hospital and a greenhouse complex which is larger than New York’s Central Park. Kim’s marquee initiative is the construction of new factories in 20 cities each year during the next 10 years. In April 2026, Kim toured Hwasong district, a new neighbourhood of skyscrapers where families of NK’s soldiers killed in Russia were given apartments. In May 2026, NK held its Spring International Trade Fair. More than 290 companies attended, including from Russia, China, Mongolia, Switzerland and Thailand. NK’s economic standing is the strongest it has been since Kim assumed power nearly 15 years ago.[iii]

Treaties With North Korea

In 1961, China and NK concluded a Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance which includes a requirement for each to provide the other with military and other assistance in the event of an armed attack against either of them. China renewed the Treaty in 2021.

In 2023, Kim visited Russia’s Far East to meet with President Putin, and in 2024 Putin visited Pyongyang. The two leaders signed the Russia-North Korea Comprehensive Strategic Partnership providing Kim with a second guarantor. Their mutual defence pact set the framework for NK’s deployment of 15,000 troops to fight Ukraine alongside Russia. One third of NK’s troops were killed or injured. NK also became a munitions supplier to Moscow, generating more than $10 billion between 2023 and 2025. In return, Russia supplied drone technology, air defence equipment, anti-aircraft missiles and electronic warfare systems to NK.[iv]

The relationship between NK and Russia makes China uncomfortable and motivates Xi Jinping to regain diplomatic lost ground and to reassert Beijing’s influence over Pyongyang. On Beijing’s Victory Day parade in September 2025, commemorating the 80^th anniversary of the surrender of Japan during World War II, Kim stood on the rostrum alongside both Xi and Putin.

North Korea - A Nuclear Power

NK has amassed 50 nuclear bombs and has stockpiled enough plutonium and highly enriched uranium to build 50 more. It has developed 20 different delivery systems including long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles which can reach targets in the United States. NK is also pursuing ballistic missiles which can be launched from nuclear submarines. NK can now flex its military power to help US adversaries such as Russia in Ukraine.

After the wars in Iraq, Libya and Iran, no one can seriously argue that NK lacks the right to be nuclear armed. Remember how the US falsely accused Saddam Hussein of developing weapons of mass destruction, leading to the execution of Hussein. After Gadhafi gave up his nuclear weapons, he was assassinated and most recently, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was bombed to smithereens over Iran’s nuclear program.[v]

The US has relied on economic sanctions to bring NK to the table and, in its dealings with NK the US has continued to repeat the same mantra – “With denuclearisation, all things are possible. Without it, nothing is possible.” Unsurprisingly, these approaches have failed although, until the end of the Biden administration in 2024, Washington continued to impose sanctions on NK.

Given the economic, political and military support NK receives from China and Russia, Pyongyang has fewer incentives to concede any more to Washington than it did when Trump last visited in 2019.[vi]

Trump’s Visits to North Korea

In 2018, Kim held a summit with the South Korean President Moon Jae-in (Moon). They shook hands across the Military Demarcation Line between their nations, with Kim referring to “An age of peace” and Moon declaring “There will never again be war on the Korean Peninsula”. There were talks of a possible reunification of North and South Korea as far back as 1950 but these were disrupted by the 1950 war. However, the 23^rd Winter Olympics were held in South Korea in 2018 when it was agreed that North and South would participate as a “Unified Team Korea”. It was promoted as the “Peace Games”, heralding the possibility of reconciliation and peace.

South Korea then informed then President Donald Trump that Kim wished to hold a summit with Trump which led to Kim and Trump meeting in 2018. That meeting ended with a joint statement suggesting that NK would work towards denuclearization. Three months later, Moon visited Pyongyang and the two Koreas agreed to cease military hostility and to engage in communication. Kim and Trump met again, in Vietnam in February 2019 but the meeting ended in deadlock setting back the hope of persuading the US to lift sanctions against NK.

Trump met with Kim for the third time in June 2019, this time at the Korean Demilitarised Zone where Trump was the first US president to step into NK. During discussions, Kim pledged to dismantle NK’s Yongbyon nuclear facility if the US agreed to lift sanctions on NK. However, Trump was stymied by the US deep state which demanded even more before NK would receive any benefits. This led to the breakdown of negotiations.

In 2020 Kim declared that while denuclearisation was not impossible, bilateral talks would depend upon the US withdrawal of hostility. However, at the start of 2024, NK abandoned the goal of reunification and Kim described South Korea as NK’s “Primary Foe”, having regard to its alliance with and support from the US.

North Korea Proving to be a Winner

NK is today ascendant in ways which could not have been predicted and Kim’s grip on power has never been stronger. In September 2025, Kim was beaming at a military parade in Beijing where he stood with Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin. NK’s trade with China had reached healthy pre-pandemic levels and Kim had been welcomed into a cohort of leaders who were countering US influence.

Kim has ramped up NK’s nuclear weapons program, and conducted over 100 missile tests between 2012 and 2019 including a hydrogen bomb in September 2017. In January 2021 Kim unveiled an ambitious five year defence plan to develop tactical nuclear weapons with super-sized nuclear warheads, hypersonic glide vehicles, nuclear powered submarines and uncrewed underwater vehicles.

In 2017 Kim and Trump were exchanging insults with Trump calling Kim “Little Rocket Man” while Kim called Trump “Mentally deranged”. However, in 2018 Kim and Trump stepped back from the brink and they engaged in their first summit.

The Possibility of Another Trump-Kim Meeting

Since again taking office, Trump has offered to meet Kim once more. Kim’s response was self-assured saying, “If the US drops its hollow obsession with denuclearisation and wants to pursue peaceful coexistence with North Korea, there is no reason for us not to sit down”. The argument could be that if Trump and Kim can achieve peace on the Korean Peninsula and bring an end to the Korean state of war which technically has persisted for more than 70 years, this could potentially result in stabilisation of the region.

Kim has honed the craft of juggling, flattering, threatening, and frustrating his neighbours. In the past, Washington offered sanctions relief and economic assistance to engage Pyongyang and to restrain NK’s actions. Now, if the US chooses to revive dialogue, it will have to offer even more.[vii]

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

Subscribe now

[i] RT, North Korea slams US war exports – 13 June 2026

[ii] BBC, Friendship or leverage: Why is Xi visiting North Korea? 9 June 2026

[iii] Wall Street Journal, World’s Most Surprising Economic Success Story – 7 June 2026

[iv] Asia Times, Kim played Russia, rattled China and won – 10 June 2026

[v] South China Morning Post, Kim Jong Un turned out to be the cleverest of them all – 12 June 2026

[vi] Foreign Affairs, North Korea as It Is, 21 April 2026

[vii] Asia Times, Xi’s visit puts a Trump-Kim Summit back in play, 8 June 2026

GERMANY

German Militarization

In an extensive analysis by Dmitry Medvedev (Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of the Russian Federation and former President of Russia), he refers to Germany under the leadership of Chancellor Friedrich Merz as aiming to “Revise the disappointing outcomes of World War II” with political leaders in Germany referring to the “virtual inevitability of a military clash with Russia by 2029”. The German government is working to transform the Bundeswehr into Europe’s strongest army, with plans to raise the strength of its active-duty servicemen and reservists from 181,000 to 460,000. With this and more, Germany’s pacifism has been cast aside.

Germany is also considering acquiring nuclear weapons aimed at “deterring Moscow’s aggressive policy in Europe”. According to Medvedev, “What Germany’s grandparents failed to accomplish in 1945, their grandchildren are determined to achieve in the 21^st century”.

For Medvedev, Russia’s main task is to prevent the repetition of the tragedy of 1941 by ensuring that Russia’s Armed Forces are kept in a state of permanent combat readiness. If the most dreadful scenario comes to pass, there is a real risk of mutual destruction and the end of European civilisation. Berlin has two options. The first is war while the second is a return to sobriety, accompanied by a fundamental reorientation of its foreign policy through dialogue.[i]

The Weimar Republic

The Weimar city which is near the former Buchenwald concentration camp is back in the news. The new crisis in Germany resembles that which engulfed the Weimar Republic a century ago. Under the 1919 Treaty of Versailles, Germany committed never to go to war although, on the political far-right there remained strong resentment against the Treaty. The Great Depression of 1929 led to a surge in unemployment and in January 1933, President Hindenburg appointed Adolf Hitler as Chancellor. Later that year Hitler was effectively granted new powers to act outside parliamentary control, bringing about the swift collapse of democracy and the creation of a one-party dictatorship. The Nazis governed Germany until the end of World War II in 1945.

Merz Loosing Support

Since taking office in May 2025, Chancellor Merz has accelerated Germany’s rearmament drive, pledging to make the “Bundeswehr Europe’s strongest” conventional army, citing “A growing Russian threat” which is dismissed by President Putin as “nonsense”. However, by April 2026 the disapproval rating of Merz had climbed to 76% with only 19% of Germans being satisfied with his performance. On 8 June 2026 several thousand demonstrators took to the streets of Berlin calling for the resignation of Merz carrying placards with slogans such as “Not my Chancellor” and “Merz must go”. In a recent public opinion survey, Merz was named as the world’s most unpopular political leader and senior figures in Germany are reported to be discussing the possible ousting of Merz due to his record-low approval ratings.[ii]

Despite Berlin’s insistence that it deserves a permanent seat on the UN Security Council (UNSC), for the first time in history, Germany failed on 3 June to win even a temporary seat on the UNSC, losing to Portugal and Austria, with the Alternative for Germany leader Alice Weidel saying that Merz had led Germany from “One embarrassment to the next”.

Despite the German Foreign Minister Wadephul saying that Germany’s support for Israel may have alienated many at the UN, Wadephul also said it was Germany’s “Historic responsibility” to atone for the Holocaust. However, in April 2026 Merz criticised the military conflict against Iran, led by the US and Israel, describing it as a “completely unnecessary war”. Attacks on Jews in Germany are today said to pervade the country with persistently high levels of anti-Semitism. The threat to Jewish life is described as “Worse than at any time since the Holocaust” while anti-Semitism is being increasingly normalised across German society. All this while Germany aims to transform the Bundeswehr into Europe’s strongest army.[iii]

JAPAN

The Sanae Takaichi Victory

Japan’s Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) leader, Sanae Takaichi was elected Prime Minister on 21 October 2025 becoming Japan’s first female leader. However, only three months into her tenure, she called a snap election with a view to securing a parliamentary majority to pass her legislative agenda. It was a gamble, but it paid off with the LDP securing a landslide victory on 8 February 2026 with 316 out of 465 seats (68%) giving Takaichi an outright majority. It was the first time since the Second World War that any party in Japan has won a two third majority in its own right.

Takaichi aims to reverse Article 9 of Japan’s postwar Constitution which allows only for self defence but not a traditional military. However, revising the postwar pacifist Constitution requires a two thirds approval in both chambers of the Diet, followed by ratification in a national referendum. Revising the Constitution remains difficult with the next Upper House election not due until 2028.[iv]

Japan’s Pacifist Constitution

For decades, Japan has adhered to a pacifist policy which was imposed by the victorious Allies after World War II. However, Takaichi is now embracing rearmament and re-militarisation and the West is actively encouraging the erosion of Japan’s post-war pacifist Constitution and its return to great power status. This is partly a consequence of what Japan sees as both “Chinese assertiveness” and waning confidence in America’s security guarantees.

In its largest military buildup since World War II, Japan is committed to almost doubling its defence budget from $35 billion to $60 million between 2022 and 2027. Japan is today developing a sixth generation stealth fighter jointly with Italy and the UK and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries is in the process of building a new hypersonic glide vehicle. This is remarkable having regard to Japan’s military history and Imperial Japan’s wartime atrocities involving massacres, forced labour and sexual slavery which has left deep scars across the region which reverberate to this day [v]

The China Threat

Sino-Japanese diplomatic ties began to deteriorate in November 2025 when Takaichi remarked that a possible Chinese attack on Taiwan could pose an “Existential threat” to Japan, allowing it to exercise the right to collective self-defense. Takaichi considers China to be the most disruptive threat and believes that Japan needs a broader coalition of partnerships across Asia and Europe with American power at the centre as the only viable way to counter China’s coercion. However, of greater concern for Takaichi is the deepening US-China relations bringing a weakening of the Trump administration’s engagement in East Asia.[vi]

China’s Colonel Chen Xi has described Japan’s accelerating re-militarisation as turning the country into a “powder keg”.

Resurgent Japan

The Yasukuni Shrine was founded in 1869 to honour those who died fighting for the Japanese Emperor and country. Today, Yasukuni is controversial as it also enshrines many convicted World War II criminals. Takaichi regularly pays respects at the shrine as does her defence Minister who is currently presiding over Japan’s re-militarisation which includes the possible development of nuclear weapons. While Germany has acknowledged its war guilt and made this part of its culture, Japan continues to deny its war guilt. A re-armed Japan could easily become a revanchist nation, seeking a return to its former glory and greatness.[vii]

Takaichi’s supporters say Japan needs a strong military to counter China and North Korea and Japan is no longer looking on from the sidelines but is increasingly willing to operate alongside Southeast Asian partners in the Indo-Pacific. China contends that this reflects a return to Japan’s World War II militarism when it committed horrendous crimes and inflicted untold suffering. China warns the international community to stay on high alert to prevent the rise of Japanese militarism.[viii]

Conclusion

Both Germany and Japan aim to shrug off their pacifist status. The rise of Germany with the aim of making the Bundeswehr Europe’s strongest conventional army, and of Japan’s Takaichi embracing rearmament and re-militarisation gives rise to the real risk of their bringing about the very consequences which they aim to avoid, namely another global war. That would be even more threatening should either or both become nuclear powers.

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

Subscribe now

[i] RT, Germany’s new militarisation: revival of blatant revanchism -7 May 2026

[ii] RT, Metz’s party mulls dumping him, 27 May 2026

[iii] Times of Israel, anti-Semitism in Germany worse than any time since the Holocaust – 22 May 2026

[iv] The Interpreter, Takaichi’s snap election delivers LDP landslide – 11 February 2026

[v] Foreign Affairs, Return of Japanese Hard Power – 5 May 2026

[vi] Nikkei Asia, Japan eyes bolstered defence of Pacific sea lanes – 17 April 2026

[vii] South China Morning Post, A resurgent Japan should scare everyone – 3 May 2026

[viii] CGTN, China urges high alert over Japanese neo-militarism 1 June 2026

Democracy is Not Perfect

As Winston Churchill famously said in 1947, “Democracy is the worst form of government except for all of those other forms which have been tried from time to time”. Clearly, this was not an unqualified endorsement. The Greek philosopher, Plato argued more than 2000 years ago that democracy meant ruling by the ignorant. Plato even suggested that democratic governance was conducive to mass ignorance, hysteria and tyranny. He believed that expertise was the critical attribute for a leader.

Writing in 1942, Joseph Schumpeter described democracy as a “Competition between teams of salesmen to get the voters to buy their product” and Cambridge University Professor, David Runciman suggests that contemporary democracy is “Tired, vindictive, self-deceiving and frequently ineffectual”.[i]

In a recent discussion, Hélène Landemore (Professor of Political Science at Yale University) described her approach to fixing Democracy saying, “The ideal of democracy is still very much alive but the implementation is failing over and over again”. Landemore suggested that electoral politics was the problem and the answer was to “get rid of elections altogether”! At the heart of her thinking is the suggestion of having “Citizens’ assemblies” made up of large groups of ordinary citizens, chosen at random to deliberate issues and to make recommendations. Surely, this would almost certainly lead to CHAOS![ii]

Arguably, a better approach, involving citizens in appropriate circumstances would be the use of referendums. There have been 23 referendums in Australia since 1945 including one on the Establishment of a Republic and another on the granting of a voice to Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islanders. Neither was successful. Only four have succeeded, including the inclusion of the Aboriginal people in the national census.

The Belief that Democracy Promotes Peace is a Myth.

Tufts University reports that the USA has undertaken more than 500 international military interventions since 1776 (250 years). The late President Jimmy Carter was not exaggerating when he said, “The US is the most warlike nation in the history of the world”.

In 1963, John F. Kennedy (having faced the real possibility of nuclear war) said, “Let us not be blind to our differences, but let us also direct attention to our common interests and to the means by which those differences can be resolved. In the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all cherish our children’s future and we are all mortal”.

However, the US targeted Afghanistan, Egypt, Iraq, Libya, and Syria thinking they could install democracies, friendly to the US. Instead, they brought killing and destruction, committing the US to endless wars. America also waged wars against communism in North Korea, killing one million Koreans and 400,000 Chinese, and in Vietnam, one million combatants and 365,000 civilians were killed.

Today, a multipolar world is rapidly emerging. Applying compromise, accommodation, and the recognition of alternative systems of government holds out the prospect of a safer, fairer and more peaceful world.

The Crumbling Pillars of Global Peace

For billions of people, the past 80 years has been a time of relative peace and rising prosperity. Peace has rested on two convictions, that wars of aggression are intolerable and empires must end. The first emerged from the carnage of two world wars which killed a hundred million people. The second came from centuries of colonial subjugation and the fight for self-determination. However, these two convictions are buckling. The great powers have engaged in wars of aggression. Russia has invaded Ukraine and the US has gone to war against Iran while nuclear powers are modernising and expanding. The standard explanation for this is said to be the collapse of the “rules-based international order” and Washington’s retreat from multilateral alliances and institutions.[iii]

Promoting Democracy

In December 2021, President Joe Biden welcomed more than 100 countries to his “Summit for Democracy”. However, even before Donald Trump was first elected President, the Economist Intelligence Unit had downgraded the US to the status of a “flawed democracy”. The truth is that effective governance is not the exclusive domain of democratic forms of government. There are scholars who argue that there is something functionally superior about meritocratic and even authoritarian regimes.

Biden referred to the STRUGGLE between “Democracy and Autocracy”. It need not be a struggle. BRICS is not ideologically driven and its members include democracies, a monarchy, a theocracy as well as “dictatorships”. Nevertheless, BRICS is today the key platform for moving the world towards multipolarity. In addition, there are 10 nations making up the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) where each has its own form of government. These include an Islamic Sultanate, a Monarchy, a One-party State, and a Socialist Communist State. Despite those differences, ASEAN is highly successful and its members pursue a culture of consultation and consensus leading to harmony, peace and prosperity.

China

Despite the West’s obsessive belief that China is a THREAT, China has no plan to overthrow democracy. In 2024 the Chinese leader Xi Jinping, referring to the USA and China said, “The two countries should be partners, not rivals; they should seek common ground instead of vicious competition. The earth is big enough for China and the United States to develop together and prosper independently”. During the May 2026 USA-China Summit in Beijing, Xi declared that “The great rejuvenation of the Chinese Nation and Making America Great Again can go hand-in-hand”.

According to John Keane (Professor of Politics at Sydney University), China is neither an autocracy nor a tyranny and the survival of its regime depends upon China retaining public support . Those who see China as a threat should recall that the US has more than 750 military bases and installations in more than 70 countries and spends more on its armed forces than the next 10 countries combined! China projects itself as meritocratic and its politicians rise on the basis of complex tests and experience which primarily value competence. China describes its system as “Democracy at the bottom, experimentation in the middle and meritocracy at the top”. Keane suggests that China is better described as a “One party dominated political system which nurtures experiments with a wide range of democratic tools”.[iv]

Although China’s top leaders are selected on merit, at the village level committees are elected by the villagers themselves. Singapore is also a meritocracy where the People’s Action Party (PAP) has governed without interruption since 1959. Singapore’s leaders are selected, not elected. Lee Kuan Yew (the founder of modern day Singapore) graduated with a double-first class honours degree from Cambridge University. His son who followed him as Prime Minister graduated from the same university, scoring 12 more alphas than his nearest competitor. Singapore places a high premium on top-class education.

As we recently wrote on this site, “China doesn’t care if you are Muslim, Jewish, Christian, Hindu or atheist. It doesn’t care if your government is democratic, theocratic or dictatorial. China doesn’t interfere with your elections, overthrow or stage coups against your government, kidnap your political leaders or sanction your country to the point of starving the population. It doesn’t operate hundreds of military bases around the world and does not invade other countries”.[v]

The Obsession with “Left Wing” and “Right Wing”

The concepts of “left-wing” and “right-wing” emerged during the French Revolution in 1789. It was based on the physical seating arrangements in the French National Assembly. Those to the rights of the presiding officer, primarily nobility and aristocrats were labelled “right-wing” and those seated to the left, primarily commoners were labelled “left-wing”. It is merely a system of classifying opposing political positions and is not about “Good v Evil”. A group could well take a left-wing position on one matter and a right wing position on another.

Today, Georgia Meloni leads the Brothers of Italy which is regarded as a right-wing coalition government with a fascist history although Meloni has largely normalised her government and strongly backs the European Union and NATO. The National Rally in France and the Alternative for Germany (AfD) are said to have undermined the European Union while aligning themselves with “autocratisation”. Two regional German elections are due in September where the Alternative for Germany currently leads the polls while France’s National Rally candidates are polling strongly France’s presidential election due in April 2027. Right-wing populists could soon acquire significant executive power in the EU’s two most influential countries.[vi]

Different Political Systems

One of the most common arguments in support of democracy is the ability of democracies to change their leaders by frequent elections. Although that may be true, one need only remember that Australia has had seven prime ministers in the 21^st century alone, John Howard, Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard, Tony Abbott, Malcolm Turnbull, Scott Morrison, and Anthony Albanese and the United Kingdom has had eight prime ministers this century, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, David Cameron, Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Liz truss, Rishi Sunak, and Sir Keir Starmer (who appears to be struggling). Bear in mind, the switch in the US from Obama to Trump, then from Trump to Biden and back again to Trump! Australia and its closest allies can hardly be considered as shining examples of effective or stable democracies.

Merely because nations pursue different political systems, does not justify hostility by any one state against another. Sovereignty requires that every state has the right to determine its own system of government and no outside power has the right to impose its views on another state.

The Blending of Democracy and Meritocracy

Western obsession with ideological differences detracts from the real issue of providing “Good and effective government for the people”. Daniel Bell analyses the merits and flaws of both Electoral Democracies and Political Meritocracies and suggests that democracies can learn from meritocratic practices while autocracies can learn from democratic practices. Singapore and China are examples of political meritocracies which strongly favour high standards of education. Strangely, in the most important role of all namely, the leadership of a nation, most democracies do not require any qualifications at all![vii]

John Keane suggests it is possible for Democracy and Meritocracy to be successfully blended. That would require that political leaders be elected by the people, but candidates should only be permitted to stand for election if they are suitably qualified and have the necessary expertise and experience. A diversity of education, talent and experience is needed. In that case, the risk of incompetent leadership would be minimised.

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

Subscribe now

[i] How Democracy Ends by David Runciman, 2018

[ii] Foreign Policy, How to Fix Democracy, 18 March 26

[iii] Foreign Affairs, The crumbling pillars of Global Peace – 21 May 2026

[iv] When Trees Fall Monkeys Scatter by John Keane 2018

[v] South China Morning Post, China is the ultimate win-win country, 11 Feb 2026

[vi] The Conversation, The follower right is surging in France, Germany and parts of Europe 22 May 2026

[vii] The China Model by Daniel Bell, 2016

US President Trump met with the Chinese leader, President Xi Jinping in Beijing 13-15 May 2026, followed only days later by a visit from the Russian President Vladimir Putin 19-20 May, also in Beijing. Since the beginning of 2026, China has seen many top foreign statesmen including from South Korea, Britain, Canada and Spain.

The Trump-Xi Summit

Trump was the first US president to visit the Chinese capital in almost a decade. The Chinese President Xi was a gracious host, declaring that “The great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation and making America great again can go hand-in-hand”. In his opening remarks, Xi called on the US to be “partners, not rivals”. The subtle message by Xi was that China and the US were the principal global powers and shared responsibility for global peace and prosperity. Xi said he looked forward to working with Trump to steer the giant ship of China-US relations so as to make 2026 a landmark year, opening up a new chapter in bilateral relations. Much of the reporting was about China as an equal with President Trump saying, “The relationship between China and the USA is going better than ever before”.

With regard to Iran, the Chinese Foreign Ministry remarked that dialogue and negotiation was the only way forward, but the “use of force was a dead end”. Trump acknowledged China’s growing stature and he referred to the US-China partnership as the “G2”, implicitly recognising China as Washington’s only true peer. He also suggested that he and Xi saw eye to eye on Iran, noting that Beijing agreed that traffic through the Strait of Hormuz should be free and that Tehran should never get a nuclear weapon.

Although Trump said, “We’ve made some fantastic trade deals, great for both countries”, the visit did not produce many concrete results although the leaders discussed the formation of a Board of Trade and a Board of Investment to oversee commerce between the two countries. Beijing agreed to purchase 200 Boeing aircraft from the US and China’s Ministry of Commerce reported that the US had agreed to sell aircraft, aircraft engines and aircraft components to China.

Taiwan

Xi described Taiwan as “The most important issue in China-US relations” saying that if handled poorly this could lead to conflict. In 1971, the UN Gen Assembly adopted resolution 2758 by an overwhelming majority, affirming that the People’s Republic of China was the sole government representing the whole of China, including Taiwan and in 1979, the US acknowledged that there was only one China and declared that it would end formal political relations with Taiwan. Nevertheless, since the 1980s, the US has adopted a policy of “strategic ambiguity” in relation to Taiwan.

Trump warned Taiwan against declaring formal independence, but its Foreign Ministry claimed that Taiwan was a “Sovereign and independent democratic nation, and was not subordinate to the People’s Republic of China”. Trump declined to discuss whether the US would defend Taiwan even though the US is ambiguous as to whether US forces would come to Taiwan’s aid. Further, Trump has delayed approval of an arms package for Taiwan worth US$14 billion.

The Taiwanese opposition KMT leader, Cheng Li-wun recently concluded a successful meeting with Chinese President Xi in Beijing and she is scheduled to visit the US in June 2026. She plans to present a new direction for cross-strait relations which she said would also align with US interests. Her trip is expected to last for about 10 days.

The Thucydides Trap

In a report published in CGTN on 15 May, drawing on views expressed by a range of world leaders and university professors from both China and the United States, Xi asked “Can China and the United States overcome the Thucydides Trap and create a new paradigm of major-country relations”. The Thucydides Trap refers to the theory that conflict often erupts when a rising power challenges an established power. However, according to Xi strategic competition between Beijing and Washington did not need to end in confrontation. It was that message in particular which shaped the tone of Trump’s visit.

The two leaders agreed to build a “Constructive China-US relationship of strategic stability”. The emphasis was not on eliminating competition but on preventing rivalry from overwhelming their relationship. Both recognised that “stability itself had become a shared strategic interest” and they agreed to strengthen communication and coordination on international and regional issues.

Stability Without Confrontation

The US-China talks were seen as a significant step towards stabilising relations amid growing global uncertainty. The meeting aimed to send a signal of stability to the world and to demonstrate that competition between China and the US had not escalated into confrontation. Both leaders agreed to pursue win-win outcomes contributing to global stability and peace and both hailed a reset in relations, recognising that their shared desire for stable relations was an important change after years of antagonism.

Although the most pressing issues between the US and China remain unresolved, both sides portrayed their meeting as positive with Trump saying his trip had been “Very successful” while Xi described it as an “Historic landmark” visit. Trump concluded his visit by inviting Xi to visit the White House in September 2026 and Beijing confirmed that the Chinese leader would visit the US.

The Putin-Xi Summit

The tone of, and the reporting on the Xi-Putin summit could not have been more different. Putin and Xi Jinping have met many times including nine face-to-face meetings since the start of the Ukraine war in 2022. They signed a joint declaration on strengthening the Russia-China comprehensive strategic partnership and pledging to expand military, technological, trade, and economic cooperation. Russia and China also signed some 20 agreements.

Multipolarity

Xi and Putin adopted a declaration on global multipolarity, calling for a new model of international relations based on equality, mutual respect and mutually beneficial cooperation. For them, the greatest misunderstanding about multipolarity is the belief that it means the destruction of the West. However, in reality it may represent the only path towards Western renewal. Their summit symbolised the accelerating transition from a world organised around ideological uniformity to one grounded in civilisational plurality. They called on the international community to uphold key principles in promoting an equal and orderly multipolar world, building a new kind of international relations, including a more just and equitable global governance system.

Xi and Putin also committed to the building of a new global order aimed at challenging the dominance of the US. China and Russia issued two joint statements. One statement focused on strengthening strategic coordination, deepening good neighbourliness and friendly cooperation. The other pledged joint efforts to advance a more just and equitable world order.

Russia and China dominate the core of Eurasia, the largest landmass on Earth. Their shared border stretches further than any other in the world. Russia and China are also nuclear powers and permanent members of the UN Security Council. Xi underscored efforts to firmly safeguard the post-war international order and the authority of international law, as well as efforts to unite the Global South and guide the reform of the system of global governance in the right direction.

Conclusion

There was little of a contestable nature in the China-Russia summit, recognising that The China-Russia Treaty of Good-Neighbourliness and Friendly Cooperation has reached its 25^th anniversary.

However, at the China-US summit there was much more at stake. Washington and Beijing were beginning to recognise that neither side could force the other into submission and in the new G2 world neither could dominate the other. While the US remains the world’s military power- house, China can push back in the Western Pacific so that conditions are in place for a more stable coexistence.

The US possesses powerful naval and air forces while China has significantly increased its missile, naval, air, and surveillance capabilities. If China were to blockade Taiwan the question would no longer be whether the US would choose to come to its defence, but whether it could do so at an acceptable cost. Each side is strong enough to deny the other’s ability to exert control.

China can restrict exports of rare earths and critical minerals which the US needs to produce semiconductors, advanced weapons and other high-tech products while the US can, and it has imposed sweeping semiconductor controls on China slowing China’s access to advanced computing chips.

Taiwan is the most difficult challenge. Beijing sees unification as a core element of its sovereignty while Washington sees Taiwan as a test of US credibility as a security guarantor. The Taiwanese President has recently described China as a “Foreign hostile force” but in April 2026 when Cheng, the KMT leader met with Xi she commented that both sides were “Chinese and one family”. The US and China could provide reassurances. Washington could reaffirm that it does not support Taiwan’s independence while Beijing could reiterate its commitment to a peaceful solution.

In their meeting, Trump treated Xi as the leader of a peer power, displaying respect, restraint and reciprocity. However, in America any move to create a more stable relationship with China is frequently attacked as “weakness and appeasement”. Nevertheless, Trump’s approach allowed him to move towards reconciliation with Beijing.

The summit did not resolve US-Chinese rivalry but it did allow for a new phase of coexistence involving a constructive relationship and strategic stability.

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

Subscribe now

Shortly before the Farrer election, Pauline Hanson arrived at Albury airport on her private plane gifted to her by Gina Rinehart, saying confidently “Change is on the way”. David Farley as well as the One Nation chief of staff James Ashby and Hanson’s parliamentary team were all in attendance for her arrival.

On 9 May, One Nation took Farrer, the seat of former Liberal leader Sussan Ley with a swing of more than 30%, reducing the Coalition vote to rubble. Farrer had been held by the Liberals for 77 years. After the election Hanson remarked, “We’re taking our country back”. One Nation had won its first House of Representatives seat in its 29 year history with David Farley becoming the first One Nation candidate to win a seat in the House of Representatives for more than 20 years[ii].

The Farrer result was a political earthquake. Hanson’s appeal is highly personal and even her opponents concede her ability to tap into a sentiment that has long been ignored. This win was only two months after One Nation had won a swag of seats in the South Australian state election. Barnaby Joyce remarked that the Australian people had not just spoken, they had “roared” adding, “Western Sydney, here we come”. Hanson’s sights were set on ousting Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen and Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke from their Sydney electorates saying, “That would be a good start to get this country on track”.[iii]

What Makes Pauline Hanson Tick

Hanson speaks for many Australians who believe that politicians have become deaf to their concerns but, not One Nation. For years much of the political class has regarded Hanson’s concerns about immigration, national cohesion and energy security as unworthy of serious debate but, NO More! She has come in for criticism in the past for alleged racist attitudes. However, in commentary by Greg Sheridan in The Australian on 12 May, he wrote, “One Nation has moderated over the years. It is certainly no longer racist, if it ever was”.

In February 2026, Hanson organised a visa for a 16 year old in Lebanon who was told by doctors that she had an inoperable brain tumour. However, a specialist at Westmead Children’s Hospital in Sydney saw the scans and said there was a good chance they could save the girl’s life. Her uncle contacted Hanson after Australia’s Department of Home Affairs rejected three applications to bring her to Australia for surgery. The department was concerned the girl and her mother would remain in the country but Hanson guaranteed that following surgery, she would personally take the girl to the airport and put her on a plane back to Lebanon.[iv]

As Janet Albrechtsen said, “Hanson is direct, authentic and even after three decades in politics, is refreshingly unpolished”! In 2003 Hanson spent three months in prison for electoral fraud, but was subsequently found to have been wrongly convicted and was soon set free. The wrongful conviction followed a hounding by the Liberal Party, led by Tony Abbott. That experience gave her a direct and personal understanding of struggling average Australians. It is not surprising that she believes passionately that even those who have been convicted of crimes deserve a shot at redemption. Today, many Australians think One Nation, rather than mainstream parties speak their language.

Kristallnacht [The Night of Broken Glass]

Having recently watched the performance at the Sydney Opera House of The Happiest Man on Earth and having then read the memoir of the same name by Eddie Jaku at the age of 100 years, it is impossible to ignore similarities in Australia with Kristallnacht, a massive Jewish pogrom across Nazi Germany on 9-10 November 1938 when hundreds of synagogues were burned, Jewish businesses destroyed and thousands of Jews were assaulted.

Only days ago, the Editorial Board of The Wall Street Journal published a paper entitled The Truth about Hamas. The article was republished in The Australian paper on 16 May. It is the most graphic, the most horrifying description of what happened at the Nova Festival on 7 October 2023. The article is attached at the end of this paper.

As Hanson warned, Labor’s politically motivated coddling of Islamic extremism was complicit in the rise of the anti-Semitism which led to the atrocity at Bondi Beach on 14 December 2025. It was reminiscent of the kind of horror German Jews experienced in the 1930s.

The Government’s Failure to Act

The public response in Sydney to the October 7 attack in Israel began with Islamist celebrations the very next day even while Israel was still in the grip of the Hamas horror. Pleas for a strong response from Albanese fell on deaf ears allowing the Islamist-inspired anti-Semitism to flourish. In Lakemba the slaughter of Jews was celebrated as a “day of victory”. Instead of action, the government tacitly permitted the demonisation of Israel.

When the monstrous protests at the Sydney Opera House occurred, Islamist protesters chanted “F...k the Jews” and “Gas the Jews”. No charges and no prosecutions were laid or even attempted. The Prime Minister seemed to hope it would all just go away and relieve him of electoral challenges in crucial seats which had large Muslim populations. It was an appalling act of prime ministerial neglect. In Australia, cars were firebombed, there was anti-Jewish graffiti at shops, schools and homes and eventually a synagogue was burned to the ground in Melbourne. The government failed to act.

On 11 December the author, Chris Kenny wrote, “Anti-Semitism remains a huge challenge for this country” adding that “The Albanese government is either complicit or asleep at the wheel”. Four nights later Bondi experienced the worst imaginable terror attack and the slaughter of 15 innocent Jewish people.[v]

A former NSW Crime official suggested that anti-Semitism in Australia and the protests following October 7 “Set the tone for a permissive environment in which glorifying violence was accepted”. Immediately following the violent attack by Hamas on Israeli citizens, including women and children, a sickening display of anti-Semitic hatred took place at the Sydney Opera House to which Prime Minister Albanese meekly responded saying, “We should not celebrate such killing”!

Previously, on 3 August 2025, tens of thousands turned out for a protest march across the Sydney Harbour Bridge, organised by the Palestine Action Group, and led by well-known Sydney identities including the former Premier of New South Wales, Bob Carr and Julian Assange.

The Royal Commission

The December 2025 Bondi Beach shooting brought the issue of Jew hatred firmly into public consciousness leading to calls for a Royal Commission but, this was resisted by the Prime Minister. What followed was a lengthy period of public pressure urging the government to reconsider. The Royal Commission was eventually launched allowing accounts to be heard of harassment, threats and fear experienced by members of the Jewish community.

More than 5,000 submissions have thus far been received including more than 1,000 from non-Jewish Australians. Witnesses spoke of their experience as being very confronting but they acknowledged that truth telling was essential. However, some who gave evidence at the Royal Commission expressed doubt as to whether the Commission’s recommendations would be enough to stem the surge of anti-Semitism while others expressed uncertainty as to whether they could see a future for Jews in Australia.[vi]

The Royal Commission is reminiscent of The Truth and Reconciliation Commission which was established in 1995, in South Africa to uncover the truth about human rights violations during the apartheid era. Victims were invited to share their stories through public hearings. The objective of that Commission were described as, “To promote national unity and reconciliation in a spirit of understanding which transcends the conflicts and divisions of the past”. There are obvious similarities with the objective in Australia of bringing about “social cohesion”. [vii]

However, in the absence of strong leadership, real conviction and a willingness to bring effective legislation into force so as to stop the ongoing violence against Jewish Australians, it seems unlikely that the Royal Commission will bring an end to surging anti-Semitism in this country.

In a report by journalist Julie Szego, she describes how witnesses have accused the ABC and The Sydney Morning Herald/The Age of biased reporting which contributed to a climate of anti-Jewish hatred and the libel that Israel was “genocidal”. The newspaper reported that “The world’s largest academic group of genocide scholars has resolved that the legal criteria had been met to establish that Israel was committing genocide in Gaza”. However, the report failed to say that more than 500 genocide scholars had signed a letter objecting to the resolution and demanding its immediate retraction.

Szego acknowledges that the Gaza war was horrible and imperfectly prosecuted but it was a war in which Israel was forced to fight a fanatical enemy whose chief weapon was its willingness to sacrifice tens of thousands of its own civilians and she adds, “Show me an existential war that is perfectly prosecuted”. [viii]

Although ASIO (Australian Security Intelligence Organisation) has for years been saying that the primary threat to the Jewish community was from radical Islam, the Australian government has been unwilling to do anything about it.[ix]

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

_________________________________________

[i] Bob Dylan 1964

[ii] The Australian, Dancin’ Hanson - One Nation’s landslide -10 May 2026

[iii] Sydney Morning Herald, Farley wins but Hanson is One Nation’s dancing Queen – 9 May 2026

[iv] The Australian, Why Pauline Hanson’s influence has never been stronger -18 April 2026

[v] The Australian, Government failure to act fanned the flames, by Chris Kenny 28 Feb 2026

[vi] Times of Israel, Chilling testimony – can the enquiry bring change -8 May 2026

[vii] Desmond Tutu, A Spiritual Biography - 2021

[viii] The Australian, My fear: It’s too late to solve Jew-hate now – 9 May 2026

[ix] Sky News, Radical Islamic elephant in the room, failure to confront extreme ideology 1 May 11, 2026

Subscribe now

____________________________________________________________________________________________

The Truth About Hamas

WSJ Editorial Board 15 May 2026

Reading “Silenced No More,” the new report by the Civil Commission on October 7th Crimes by Hamas Against Women and Children, we were transported back to October 27, 2023, and a screening of the raw footage of Hamas’s atrocities. The mouths of journalists were agape, but time dulls horrific reality.

The new report is a catalogue, for memory’s sake, of Hamas depravity. Testimony from site after site attests to rape and assault. Screams and pleas. Gunshots to the face and genitals. Mutilation. Burning. Bodies naked, legs spread. Grotesque scenes staged. All forming an evidentiary record, the result of more than 10,000 photos and video segments and more than 430 interviews, testimonies and meetings with survivors, witnesses and experts.

“I saw them raping her,” says Raz Cohen, who escaped the Nova Music Festival where 396 people were slaughtered. “Then they murdered her. And then they raped her again.”

Eden Wessely, who came to Nova to rescue a friend, found and filmed a naked, burned body. “Her dress was pulled up, and she wasn’t wearing underwear, not because it burned, because there was no trace … Her legs were spread. Her genitals were exposed.” A review by forensic pathologists confirmed these details.

00:03 / 09:56

Yoni Saadon recounts another horror: “She fell to the ground, shot in the head, and I pulled her body over me and smeared her blood on me so it would look as if I was dead too … I will never forget her face. Every night I wake to it and apologise to her, saying ‘I’m sorry.’” Later he saw “a beautiful woman with the face of an angel and 8 or 10 fighters beating and raping her.” The last one shot her in the head. Each example here is of a civilian non-combatant.

A male says he was gang-raped at the Nova site, providing medical records and a detailed account: “They laughed, they were really pleased, as if I was their sex doll.” The Hamas invaders had been given operational materials including Arabic-to-Hebrew phrase lists such as “take off your pants/take your clothes off,” “lie down” and “spread your legs.” The planned sexual degradation speaks to years of Palestinian propaganda that treats Jews as sub-human.

Sexual abuse continued for hostages, who are on video being groped and humiliated during abductions. In one video, a female hostage begs for her life while the narrator says, “This is one of the Jewish dogs.”

Former hostage Ilana Gritzewsky says, “one terrorist started touching me; he put his hand under my shirt and started sliding it down my leg. That’s when I fainted.” On waking, she was “surrounded by Hamas people, my shirt up here, my pants down here.” After being freed, she learned they had broken her pelvis.

Romi Gonen tells of 16 days of assault. Arbel Yehud says she was assaulted throughout her 482 days as a hostage. Two former hostages, minors who are family members, “reported that they were forced to perform ‘sexual acts on one another.’”

We regret having to relate such details, but it is crucial to remember when the understandable human impulse is to forget such horrors. All the more so because the sexual violence by Hamas has been aggressively denied by an antisemitic global left that wants us to forget. Everywhere denial serves the same purpose: to distort Israel’s defensive war as if it were wanton violence. Such deniers prefer anything to reminding the world why Israel has no choice but to fight for its life.

The Thirty Year War (1618-1648) began in Prague, Bohemia (now, the Czech Republic) and eventually concluded with the Peace of Westphalia. World War I began in Sarajevo, Bosnia in June 1914 with the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, leading to Austria-Hungary declaring war on Serbia the following month. World War II began in September 1939 when Germany invaded Poland.

All three wars commenced, and were primarily conducted in Europe.

Germany

After defeating Germany in World War I, the Allied powers forced Germany to disarm with the Treaty of Versailles. Margaret Thatcher later opposed German reunification, warning that this “Would undermine the stability of the whole international situation and could endanger our security”.[i]

In 2024 the NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte declared that Germany’s military must “spend more and produce more” and in February 2026 the German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said the EU needed to rapidly rearm. He pointed to Russia’s “Violent revisionism” and China’s desire to be “A leader in shaping the world”. Germany’s Defence Minister Boris Pistorius announced, “We are transforming the Bundeswehr into Europe’s strongest conventional army”. Germany plans $1 trillion worth of new defence projects to be completed by 2035 including an increase of combat manpower from 200,000 to 460,000. German officials have set 2029 as the deadline for the Bundeswehr to be “war-ready” for a potential conflict with Russia .[ii]

Nevertheless, Merz recently said that Ukraine may have to accept territorial losses in a future peace deal with Russia to keep its EU membership hopes alive. However, Zelensky rejects the idea of accepting territorial losses while Moscow has repeatedly stressed that peace must include the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from those parts of Donbass which remain under Kiev’s control. Moscow has also said it would not oppose Ukraine joining the EU in those circumstances.[iii]

Japan’s New Militarism

The Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi is focused on freeing Tokyo from the yoke of its 1947 pacifist Constitution which bars Japan from fielding a conventional military. She is expected to target Article 9 which renounces war and bars Tokyo from using force in international disputes.

Japan’s government has also lifted restrictions on lethal arms sales imposed under the 1947 Constitution to enable it to sell arms to countries with which Tokyo has defensive agreements. These developments all point to a growing trend of “new militarism” in Japan although Takaichi has said, “There is absolutely no change in our commitment to upholding the path and fundamental principles we have followed as a peace-loving nation for over 80 years”![iv]

The WWII Axis of Fascism is Reforming

Japan and Germany are emerging after 80 years to become fully armed and active. While the German Chancellor positions his country as the central bulwark against Russian invasion, Japan’s Prime Minister positions her country as Asia’s central point of resistance against China. Both Germany and Japan have committed to substantially increasing their defence spending.

While Merz has denounced US President Trump, Takaichi has embraced him. It now appears that the one-time axis of fascism may be emerging as an axis of freedom![v]

There is, however, a countervailing argument. The Yasukuni Shrine in Tokyo commemorates those who died in the service of Japan, including during WWII with every Japanese leader paying their respects at the shrine. Imagine if the Germans included the names of Nazi leaders in a permanent memorial in the heart of Berlin to commemorate its war dead. However, Germany has fully acknowledged its war guilt whereas Japan has never done so. A rearmed Japan could potentially become a “revanchist” nation.[vi]

The Non-Proliferation Treaty

The 1970 Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Treaty (NPT) guarantees signatories the right to peaceful use of nuclear technology in exchange for signatories accepting the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA’s) controls to prevent weaponization. However, the last remaining agreement constraining Russia and US lapsed in February 2026 and every nuclear armed state is currently investing in modernizing its arsenal. These developments have brought the Doomsday Clock closer to midnight than ever before.[vii]

There are 190 members of the NPT including the five countries which exploded nuclear weapons before 1967 – China, France, Russia, the UK, and the US. North Korea joined the NPT but later renounced membership. India, Israel and Pakistan have never joined. The NPT entered into force in 1970, initially for a period of 25 years until 1995. In 1995 the NPT was indefinitely extended and there have since been reviews every five years.

Members agreed in 2000 on practical steps to progress nuclear disarmament. However, nuclear armed states have not only failed to disarm but they are growing, modernizing and threatening to use their arsenals.

The only safe and sustainable future is predicated on the elimination of nuclear weapons, but this can only be achieved through cooperation, negotiation and international law, backed up by verification.[viii]

Iran’s Nuclear Threat

There are deep divisions between the US and Iran over Iran’s nuclear program. While the US has focused on the uranium enrichment path to nuclear weapons it has largely ignored plutonium although plutonium is the preferred route to nuclear weapons by countries such as Iraq and North Korea and there are estimates that Iran has enough plutonium to make more than 200 nuclear weapons. The former White House national security adviser, John Bolton contends that there is no justification for any Iran deal which does not eliminate both plutonium and enriched uranium options and he argues that regime change is the only long-term solution to prevent renewed Iranian nuclear proliferation.[ix]

In June 2025, the US and Israel struck Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities claiming that the 12-day bombing campaign had ended Iran’s nuclear weapons program. However, according to the head of the International Energy Agency, 440 pounds of enriched uranium remain in a tunnel at the Isfahan complex in Iran. Iran’s nuclear program was a primary reason why the US launched strikes on Iran in late February 2026 and it continues to be a major roadblock in peace negotiations. Tehran insists that its nuclear program is for civilian use only and has demanded the right to continue enriching while Washington maintains that any peace deal must include heavy restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program but, Iran is now believed to be only weeks away from building the bomb.[x]

Chernobyl

The Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant (CNPP) was built in the 1970s on the banks of the Pripyat River near the city of Chernobyl in Ukraine. A city sprang up around the plant with a population of 50,000 who were mainly CNPP personnel and their families.

Water was continuously pumped into the Chernobyl reactor core where it boiled and turned into steam driving the turbines and converting thermal energy into electricity. An experiment was scheduled for 25 April 1986 when operators planned to shut down the pumps which supplied water. However, the reactor core overheated uncontrollably, leading to a chain reaction which cut off the water supply so that the reactor’s water system ruptured. The 130 ton separator drums flew off their mounts and the 500 ton reactor roof was blown off. Nuclear fuel shot into the atmosphere. The amount of radioactive material which escaped was equivalent to 10 Hiroshima bombings.

Many died from radiation sickness. Pripyat was evacuated. The CNPP was bombarded by helicopters to slow down the spread of radioactive particles but the helicopter pilots received lethal radiation doses and those working around the plant continued to receive high doses of radiation. The effects of radiation exposure lingered for decades. Tens of thousands may have died of radiation related illnesses.[xi]

AI Concerns in Addition to Nuclear Threats

Washington and Beijing are concerned that AI competition could become the arms race of the digital era. The rush to produce more powerful AI models could trigger a crisis which neither Washington nor China could manage. This has given rise to suggestions for an AI hotline for crisis communication. In 2024, following earlier discussions between Biden and Xi it was agreed that humans, not AI would retain authority over nuclear-launch decisions.

When Henry Kissinger met with Xi in 2023 he requested AI to be on the agenda, believing that the two sides might reach a mutual understanding regarding AI issues. That conversation has since become a continuing channel for AI discussions which have focused on safety and how to design guardrails to ensure AI models would comply with human laws and intentions.[xii]

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

Subscribe now

[i] Foreign Affairs – Europe’s Next Hegemon – 6 February 2026

[ii] Asia Times – Merz rearming Germany – 24 April 2026

[iii] RT – Ukraine may have to cede territory – Merz, 27 April 2026

[iv] Asia Times – Takaichi chooses guns over butter, 21 February 2026

[v] Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) Germany and Japan threatened Democracy, now saving it, 5 May 2026

[vi] South China Morning Post – a resurgent Japan should scare everyone, 3 May 2026

[vii] RT – Chernobyl 2.0: Where nuclear disaster could happen next, 25 April 2026

[viii] The Conversation – Only one way to stop a new nuclear arms race, 27 April 2026

[ix] Wall Street Journal (WSJ) – Negotiation won’t end Iran’s Nuclear threat, 29 April 2026

[x] Foreign Policy – 440 Pounds -30 April 2026

[xi] RT -40 Years after Chernobyl 27 April 2026

[xii] WSJ, US and China to pursue guardrails to prevent AI crisis, 6 May 2026

Taiwan was annexed by China’s Qing Dynasty in 1683 but was ceded to the Japanese Empire in 1895 after the Qing was defeated in the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-95. However, after Japan’s defeat in October 1945 it renounced all claims to Taiwan. The Chinese Civil War which ended in 1949 was fought between the Kuomintang (KMT) led by Chiang Kai-shek and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) led by Mao Zedong. The war resulted in the defeat of the KMT which retreated to Taiwan. The Communists founded the People’s Republic of China (PRC) on 1 October 1949. The victorious CCP considers the PRC to be the sole government of China, including Taiwan. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was inaugurated in 1986.

UN Recognition of China

In1971, the United Nations General Assembly adopted resolution 2758 by an overwhelming majority and affirmed that the PRC was the sole government representing the whole of China, including Taiwan. In the following year Australia also recognised the PRC as the sole legal government of China. Taiwan maintained official relations with only 14 (later reduced to 12) out of 193 UN member states. The US acknowledged that there was only one China and in 1979, declared that it would end formal political relations with Taiwan. However, since the 1980s, the US has adopted a policy of “strategic ambiguity” in relation to Taiwan.

In 2000 the DPP nominee was elected as Taiwan’s first non-KMT President but, in 2008 the KMT won the presidency while campaigning for better ties with the PRC. However, in 2016, the DPP’s Tsai Ing-wen became president of Taiwan and pursued independence from China. In 2020, the DPP again won a majority with 54% of the vote although the KMT was not irrelevant having won 34% of the vote.

In October 2021, China’s President Xi Jinping proclaimed that Chinese unification was a historical mission and although China reserved the right to use force, it would strive to achieve “Peaceful Reunification”. However, although nearly all nations recognised Beijing as the sole representative of China, then US President Joe Biden said the US had a “sacred commitment” to come to Taiwan’s defence in the event of an attack by China. The White House immediately announced that there was no change in the US China policy and the US would continue to pursue “strategic ambiguity”.

Australia’s Role in Taiwan

In 2021, Australia’s Defence Minister, Peter Dutton announced that if the US committed forces to defend Taiwan, it would be “inconceivable” that Australia would not join in the military action. China’s Global Times responded that if so, “It is unimaginable that China won’t carry out a heavy attack on Australia”. The big question for then Prime Minister Morrison and Defence Minister Dutton was how committing forces to support America in a conflict with China was somehow in “Australia’s national interest” and how much blood and treasure would Australia be prepared to sacrifice? The 2021 AUKUS nuclear submarine pact, secretly brought about by Morrison was seen as a major component of any US-led pushback against China. When Australia’s Labor Party came to power in 2022, it adopted Morrison’s AUKUS deal and the newly appointed Defence Minister Marles stated that in the event of a conflict over Taiwan, Australia could not be a passive bystander.

The New KMT Leader Visits China

Cheng Li-wun was elected chairperson of the KMT in October 2025 taking up her role in November that year. She subsequently accepted an invitation from Xi Jinping to visit China. She planned to lead a 14 member delegation to China on a six-day visit from 7 April 2026, saying that the visit could be a “foundation” for peaceful relations across the Taiwan Strait. Cheng’s visit marks the first time in a decade that a KMT leader has led a delegation to the Chinese mainland. She hoped to make the Taiwan Strait “safe” instead of being seen as one of the world’s “most dangerous places”. Cheng’s visit took place before President Trump’s postponed meeting with Xi Jinping, expected to take place in May 2026.

Ahead of her departure, Cheng observed that “Preserving peace is preserving Taiwan”. However, she acknowledged that any comprehensive reopening of cross-Strait relations would depend upon the KMT returning to power which would have to wait until 2028, confidently adding, “When our party is back in government”.[i]

Cheng Meets with Xi

Cheng met with Chinese President Xi on 10 April. Xi spoke of compatriots on both sides of the Strait and of strengthening exchanges and dialogue on the basis of adhering to the 1992 Consensus. The 1992 Consensus is an unwritten understanding between the CCP and the KMT representing a foundation for cross-Strait dialogue and generally meaning that both sides agreed that there is only “One China”. Xi who regards the DPP President as a dangerous separatist and has said that he did not rule out the use of force to unify the island with mainland China, stressed that Beijing would “absolutely not tolerate” any independence efforts by Taiwan.

The Xi-Cheng meeting demonstrated at home and abroad that it was possible for China to realise its dream of peaceful unification with Taiwan although Cheng observed that Xi appeared to be taking a patient approach to reunification and had said that resolving the issues would take perseverance and patience. However, after Cheng’s visit, Beijing’s Taiwan Affairs Office unveiled a 10 point economic incentive package to the island which included the full resumption of regular direct flights across the Taiwan Strait and facilitating access for Taiwanese food products to the Chinese market.[ii]

Cheng in turn suggested said the two sides build cooperation to make the peaceful development of both sides of the Strait irreversible. Her visit marked a seismic shift in power within her party where there had not been consensus amongst all KMT leaders. A KMT victory in the 2028 election would be the mandate needed to officially represent the people of Taiwan in negotiations with the mainland. She also said she hoped to invite Xi to visit Taiwan if her party prevailed in 2028.

The Chinese media reported that the meeting underscored Beijing’s efforts to advance peaceful relations “with maximum sincerity and utmost commitment”. At the same time China sent a warning to the DPP that any separatist moves toward “Taiwan independence” would undermine regional stability and were bound to fail.[iii]

Strongly Contested Views

Cheng’s trip aimed to create the opportunity for improved cross Strait relations and to step out of the shadow of “Taiwan independence”. Ahead of her visit, Cheng stressed that by upholding the 1992 Consensus and opposing separatist activities, the KMT wanted to prove to the world that cross-Strait relations didn’t have to face the prospect of war. However, the DPP refuses to recognise the one-China principal and rejects the 1992 Consensus. Nevertheless, China views Taiwan as part of the Chinese nation and argues that all Chinese share kinship and a national identity.[iv]

Japan

According to a report in Nikkei Asia, the meeting between Cheng and Xi was a meeting between two Chinese “ethno-nationalist” parties who oppose Taiwanese self-determination and tied the annexation of Taiwan to Xi’s “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation”. By hosting Cheng, Xi signalled that he was capable of managing the Taiwan issue and could deepen doubts in Washington about Taiwan’s resolve.[v]

Japan’s Prime Minister Takaichi is said to be pursuing the first ever revision of Japan’s post-World War II pacifist constitution which is likely to be condemned in Beijing. It will inevitably bring back memories of wartime between Japan and China. The relationship between them has been strained since Takaichi said, in November 2025 that an attack on Taiwan would be seen as an “existential crisis situation” for Japan which would allow Japan’s military to take action in self-defence. Even though she said her comments were “hypothetical”, she refused to retract them.[vi]

Japan’s recent participation in US-Philippine military exercises shows that Tokyo is taking a bigger role in regional groupings which could face off against China. It is the first time that combat ready Japanese troops have been deployed in the Philippines since Japan’s occupation of that country during World War II. Tokyo appears to follow Washington’s regional strategy which urges countries like Japan to do more to deter adversaries and protect the first island chain (islands and archipelagoes along the eastern edge of mainland Asia) which includes denying any Chinese attempt to seize Taiwan.[vii]

“TO BE, OR NOT TO BE, THAT IS THE QUESTION”.[viii]

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

Subscribe now

[i] South China Morning Post (SCMP), Taiwan opposition leader begins journey of peace, 7 April 26

[ii] Nikkei, Xi meets Takaichi as US and Japan watch 10 April 26

[iii] CGTN, Cheng’s visit signals mainland’s sincerity in advancing cross-Strait peace, 11April 26

[iv] CGTN, Cheng visit shatters DPP illusion of relying on US, 7 April 26

[v] Nikkei, KMT and CCP form united front against Taiwan sovereignty 8 April 26

[vi] SCMP, Takaichi putting Japan’s pacifist constitution on chopping block 18 April 26

[vii] SCMP, Military drills show Tokyo’s focus on deterring China 11 April 26

[viii] Hamlet, by William Shakespeare

By January 2026, One Nation had surged ahead of the Coalition for the first time as voters abandoned the major parties and Albanese’s net approval rating plunged to minus 11. Core support for One Nation was on the rise.[i]

Albanese described the growth in support for One Nation as a “worry”, saying the party was a “pretty divisive lot”. Hanson reacted saying “I’ve got no time for him. The worst Prime Minister this country has ever had. I tell you what, Anthony Albanese, I’m coming after you. I want to see you gone from being Prime Minister at the next election and I’m going to work my butt off to make it happen”. She claimed that his lack of action on anti-Semitism since 7 October 2023, proved he was a “hypocrite” and he was unaware of the concerns people had about radical Islam. She added, “Instead of worrying about how we are going to deal with hate speech, don’t bring these people into the country in the first place”.[ii]

In 1996, Pauline was a single mum, running a fish and chip shop in Ipswich, Queensland. She decided to run for politics as the LNP candidate for the seat of Oxley in the 1996 election but her alliance with the LNP quickly soured when she made racist remarks about indigenous people, and she was sacked from the Liberal Party. Her reaction – “Okay, I’ll run as an independent for Oxley”. No one in the mainstream thought she had a hope but, on election day she rocketed into Parliament with one of the biggest swings against the sitting Labor member ever recorded.

She was ridiculed for her lack of education and when she was asked, “Are you xenophobic?” When she asked what that meant she was subjected to widespread derision. However, the more she was criticized the more people came out to support her.

A Resurgent One Nation

In her maiden speech, Hanson complained that Australia was being “swamped by Asians”. She formed One Nation in 1997 and won 11 seats in the 1998 Queensland state election. She has since moderated her approach and would probably not use the phrase “swamped by Asians” today, but her visceral 1996 stand against high levels of immigration follows the same theme which underpins her resurgence now. A large share of the voting public have come to her way of thinking.[iii]

Pauline Hanson has outlasted her critics and now presides over a resurgent One Nation, wielding political power which few anticipated. She is the politician who will stand up and say what she feels her supporters are thinking but may be too fearful to say out loud, but for her, “Bugger the consequences”.

Early in 2026 a $500,000 animated film, A Super Progressive Movie was released by One Nation. The revenue from the movie will contribute funds for One Nation’s 2028 election campaign. One Nation’s most recent annual return to the Australian Electoral Commission shows that the party received $3,323,609 in donations and other payments in 2024-25.

Hanson Goes to Jail

In 1998, One Nation fielded 139 candidates but, after a concerted smear campaign from the LNP, Hanson lost her seat and only a single One Nation candidate was elected. Tony Abbott set up a fund to support a case for electoral fraud against Hanson and in 2003 she was sent to jail. It was the absolute rock bottom moment of her life. She had always prided herself on being an honest, upstanding and law-abiding Australian citizen and yet the court found her guilty of fraud. However, after 11 weeks, her conviction was overturned and she was released. Her time in jail gave her a steely edge and gave her the kind of backbone and mentality which enabled her to survive and thrive.

Racism

After 1998, Hanson ran for Parliament nine times and failed each time. However, the 2016 election campaign marked a new kind of Pauline Hanson. She emerged as a serious, strategic, experienced, and a battle hardened political operator. These days her brand of “racism” targets Muslims, not Asians. However, she was justifiably criticized for her remark in March when she declared “How can you tell me there are good Muslims?” Albanese took the opportunity to unfairly link her comments to threats against a mosque in Western Sydney. Hanson did not take a backward step and she has doubled down on her calls for a ban on the “Importation of radical Islam that hates Western society, freedom of speech and equality before the law”. She has since teamed up with James Ashby, a strategic operator schooled in Conservative politics. This is seen as one of the reasons why One Nation is now surging.[iv]

Janet Albrechtsen wrote in The Australian that Josh Lees could be one of the best things that ever happened to One Nation. Every time he and his bunch of protesters chant “Globalise the intifada” or “From the river to the sea” and when Grace Tame screams similar slogans, another cohort of otherwise peaceful Australians decides they’ve had enough. Many Australians don’t think mainstream politicians do enough to re-establish Australia as a socially cohesive country and they are now throwing their lot in with One Nation. Albrechtsen suggests that sensible control over migration and tough, but fair crime policies could have avoided the looming left-right battles to come. She pointed to a recent poll by The Guardian which found that 62% of respondents supported stronger police powers to curb protests.[v]

Advance One Nation Fair

There was early speculation that One Nation might seek to merge with the Liberal and National parties to defeat Labor but Hanson was “not interested”. Strong polls suggested that One Nation had become the second most popular political force in the nation.[vi]

In the South Australian election in March 2026, One Nation, led by Cori Bernardi secured 22.5% of the Lower House primary vote, gaining four MPs and three Upper House members. The most recent federal Newspoll shows One Nation ahead of the Coalition on the primary vote, by 26% to 21%. One Nation’s next electoral test will be in the NSW Federal electorate of Farrer, a by-election on 9 May triggered by the resignation of Sussan Ley. Party supporter, Paul Moodie comments, “One Nation win will shake Labor and the Liberals to the core”.

Immigration is the most potent issue driving up the One Nation vote. A large number of migrants, many of whom don’t integrate well have come into Australia from all corners of the world and this his has turned a sizeable proportion of the Australian population against immigration. The massacre of Jews at Bondi Beach in December 2025 also inflames hostility to immigration as did the scene in late March when Prime Minister Albanese was heckled and abused at a Lakemba Mosque.[vii]

In the months since the Bondi Beach massacre in December, public support for Labor, the Liberals and the Nationals has plummeted while One Nation leader Pauline Hanson has taken her party to historic highs. Albanese’s leadership, since the Hamas terror attack in Israel on October 2023 and his inconsistent response to a Royal Commission and to anti-Semitism since the 2025 Bondi massacre have turned voters away leading to a record low in support. Many voters now prefer One Nation.[viii]

Albanese Attacks Hanson

Albanese did himself no favours with his statement that “Pauline Hanson appeals to our darkest forces while he appeals to light, to optimism, and to unity, because that’s the way our country will go forward”. He later claimed that he did not call One Nation supporters the “darkest forces” but was “only describing Pauline Hanson”. Hanson is now the leader of the second most supported party in the country – appealing to “darkness” while Albanese appeals to “light, optimism and unity” as if this was a battle between Good and Evil . To cast Hanson as appealing to our “darkest forces” paints her supporters as people hypnotized by an evil force into voting against Australia’s best interests. It was neither smart nor helpful for Albanese to recreate Hillary Clinton’s “basket of deplorables” in the way he spoke about Hanson.[ix]

Hanson Aims to Get Australia Back

Labor and the Coalition are facing a One Nation bloodbath in Queensland as young Australians, women and voters shift away from Albanese whose support has suffered a dramatic fall, particularly in the wake of the Bondi Beach terror attack, rising inflation, higher interest rates, fuel shortages and a worsening cost of living crisis. Recent Newspolls show that One Nation is leading the Coalition in every major state except Victoria and it has the highest primary vote of any party in Queensland.[x]

In a recent national YouGov survey, One Nation had the strongest support of any party amongst men, the working class, Millennials, Generation X, outer metropolitan voters, rural voters, the working class, parents with children under 18, mortgage holders, and renters.

Hanson has responded saying, “They want their country back and that’s what I am going to do, I’m going to get Australia back”.[xi]

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

Subscribe now

___________________________

[i] The Australian (AU), One Nation ahead of Coalition, 19 Jan 26

[ii] Sky News (Sky) What a hypocrite, 20 Jan 26

[iii] AU, Hanson’s rise, due to consistency, 7 Feb 26

[iv] The Conversation, Pauline Explained by Anna Broinowski, 4 April 26

[v] AU, Out of touch Judges driving Australian voters to One Nation, 18 Feb 26

[vi] Sky, Hanson rules out a super coalition with Liberals and Nationals, 9 March 26

[vii] AU, Liberals forgotten patriotism, Now One Nation owns it, Alexander Downer 23 March 26

[viii] AU, Truth behind One Nation “poll vault”, 8 Feb 26

[ix] Sky, Albanese’s “basket of deplorables” 27 Feb 26

[x] AU, One Nation leads Labor and Coalition in Queensland, 6 April 26

[xi] SMH, From a hypothetical to an existential political threat, 4 April 26

China doesn’t care if you are Muslim, Jewish, Christian, Hindu or an atheist and it doesn’t care if your government is democratic, theocratic or dictatorial. If you want to do business, China is more than happy to partner with you. China doesn’t interfere with your elections, overthrow or stage coups against your government, kidnap your political leaders or sanction your country to the point of starving the population. It does not operate hundreds of military bases around the world and does not invade other countries. Life in China can be wonderful!

CHINA is the most transactional and ideology-free country in the world, but DO NOT CROSS ITS RED LINES, namely - The return of Taiwan, the legitimacy of Communist Party rule, and the Unity of the Chinese nation. Everything else is negotiable.

Ai Weiwei is a contemporary, internationally recognised Chinese artist and activist. He has been openly critical of the Chinese government and was arrested in 2011 for “economic crimes” and detained for 81 days without charge. The government confiscated his passport but it was returned in 2015 after which he lived in Portugal, Germany and the United Kingdom. When he returned to Beijing on a visit, after a decade he described his visit as “smooth and pleasant” and he shared his belief that China was in an “upward phase” while Western society was in decline adding that, “The West no longer had the moral authority to criticise China on human rights”.

BBC China correspondent, Laura Bicker remarked, “As someone who lives and works here, you see a China where, if you want to live within certain parameters, you have a nice life. You have high-speed trains which can transport you from one side of the country to the other. It is safe - I could go for a run at three in the morning. People are friendly and, to all intents and purposes it is a lovely place to live, but if you step on those red lines, it becomes a problem”.[i]

China – US Relations

President Trump held a wide-ranging phone call with Xi Jinping on 4 February. Xi called on the US to build mutual trust and he expressed the hope of working with Trump to steer China-US relations forward, adding that if the two countries worked in the spirit of “equality, respect, and mutual benefit” they could find solutions to address each other’s concerns. In turn, Trump said there would be many positive results achieved over the next three years of his Presidency in his dealings with China, adding that his personal relationship with President Xi was “extremely good”.[ii]

China’s Military Prowess

During its military parade in September 2025, Beijing rolled out its arsenal which included Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs), hypersonic gliders and “killer” missiles which rumbled through Tiananmen Square. Its DF-5C (a silo-based giant) was said to have the ability to hit any target in the world, with a range of up to 20,000 km. However, China’s short and medium-range ballistic missiles are most likely for use in a regional fight, specially over Taiwan or in the South and East China Seas.

China is also expanding its hypersonic anti-ship arsenal and is building a missile force designed not only to guarantee a second strike in a nuclear war but also to deny access to its coastal zones, to threaten adversaries and to keep rivals guessing. Beijing is no longer playing catch up in missile technology. Instead, it is setting the pace.[iii]

China’s Growing Relationships

Ukraine

In Ukraine, there are multi-day blackouts and buyers are rushing to secure supplies from China of goods such as electric vehicles, batteries and solar panels, desperate for any power source they can get. China remains Ukraine’s biggest single trading partner, indicating the pragmatic nature of Ukraine’s relations with Beijing, despite the “no-limits” partnership declared by Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin. According to Beijing, China exported more than US$5 billion in goods to Ukraine in 2025 although Kyiv’s Customs bureau reports imports of US$19 billion from China since Chinese products imported to Ukraine from Poland are also counted by Kyiv as Chinese imports.[iv]

ASEAN

China aims to deepen its trade with South-east Asia and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has already become its largest export market with exports to the bloc reaching $322.5 billion in the first half of 2025. China’s new 134 km Pinglu waterway will connect China’s landlocked Guangxi Province directly to the Gulf of Tonkin. The Canal is expected to open this year and will shorten the shipping route from Nanning, Guangxi’s capital, by 560 km and reduce transport costs by hundreds of millions of dollars each year. This may prove to be only a “warm-up act” with provincial governments in Hunan and Guangxi pushing for approval of the “Xianggui Canal”, a 300-kilometre waterway extending the Pinglu canal northward to connect with the Yangtze and Pearl River systems. The combined network will stretch for 3,200km, creating an inland maritime highway from central China to Southeast Asia.[v]

Hungary

China’s Foreign Minister, Wang Yi recently met with the Hungarian Prime Minister, Viktor Orban with both sides vowing to deepen all-round cooperation. Orban described the Chinese nation as “great”, saying China’s leadership had a strategic vision. Orban noted that thanks to China, the Hungary – Serbia Railway would soon begin operation. These developments will boost Hungary’s economic growth while improving the livelihood of its people. Orban also reaffirmed Hungary’s commitment to the one-China policy.[vi]

Africa

In June 2025, China announced the elimination of tariffs on 98-100% of imports from 53 African countries which maintain diplomatic relations with Beijing. Kenya and China signed a bilateral trade agreement which will grant 98.2% zero-duty market access for goods from Kenya, with particular emphasis on agricultural exports, which are the backbone of Kenya’s economy. The deal balances deepening economic ties with Kenya’s eastern partners including both China and Russia, while maintaining relationships with the US and the UK. According to a Kenyan economist, while countries like the US use trade tariffs as a tool to punish African countries, China uses tariffs to foster relationships.[vii]

Europe

China has overtaken the US as Germany’s biggest trading partner and, according to a German report, its trade deficit with China has reached a record level of €89.3 billion. Since 2015, China has been the largest supplier of goods to Germany, underscoring the depth of their economic ties. China’s exports to Germany rose by 8.8% in 2025, pushing total bilateral trade to €251 billion. In the meantime, Berlin’s exports to the US fell by 9.4% in 2025.[viii]

In January 2026 we wrote on this site how Canada had concluded a new strategic partnership with China. The same month, UK Prime Minister Starmer visited China looking to de-risk from an increasingly untrustworthy US. French President Macron visited China in December 2025. The Irish and Finnish Prime Ministers also visited China. For them, China is seen as a stable, consistent economic partner.

Taiwan

Beijing seeks peaceful reunification with Taiwan, but warns that any move toward a formal declaration of independence by Taipei would be met with force! In an earlier discussion with Trump, the Chinese president stressed that it was the most important issue in China-US relations and that Taiwan is part of China’s territory, and China would never allow Taiwan to be separated.

Australia – Quo Vadis?

Washington’s contempt has led to a fundamental rethink among its European and Canadian allies but, Australia which is just as much affected has been conspicuously silent, even doubling down on the controversial AUKUS military pact along with its prohibitively expensive (AU$368 billion) nuclear powered submarine program. Does Australia seriously believe that Beijing would ever want to attack it unless it joins the US in a shooting war against China? It is like conjuring up a phantom enemy to suit the needs of its US “lord and master”.

On the other hand, Canadians have never been more defiant. Australia can learn from Canada and should seriously revisit the awful AUKUS deal which was secretly signed and sealed by former Prime Minister Scott Morrison with no prior public consultation, not even with his colleagues. This resulted in a breach of Australia’s contract with France for the supply of a fleet of much cheaper, quicker to build, diesel powered submarines which would have been far more suited to Australia’s needs. The AUKUS submarines will have power projection into the South China Sea rather than for domestic defence, and they are intended to fight alongside the Americans in the event of a war with China. This, together with existing US military bases in Darwin, Brisbane, Newcastle and Port Kembla makes Australia a potential Chinese target.

It is not too late for Prime Minister Albanese to grow his Mojo![ix]

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

Subscribe now

[i] South China Morning Post (SCMP) China is a win-win country but Don’t Cross its Red Lines, 11 Feb 26

[ii] CGTN, Xi calls on China and the US to build mutual trust, 5 Feb 26

[iii] RT, The might of the Dragon, 26 Feb 26

[iv] SCMP, China keeps Ukraine’s lights on, 7 Feb 26

[v] The Australian, China eyes Canals to boost trade with Asia, 23 Feb 26

[vi] CGTN, China Hungary to deepen cooperation 12 Feb 26

[vii] RT, China edging out the US, 9 Feb 26

[viii] RT, China overtakes US as Germany’s biggest trade partner, 20 Feb 26

[ix] SCMP, The real 51^st American state may be gullible Australia, 18 Feb 26

The violent protests against the visit to Australia of Israeli President Isaac Herzog (who was invited by Prime Minister Albanese) included the Palestine Action Group (PAG), activists from hardline Muslim groups and former Australian of the Year, Grace Tame. They were mostly the same protesters who had gloated outside the Sydney Opera House about Israel’s “humiliation” only hours after the deadly Hamas attack on 7 October 2023. The protests were led by Josh Lees who previously led a legal battle for protesters to march across the Sydney Harbour Bridge in August 2025 when the NSW Supreme Court judge Belinda Rigg preferred the views of Lees over the safety concerns of senior police. Ninety thousand crossed the bridge in a “March for Humanity”.

Lees promised a peaceful demonstration at Sydney’s Town Hall square on Monday 9 February, but it didn’t turn out that way. Tame yelled out, “Israel is a fascist state engaged in genocide” and she led the crowd in chants of “From Gadigal to Gaza, globalise the Intifada” while calling President Herzog a “war criminal”. NSW Premier Chris Minns described her language as “hateful and violent” and the Jewish community leader, Alex Ryvchin remarked that “What we had at Bondi Beach (on 14 December) was exactly what Tame was calling for”.[i]

As Paul Kelly wrote in The Australian, “Eight weeks after the massacre of Jewish people at Bondi Beach, Australia’s response is deeply compromised with growing ideological conflict, hardening divisions, damage to the social fabric and battles in the streets”.

What about Prime Minister Albanese

The Prime Minister has spoken of the need for “Social Cohesion” and in response to the violent Monday night demonstration in Sydney he remarked, “We need to turn the temperature down”. He appears to have forgotten or ignored the attacks on schools, homes, businesses and synagogues and the fact that Jewish children now go to school protected by armed guards.[ii]

Albanese insists that his government is not helping “ISIS brides” return to Australia even though they and their children have passports issued by Australia which Albanese claims does not constitute “assistance”. Previous returnees to Australia in 2022 were interviewed multiple times by intelligence agents in Syria before they were cleared to return and, on their arrival they faced a period of monitoring by Australia’s Counter Terrorism Task force but that does not seem to be the case now.[iii]

Although Albanese said, “I have nothing but contempt for these people”, he does absolutely nothing about it. Perhaps he should learn from an old children’s rhyme, “Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me”!

Opposition leader Angus Taylor has called on the Prime Minister to “shut the door” and he slammed Albanese over his government’s role in the plan to return ISIS brides to Australia. As shadow opposition Defence Minister, James Paterson commented, “The government can keep an Australian citizen offshore for up to 2 years while a case is built against them so that they can be charged if they ever do choose to return”.[iv]

One Nation leader, Pauline Hanson has come under fire from both Labor and the Coalition for questioning whether there were any “good Muslims”. Arguably, her comments were somewhat over the top, but that is Pauline whose polling has reached new heights. While the Australian press has suggested that Barnaby Joyce has refused to endorse her criticism of Muslims, the only statement they have been able to actually quote was Barnaby Joyce saying, “I will talk to Pauline Hanson about her comments”. Much more has been read into that simple statement by overly enthusiastic Hanson critics! One Nation may be “right wing” but they are not robotic and there are and will inevitably be differing opinions among its members.

Antisemitism and Genocide

As the former deputy editor of The Australian, Shelley Gare wrote, “Now I know I live in a country far more antisemitic than I ever imagined”. She described how a non-Jewish friend said that what we in Australia are witnessing is “Bone-deep; they don’t even know they are anti-Semitic”. There are only 120,000 Australian Jews in an Australian population of 28 million. The number of anti-Zionist Jews is tiny, although the “Jewish Council of Australia” which is utterly unrepresentative of Australia’s Jewish community with around only 1000 members is an anti-Zionist Jewish organisation but is frequently quoted as an “authority” by the likes of the ABC, SBS, The Guardian and Al Jazeera.

Claims in Australia of “Gaza genocide” diminish the horror of the Holocaust when 6 million Jews were murdered by the Nazis. Auschwitz reached “peak efficiency” in 1944 when 6,000 Jews were gassed and fed into crematoria each day. That dear reader is “GENOCIDE”.[v]

The Judiciary

Australian courts seem to struggle with deciding which particular hateful phrases are “anti-Semitic”. A few days after the Bondi shooting, a Victorian magistrate had to consider whether the statement “All Zionists are terrorists” was inherently offensive. He ruled that it was not, because he wasn’t sure whether the offender concerned intended to be hateful! How could the magistrate be so “unsure”, after the mass shooting of Jews by terrorists as to declare that saying “Zionists are terrorists” is not inherently insulting?

The Victorian Summary Offences Act 1966 prohibits the public use of insulting words in a manner which disturbs public order and yet, just as things have reached the absolutely worst point for Jews in Australia, a public official bends over backwards to read laws against the interest of the Jewish people. The only way out of this mess is by taking the law and actually applying it. As Melinda Jones suggests, the phrases which should be proscribed are: “Globalise the Intifada”; “From the River to the Sea”; “Zionism is racism”; and “All Zionists are terrorists, murderers, child killers or fascists” – INDEED.[vi]

The NSW Premier Acts

Premier Minns embarked on a campaign to turn back the latitude given to the protesters. Laws were passed giving the police Commissioner power to temporarily declare public areas restricted from assemblies. After Commissioner Mal Lanyon said that protests would present a risk to community safety, Minns declared Hertzog’s visit a “special event” which gave the police power to close off designated areas and to order people to leave. The protesters were not going to comply and Josh Lees led the March telling the mob, “We are going to take back our streets and demand freedom and humanity”. Many of the protesters attempted to break the police line and, unsurprisingly it turned ugly resulting in the police being accused of “manhandling” some protesters. Minns defended the police, saying they had to respond in the midst of a riot.

The police were required to perform a difficult duty in the face of violent, hateful, angry and threatening protesters, some of whom prostrated themselves on the street in “prayer”. Since when does anyone in their right mind lie down in the middle of a street full of violent protesters to pray. The police did not fall for it and rightly dragged them away. In the midst of chaos, the police acted. They should be supported not criticized, nor should they be expected to apologize. They carry out a most challenging task and can hardly be expected to wear kid gloves in those circumstances.[vii]

Legislation Against Nazi Conduct

Despite Australia’s leaders denouncing violence, the rise of anti-Semitism and attacks on Jews, they have resisted introducing new laws to confront the problem! However, language calling for “social cohesion” and requesting protesters to “turn the temperature down” will not bring change. The horror of the Bondi massacre has provided this government with both an opportunity and a pressing need to act, to take the lead and not sit back and wait to see what other nations might do.

The conduct experienced in Australia is not much different from Nazi threats, the display of Nazi symbols, Nazi salutes or Nazi memorabilia. Correction - Since the violent massacre of Jews in Bondi in December, the conduct experienced in Australia is arguably worse!

Australian and State laws prohibit the public display of Nazi symbols, including performing the “Sieg Heil” gesture. Federal laws provide for up to 12 months imprisonment while the states go further and have higher penalties with Western Australia providing for up to five years imprisonment.

The violence and the murder of 15 innocents for the “crime” of being Jews demands immediate and effective action with severe penalties for violent conduct, threats and attacks on the Jewish community as well as every other minority group. The time has come for Australia to stand up and to provide an example of how to respond to this crisis. Weak talk and vague promises will no longer suffice.

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

Subscribe now

[i] The Australian, Palestine Action Group: Transformed Sydney streets into battlegrounds, 14 Feb 26

[ii] The Australian, A big question now hangs over Australia: Will this division actually get worse? 14 Feb 26

[iii] The Australian, Government bans one ISIS bride, but allows others to return, 19 Feb 26

[iv] Sydney Morning Herald, Albanese maintains ‘no assistance’ for ISIS brides, 18 Feb 26

[v] The Australian, Why the Holocaust still matters, by Shelley Gare, 7 Feb 26

[vi] The Australian, How a court ruling reveals Australia failing Jewish community, by Melinda Jones, 7 Feb 26

[vii] Sydney Morning Herald, Premier legislated for enforced peace – got brutality and division 12 Feb 26

Fidel Castro led the Cuban Revolution which brought the overthrow in 1959 of the Cuban President, Batista. Castro assumed military and political power as Cuba’s Prime Minister and continued as head of State for 49 years, until 2008. Under Castro, Cuba became a one-party Communist state. The United States attempted unsuccessfully to remove Castro by assassination and by economic embargo, as well as the Bay of Pigs Invasion of 1961. To counter US threats, Castro aligned with the Soviet Union and allowed the Soviets to place nuclear weapons in Cuba which led to the “Cuban Missile Crisis” in 1962.

Castro subsequently transferred responsibilities to his brother, Raul Castro who became president in 2008. Fidel Castro died in 2016 aged 90.

A Visit to Cuba

Having visited Cuba as a tourist in 2019, my experience provided valuable insights into this island nation with a population of 11 million. My initial impression was one of decadence and to some extent, third world standards. Even in Havana, where living standards are the highest in Cuba, the average wage was only $30 per month!

In Trinidad we witnessed grand homes which had been abandoned following the 1959 revolution although many have since been restored and some have become museums. In 1988, UNESCO declared Trinidad a heritage site.

We enjoyed discussions with a number of highly educated Cubans. These included a talk by an urban planner about living standards and housing and a discussion with a former Cuban Ambassador dealing with politics and attempts to introduce reforms in Cuba, but without success.

At an art exhibition we watched a polished hip-hop performance by two young women who had given up their professions as social worker and industrial chemist respectively because they could earn more by dancing and receiving $10 for each CD sale of their music and performances. They are not alone. Many highly trained professionals have taken to alternative activities just to survive.

In the magnificent city of Cienfuegos there was a talk by an economist about the state of Cuba’s economy and politics. The model was one of social well-being with free education and government services but, of course with a basic wage of only $30 per month!

Cuba has struggled for at least 100 years against US tyranny, including the US taking control of Guantánamo Bay which was later turned into a prison. The book, Guantánamo describes the tyranny and the efforts by Cuba to take the area back, but to no avail.[i]

The US Aims to Suffocate Cuba

After the abduction by the US of the Venezuelan President, Nicolas Maduro on 3 January 2026, the US planned a total oil blockade on Cuba with Trump, callously claiming that Cuba was about to “collapse pretty soon” and warning that Cuba would have to reach an agreement with Washington if it wanted to avoid a humanitarian crisis, but without explaining what concessions the US wanted or expected. The last oil delivery to Cuba was a shipment on 9 January from Mexico which has since halted supplies under US pressure. Mexico’s president Claudia Sheinbaum warned that the US action could “trigger a large-scale humanitarian crisis, directly affecting hospitals, food supplies, and other basic services for the Cuban people”. And yet, bizarrely, Trump officials have denied that US pressure to curb fuel shipments to Cuba is responsible for the crisis![ii]

If the US continues to prevent the flow of oil from Venezuela and pressures Cuba’s other oil producing allies to hold back, the results would be catastrophic, and Cuba would face collapse. There is already not enough fuel for airplanes to refuel in Cuba and by 30 January Cuba was left with enough oil to last only 15 to 20 days. For many Cubans, the crisis means power shortages and a lack of food and medicine. Even then, Cuba refuses to bend to pressure and its Deputy Prime Minister, referring to the challenge said, “We have no doubt we will overcome. We are not going to collapse”.[iii]

The Marco Rubio Story

Rubio is the son of Cuban immigrants who moved to the US in 1956. Although Rubio described his parents as exiles fleeing Castro, in fact they immigrated several years before Castro came to power in 1959, well before the Cuban Revolution and the latest version of Rubio’s story confirms that his family did leave Cuba in 1956.[iv]

Marco Rubio is a long-time foe of the Cuban government and has said, “We would love to see regime change” and “It would be of great benefit to the United States if Cuba was no longer governed by an autocratic regime”.

Recently, the Trump administration has been searching for Cuban government insiders who can help push out the government by the year end.[v]

The Obama Intervention

After President Obama restored relations with Cuba, tourism briefly soared but, in 2017 this suffered a setback when President Trump reversed Obama’s efforts.

In 2009, President Barack Obama promised to end restrictions on remittances and family travel by Cuban-Americans and to resume “people-to-people” exchanges. He argued that engagement offered the best hope for promoting “a democratic opening in Cuba” which would be “the foremost objective of our policy”.

However, well into Obama’s second term, US relations with Cuba were not much different from what they had been under Obama’s predecessors. He did embrace “soft power” in the hope of fostering gradual, incremental change, but even his approach required Cuba to dismantle its political and economic systems and replace them with a multiparty electoral democracy.

Obama demanded concessions which the Cuban government was unwilling to make and ultimately he was stuck in the same impasse as his predecessors. Each time a new president took office in Washington, Cuba held out an olive branch to see if the administration might be open to better relations, but to no avail.[vi]

Trump Pressure

On 11 January 2026 Trump announced that, “There will be no more oil or money going to Cuba – zero! I strongly suggest they make a deal before it is too late”. Trump proposed tariffs on any nation which provided oil to Cuba, aiming at Mexico, Brazil, Angola, and Algeria. Cuba’s economic crisis is already severe and a complete energy blockade will push the Cuban economy to breaking point which gives it a strong incentive to “make a deal”.[vii]

Cuba’s President Miguel Diaz-Canel is willing to talk to the US government “as equals” saying that any dialogue should respect Cuba’s sovereignty, adding that “To surrender isn’t an option for Cuba. We aren’t in a state of war, but we are preparing ourselves in case we have to move to a state of war”.

Cuba would welcome a commercial engagement with the US. Cuba has significant deposits of nickel and cobalt which would be attractive to the Trump administration given its priority of securing access to strategic minerals. Trump recognises that Cuba’s tourism sector is languishing due to a lack of visitors and resources. Even before he was elected in 2016, Trump had sent representatives to Cuba to explore business opportunities in hotels and golf courses. Although Cuba would be unwilling to make concessions about its political or economic systems, this did not appear to trouble Trump as democracy does not appear to be high on his agenda.

Trump has an aversion to “endless wars” which were fought to spread democracy. However, according to Trump there were already talks taking place with Cuba to explore an accord to address US security and economic interests while leaving Cuba’s government structure in place. It does make sense for Cuba to explore a deal with the Trump administration provided it preserves Cuban sovereignty, even at the price of compromise on other issues.[viii]

According to a report by Al Jazeera, on 31 January Trump told reporters, “It doesn’t have to be a humanitarian crisis. I think they probably would come to us and want to make a deal. So that Cuba would be free again”.

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

Subscribe now

[i] Guantánamo, published 2011

[ii] Reports published on RT (Russia) between 23 January and 1 February 2026

[iii] CNN, A Hurricane is coming 30 Jan 26

[iv] NPR, Rubio tries to clarify how his Family left Cuba, 24 Oct 2011

[v] WSJ, Life in Cuba Grinding to a Halt, 10 Feb 26

[vi] Back Channel to Cuba, published 2015 (chapter 9, A New Beginning)

[vii] WSJ, Cuba says it is Ready to Engage with Trump, 5 Feb 26

[viii] Foreign Policy, What a deal between Trump and Cuba might look like, 5 Feb 26

Trump has threatened to impose tariffs on European countries which oppose his plans to annex Greenland, and has refused to rule out military action. In a letter to the Norwegian Prime Minister, Trump wrote: “Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 wars, I no longer feel an obligation to think only of Peace but can now think about what is good and proper for the United States of America”. As Greg Sheridan justifiably observed in The Australian, “His text to Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store is surely the single most deranged message ever sent by an American president to any foreign head of government”.[i]

Copenhagen and the government of Greenland have made it clear that Greenland is not for sale and the Danish Prime Minister warned that a forcible US annexation of its territory would be the end of NATO.

Trump had initially threatened to impose tariffs on several European nations over Greenland. Then he changed his mind, saying that securing Greenland was a core national security interest for the US to prevent outside threats, but, “I don’t want to use force. I won’t use force”.

Trump claimed that China and Russia would take over Greenland unless the US did so. However, Beijing rejected that saying, “China does not support the US using China or Russia as pretexts for its own self-interest” adding that Beijing’s activities in the region, “Strengthen peace, stability and sustainable development in accordance with international law”. Russia also reacted saying Greenland’s future must be determined by its citizens and dismissed claims that Russia posed a threat.[ii]

Iran

In December 2025, mass protests erupted in more than 200 cities in Iran. It seemed that the Islamic Republic, established in 1979 was on the brink of collapse. After the regime cracked down on the protesters, Trump declared that help was on the way and he urged them to keep protesting. And yet, just when military action appeared imminent, Trump changed his mind and stepped back from helping the protesters. Trump then turned his focus onto Iran’s nuclear ambitions. However, several countries in the region including Egypt, Oman, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia discouraged the White House from striking Iran. Despite that, Trump announced “A massive armada is heading to Iran which includes the USS Abraham Lincoln and several guided missile destroyers”. No mention was made of the protesters and thus far there has been no further action and no meaningful plan has emerged.[iii]

Meanwhile, the EU also took steps against Iran designating its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a “terrorist organisation” with more than 6,000 people having been killed since the protest movement in Iran erupted in December.

Venezuela

On 3^rd January President Trump sent the American military into Venezuela to kidnap its leader, Nicolas Maduro. This was a flagrant violation of sovereignty. In an interview with John Mearsheimer (Professor of Political Science at Chicago University), he acknowledges that every great power cares about its own region. The Chinese care about East Asia, the Russians about Eastern Europe and the United States about the Western Hemisphere and that is what the “Monroe Doctrine” is all about. However, he contends that there was no serious threat to the US from Venezuela. Rather, it was a case of “old-fashioned imperialism” as the US had decided to take control of Venezuelan oil. The Trump administration is counting on oil companies to move into Venezuela and rebuild its oil industry, but that is unlikely to happen as it will take many years and many billions of dollars to achieve that and it is not at all clear that major oil companies have an interest in doing so.[iv]

Canada

In a forceful speech before world leaders at Davos on 20 January, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney laid out his vision on how to push back against Trump’s chaos. Multilateral institutions on which the middle powers relied such as the WTO and the UN were under threat. As a result, many countries believe that they must develop greater strategic autonomy in energy, food, critical minerals, finance, and supply chains. Carney spoke of how Canada was rapidly diversifying including a comprehensive strategic partnership with the EU. Canada had also signed 12 trade and security deals on four continents in six months. Furthermore, Canada had concluded new strategic partnerships with China and Qatar and was negotiating free-trade pacts with India, ASEAN, Thailand, and the Philippines.

Trump responded by threatening to impose 100% tariffs on all Canadian goods and products coming into the US if “Canada makes a deal with China”. In his address at Davos, Trump accused Carney of not being grateful enough to the US and he petulantly revoked Canada’s invitation to join his Gaza Board of Peace (a proposal which Carney was considering but had not yet accepted). In the meantime, Canada and China had made deals involving Chinese electric vehicles and Canadian agricultural products which Carney described as the start of a strategic new partnership with China, adding that deals with China were necessary, given the US trade policy uncertainty. While in Beijing, Carney remarked that China was a more reliable trading partner than the US![v]

De-Risking from the USA

It is not only Canada. The UK Prime Minister, Keir Starmer spent most of the last week of January in China faced with the imperative to de-risk from an increasingly untrustworthy US even though Starmer and his European neighbours fear the consequences of angering the volatile US leader. Others are also queueing to get to Beijing. French President Macron visited China in December and German Chancellor Merz is expected to visit in February. The Irish PM as well as the Finnish PM visited China in January. It seems that the US has become the “rogue” to be hedged against while China is now seen as a stable, consistent economic partner.[vi]

In a survey carried out in late November 2025 by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 47% of Americans surveyed agreed that China had already surpassed the United States or would do so within five years. 63% said China outperformed the US in technology. This was a view shared by 74% of Democrats, 62% of Independents and 52% of Republicans. In addition, 42% of respondents said that China held an economic advantage over the US although most Americans believed that the US retained a military edge. These results are said to have echoed an April 2025 Pew Research Centre survey.[vii]

Impact on the World Order

Trump’s actions at the start of 2026 align with the updated US National Security Strategy released in December 2025, to secure the Western Hemisphere as a zone of exclusive American interests, to contain China and to shift responsibility for Europe, the Middle East, and Africa onto its allies.

The new strategy shows how Trump’s thinking on Beijing has shifted, with the document dropping all reference to “strategic competition” with both China and Russia. Instead, the strategy shifts to maintaining a “favourable balance of military power in the Indo-Pacific. There is no reference to any threat to the international order posed by Moscow or Beijing and not a single reference to Taiwan. Trump seeks a stable peace, fair trade, and respectful relations with China and he has shown his willingness to engage with Xi Jinping directly to achieve these goals.

The main objectives of the 2026 National Defence Strategy are defending the US homeland. Allies and partners are expected to shoulder their fair share of the burden of collective defence. As to China, the goal is not to dominate nor to humiliate. Instead, it aims to prevent anyone, including China from dominating the US and its allies. The strategy also directs the Pentagon to maintain a favourable balance of military power in the Indo Pacific, but it does not seek regime change or an existential struggle. It aims for peace on terms favourable to Americans, but which China can also accept. The strategy also makes it clear that Washington will look to NATO to take primary responsibility for Europe’s defence.[viii]

Trump’s Health

On 18 January, Tim Stanley remarked in The Telegraph, “Of all the explanations for Donald Trump’s attempt to seize Greenland, the most superficially attractive is that the President has dementia”. The remark was not dissimilar to a remark made only days earlier in the Asia Times.

Trump believes he had a really successful visit to Davos. He was wrong. Instead, he is seen as being in the process of destroying the world. As the Sydney morning Herald wrote, “Trump is in decay, and it is affecting him and his presidency”. He makes grandiose declarations on the war in Ukraine, on tariffs, on Gaza and on the Board of Peace but nothing is successfully fulfilled. The Board of Peace was launched with Trump having full control and having the sole veto over any vote taken by the Board, but no major European allies have joined up. Nor has Russia or China and neither has Canada after Trump disinvited Carney.

Scrutiny has now turned to Trump and his mental and physical health, leading to one question: Is Trump up to it?[ix]

At 79, Trump is the oldest man to assume the presidency although, in fairness he was a mere five months older than Biden when Biden became president. It was only after a catastrophic performance in a debate against Trump that Biden decided not to seek re-election. Trump may, at times show signs of ageing, but he claims to rely on his “good genetics” and his doctor says he is in excellent health while aids say he maintains a vigorous schedule. Trump is not interested in an exercise routine other than golf as he finds exercise “boring”. He has difficulty sleeping well at night and, by his own account, often texts and calls up aids at 2am. He claims never to have been a big sleeper.[x]

Trump has been almost omnipresent in his second term, fielding questions sometimes several times a day and regularly hosting dinners at the White House. His doctor, Barbabella has told the WSJ that Trump is in “exceptional health and perfectly suited to execute his duties as Commander in Chief”!

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

Subscribe now

[i] The Telegraph, Taking Greenland as revenge for losing Nobel Peace Prize – 19 Jan 26

[ii] RT (Russia), Beijing slams Trump for citing China and Russia – 12 Jan 26

[iii] Foreign Policy, Threats to the Iranian Regime – 30 Jan 26

[iv] South China Morning Post (SCMP), Interview with John Mearsheimer – 19 Jan 26

[v] Wall Street Journal (WSJ), Trump threatens tariffs on Canada over China – 25 Jan 26

[vi] SCMP, The World is Waking up to the US Threat -30 Jan 26

[vii] SCMP, Do Americans think China will overtake the US – 29 Jan 26

[viii] The Australian, Trump’s new Strategy – 25 & 26 Jan 26

[ix] Sydney Morning Herald, Trump In Decay – 26 Jan 26

[x] WSJ, Signs of ageing emerge – 2 Jan 26

Nicolas Maduro

The US Launches a Military Assault on Venezuela

In the early hours of Saturday 3 January, the US launched its military assault on Venezuela, abducting its president, Nicolas Maduro who, with his wife was flown to New York where they face federal charges including narcotics and terrorism allegations. It was the first time the US has apprehended a sitting foreign leader since 1990.

Trump has also threatened Denmark, Cuba, Nicaragua, Mexico, Canada, Colombia and Iran, and he plans to increase the Pentagon budget by 50% to US$1.5 trillion. Justifications for Trump’s actions include narco-terrorism, illegal immigration, oil and the “maligned presence of China, Russia and Iran”. As the Asia Times wrote, these are the “musings of dementia-addled narcissism” and “All of this will end in tears as it has in Vietnam, Somalia, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and the Red Sea. Somewhere in Trump’s brain is Venezuela’s 300 billion barrels of oil reserves”, even though Venezuela currently produces only about 1% of the world’s oil, a far cry from the oil production of the US, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Canada.[i]

Marco Rubio, the US Secretary of State cast Maduro’s ouster as central to Trump’s priorities of curbing the flow of drugs into the US, deporting migrants and reasserting US dominance in the region.

Trump also claimed that drugs were pouring through Mexico into the US and he offered to send US troops to Mexico to combat the cartels, but Mexico’s president, Claudia Scheinbaum rejected any US military action on Mexican soil and condemned the US military raid on Venezuela as “a serious threat to regional stability”.

Maria Corina Machado

Maria Corina Machado

On 15 January the Venezuelan opposition leader, Maria Corina Machado met Trump and presented him with her Nobel Peace Prize which was awarded to her in October 2025 for her campaign for free and fair elections in Venezuela. Trump did not hesitate to accept her prize. However, she emerged from the meeting with no public backing from Trump who said she did not have enough support to run the country. Instead, he backed Venezuela’s acting president Delcy Rodriguez who assumed power following the capture of Maduro.[ii]

During Trump’s first term, Rodriguez was regarded as a pariah and the US administration sanctioned her, citing corruption and mismanagement. Now, Trump has made her the US’s primary partner in Venezuela! Rodriguez has outmaneuvered Machado whose party won presidential elections in 2024 but which Maduro and Rodriguez ignored. The risk is that Rodriguez will avoid free and fair elections which the Venezuelans want and believe Machado would win in a landslide. Venezuela’s petroleum sector needs significant investment, with Trump saying that he hoped for US$100 billion from the private sector. However, major oil companies are reluctant to invest in Venezuela since the removal of Maduro, citing political and economic instability. [iii]

Delcy Rodriguez

Mixed Views

According to the UN International Organisation for Migration, about 7.7 million Venezuelans have left the country since 2000. Colombia received the largest number of about 2.8 million followed by Peru with 1.6 million.

Venezuelans in Australia have been celebrating the removal of Maduro, calling the US military intervention the only way to escape the dictatorship which saw them targeted, impoverished and forced to flee. Social media has shown thousands of Venezuelans in the capital of Caracas celebrating the capture of Maduro. The Argentine president, Javier Milei also celebrated the capture of Maduro and in Florida, members of the local Venezuelan community also celebrated. Throughout Latin America, Venezuelan expats gathered outside their national embassies to celebrate.[iv]

However, Trump’s military assault and the abduction of Maduro also sparked a backlash from Latin America and across the globe. The former president of Bolivia repudiated the attack while the Colombian president decried US aggression against the sovereignty of Venezuela. The Presidents of Chile and Mexico similarly condemned the assault.

In the US, criticism mounted against the military operation in Venezuela and the newly inaugurated New York City mayor, Zohran Mamdani condemned the operation, branding it as an “act of war”. In Manhattan, crowds marched through the streets with signs reading “No War on Venezuela”.

Moscow has expressed “Unwavering solidarity with the Venezuelan people and Government” and the Russian ambassador to the UN has described Washington’s actions in Venezuela as “international banditry”. China, together with several other BRICS nations has also condemned the US actions. However, despite condemnations, neither Russia nor China has taken any action beyond diplomatic protests, and China has deliberately avoided any military role in the region.

Cuba and Venezuela

Venezuela is a long-standing ally of Cuba and sends around 30,000 barrels of oil per day to Cuba. Venezuela and Cuba have shared a vision of socialism ever since Hugo Chavez (President of Venezuela 1999-2013) met the ageing leader of the Cuban Revolution, Fidel Castro in 1999. For years, Venezuelan oil has flowed into Cuba in exchange for doctors and medics travelling to Venezuela. Maduro’s security detail was made up almost entirely of Cuban bodyguards, 32 of whom were killed in the US military operation to capture Maduro.

The US and Cuba have had a strained relationship since Fidel Castro overthrew a US backed government in 1959. Although steps were taken by former President Barack Obama to improve diplomatic relations with Cuba, the Trump administration reversed those moves. The Cuban President, Miguel Diaz-Canel claims that Cuba’s severe economic shortages are the fault of the “Draconian measures of extreme strangulation that the US has been applying to us for six decades”. Since the time of John F. Kennedy every US administration has coerced or threatened Cuba and Washington has maintained a comprehensive trade embargo on Cuba since the 1960s.[v]

Trump has said that without Maduro and the oil supplies from Venezuela, “Cuba looks likely to be ready to fall”. He and Rubio have made it clear that the collapse of Cuba’s Communist government was not only a likely side benefit of Maduro’s ouster, but a goal.

A History of US Intervention

James Monroe served as the fifth president of the United States from 1817 to 1825. The “Monroe Doctrine” emerged in 1823 as a policy to prevent European powers from meddling in the US sphere of influence in the Western Hemisphere. Mexico’s independence from Spain was ultimately gained in 1821, but after Mexico’s war with the US in the late 1840s, it lost Texas, New Mexico and California to the US. Spain had earlier ceded Florida to the US in 1819.

Trump has dubbed the new circumstances in Latin America, the “Donroe Doctrine”. Although he had previously vowed to avoid foreign interventions, he is currently making threats similar to those of past presidents. He repeatedly claims that he wants to make Canada American’s 51^st state and to take Greenland from Denmark.[vi]

The US State Department has said the US would exert greater power across the Western Hemisphere saying, “This is our Hemisphere and President Trump will not allow our security to be threatened”. Rubio issued a similar warning saying, “We are not going to allow the Western Hemisphere to be a base of operations for adversaries, competitors, and rivals of the United States”.[vii]

Following the adoption of the Monroe Doctrine in the 19^th century, the US declared the Western Hemisphere to be its own backyard, and it played a role in staging dozens of coups and government overthrows in the 20^th century alone. Maduro is just the latest chapter.

Examples of successful US regime changes include - In 1954, Guatemala’s elected president Jacobo Arbenz was ousted by mercenaries trained and funded by Washington. In 1965, citing a “Communist threat” the US sent its military to Santo Domingo to crack down on supporters of Juan Bosch, the first democratically elected president of the Dominican Republic. In 1973, Salvador Allende was ousted in a US backed coup in Chile. This led to a 17-year long dictatorship under Augusto Pinochet and thousands were imprisoned for political reasons.

In a failed coup attempt, Cuban exiles, backed by the US landed in Cuba in 1961 to overthrow the government of Fidel Castro who had come to power in 1959 following a revolution to overthrow Batista, the US backed dictator. The Bay of Pigs invasion ended in disaster as the Cuban military led by Castro defeated the 1,500 strong force in two days. This pushed Cuba closer to the Soviet Union and set the stage for the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962.[viii]

The Impact on China

The removal of Maduro is likely to change China’s strategic calculations. China is Iran’s largest customer and, if regime change occurs in Iran, disrupting oil supplies to China, it will need to seek alternative sources. However, with Venezuela being run by the US there is a prospect of China losing both Iranian and Venezuelan oil. This could be catastrophic for China’s economy as Venezuela and Iran together provide almost one third of Chinese oil imports. Despite that, China did not rescue Iran in 2025 during Operation Midnight Hammer nor did it come to the rescue of Maduro in January 2026.[ix]

For two decades China has been building close ties in Latin America but the US removal of Maduro shifts the playing field for China. It also dents the view promoted by Xi Jinping that American power was waning and that changes were accelerating in China’s favour. The takedown of Maduro potentially throws a wrench in Xi’s calculations.[x] Nevertheless, it would be unwise to dismiss China or to underestimate its resourcefulness.

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

Subscribe now

[i] Asia Times (AT) – Contrasting Chinese and US Power Plays, 12 Jan 26

[ii] Wall Street Journal (WSJ), Trump Accepts Machado’s Nobel Peace Prize – 15 Jan 26

[iii] WSJ, Rodriguez goes from pariah to US pick – 16 Jan 26

[iv] I24 News (Israel) – Venezuelans Celebrate Maduro Auster, 4 Jan 226

[v] BBC – Trump tells Cuba to Make a Deal, 12 Jan 26

[vi] South China Morning Post (SCMP), Monroe Doctrine 2.0, 7 Jan 26

[vii] RT (Russia), US threatens Greater control over Western Hemisphere, 6 Jan 26

[viii] RT Maduro’s Capture follows long list of US Interventions, 4 Jan 26

[ix] Nikkei Asia, Venezuela strike to change China’s Calculations, 5 Jan 26

[x] WSJ Madura Capture threatens China’s Ambitions, 5 Jan 26

https://www.inmyopinion.co/post/the-scourge-of-anti-semitism-brings-terror-to-bondi-beach

Calls for a Commonwealth Royal Commission

Despite pleas from Jewish and other leaders across the political, legal and business worlds (including the former Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia, Robert French) for Prime Minister Albanese to call a Commonwealth Royal Commission, he continues to refuse, arguing that no such royal commission was called following the Port Arthur massacre, nor the Lindt siege. What he failed to mention was the comparable Christchurch massacre when New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern promptly ordered a royal commission. The Prime Minister’s failure is now described as “A National Crisis”.

Albanese’s pathetic response was to say, there is “No place in Australia for this kind of hatred and it has to stop” and “We need to root out any evil that is anti-Semitism across the board. My government is committed to do that and that is what Australians want to see”. He spoke as if merely uttering these words would bring an end to the hostility and terror but, there was no action from him - none even after a rabbi’s car in Melbourne, displaying Chanukah decorations in the heart of Melbourne’s St Kilda East was firebombed in the early hours of Christmas morning. Albanese merely said, “What we will do is continue to co-operate and work with Premier Minns” who plans to hold a commission in New South Wales. It was a complete “copout” by the Prime Minister.

Time’s up, Mr. Albanese. No more excuses!

Wilful Blindness

The Bondi massacre demanded an extraordinary national response. Instead, Albanese delivered an internal departmental review. That is not leadership. It was retreat. Albanese could not even bring himself to back the Minns government crackdown on chants such as “From the river to the sea” and “Globalise the Intifada”.

Albanese is accused of “wilful blindness”. Instead of meaningful action, his government has instead tasked former defence chief Dennis Richardson to undertake a snap review of Federal enforcement and intelligence agencies – namely ASIO and the AFP, and their role in the terror attack! Unsurprisingly, this has angered these organisations which are concerned that the government is “throwing them under the bus” to deflect from its own inaction. Albanese had been warned by security chiefs that existing anti-vilification and hate speech laws were too weak and that the thresholds for prosecution needed to be lowered, but there was still no action. The proposed departmental review has been trashed – it has failed to even mention Jewish Australians, anti-Semitism, radicalisation or Islamic extremism!

Alarm bells were ringing long ago. There was the 9 October 2023 protest at the Sydney Opera House, the 300% rise in harassment, threats and assaults against Jewish Australians, the arson and vandalism of Jewish businesses, schools and places of worship, anti-Semitism on university campuses as well as the weekly protest marches in Australia calling for the destruction of Israel and the Jewish people. At the centre of the tragedy is the rise of radical Islamist extremism and violent anti-Semitism. Individuals who entered Australia holding extremist ideologies were able to obtain firearm licenses and to purchase weapons.

Does the Problem Lie Within the Labor Party?

Some Labor Party members have themselves called out widespread anti-Semitism running rampant within the ALP and have said that “extremely hateful language” was frequently used in branch meetings.

Only two weeks before the Bondi massacre, the Queensland Branch of the ALP had unanimously passed a series of resolutions condemning Israel, including accusing Israel of “genocide”. When such tropes are endorsed within mainstream political institutions, any boundary between criticism of the Jewish state and hatred of the Jewish people collapses. Only days ago, a group of rabbis from across Australia wrote to Albanese referring to “The most tragic and violent manifestation of a climate in which visceral hatred towards Jews has been allowed to grow louder, more normalised and more tolerated”. They spoke out against the injustice of permitting weekly pro-Palestinian marches, marked by intimidation and threats, while Jews were advised by the police to stay away from public spaces “for their own safety”!

On December 29, Janet Albrechtsen, writing in The Australian, described the Prime Minister’s “award-winning word salad” when he said, “The issue there is that royal commissions can be good at deciding facts. Where royal commissions are not as good, is to consider things that are not agreed, where people have differences of views and to enable, which is what it would do, a repetition of some of the worst elements”. As Albrechtsen remarked, those comments “Will go down as some of the most ridiculous responses imaginable by this government”. Labor’s excuse was so poor and so obviously bogus that Albanese must know things that we in Australia do not know – something so deep and dark within the Labor government that they believe any excuse that can save them from exposure is justified.

There is a Better Side to Australia

As Gemma Tognini wrote, also in The Australian, there is another version of what Australia is, “It is a hero called Ahmed al-Ahmed who attacked and disarmed one of the terrorists, the Russian speaking Jewish migrants in their 60s, Sophie and Boris Berman, shot dead trying to disarm the terrorist at the start of the bloody rampage, and a woman shielding a stranger’s child as bullets rained down”. They indeed represent the very best of us. As for this Australian government, there is no time to lose and no place to hide.

In stark contrast, NSW Premier Chris Minns has given a masterclass in what must be done. While Albanese has been unwilling to comment on questions about anti-Semitism within the Labor Party, the Jewish community holds up Premier Minns as a prime example of the leadership they want from Canberra He will bring a state royal commission and will step up limits on protests. The NSW Police Commissioner, Mal Lanyon has already taken steps to enforce the new anti-protest laws and has announced a two week moratorium on all applications for public demonstrations. The moratorium would stretch across south-west, north-west and central Sydney and its duration may be further extended.

However, Josh Lees and his Palestine Action Group (PAG) is said to be planning a constitutional challenge to these restrictions. PAG previously succeeded in persuading the Supreme Court to strike down a law enacted in February 2025, when it argued that it breached constitutional freedom of political communication!

A Follower – Not a Leader

There is much evidence to show that this Prime Minister is a follower, but he is not a leader:

• He called for the premature recognition of a Palestinian state but did so only after following in the footsteps of Britain, France and Canada.

• Shortly before the 2022 Federal election, Albanese learned that then Prime Minister Morrison had secretly negotiated and agreed to the AUKUS deal involving Australia obtaining nuclear powered submarines at an eye watering cost of AU$368 billion. Morrison did so without even consulting his own cabinet. However, faced with an imminent election, Albanese made the fateful decision to follow in Morrison’s footsteps and he continues to do so, even now.

• In the face of the Bondi massacre when 15 innocent Australians were murdered, Albanese refused a Commonwealth Royal Commission, saying instead that no such commission had been called after the Port Arthur massacre nor the Lindt siege.

It is Time for this Prime Minister to Stand Aside

It is increasingly evident that new leadership is desperately needed in Australia. The Australian nation deserves a leader who puts the security and unity of all Australians above political interests. Australia would be better served if the Prime Minister took the courageous step of standing down and allowing the kind of leader which Australia so desperately needs, to take his place. Not only would this be in Australia’s best interests but, in all likelihood it would also benefit Mr. Albanese who recently married Jodie Haydon and acquired a large clifftop home in Copacabana on the New South Wales Central Coast. As a retired Prime Minister, he would be the beneficiary of a comfortable retirement pension. Should the Prime Minister heed the calls to step aside, he might even be praised for having the courage to do so.

There is currently a petition circulating in Australia demanding such resignation. Many thousands of Australians have already signed up.

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

Subscribe now

It was the first night of Chanukah - Sunday evening 14 December, a major Jewish holiday commemorating the rededication of the Second Temple in Jerusalem, traditionally marked with the lighting of candles over eight successive nights. Many members of the Jewish community gathered to celebrate the “Chanukah by the Sea Festival” at Sydney’s iconic Bondi beach.

Light Turns to Darkness

In one of Australia’s darkest days, unthinkable terror arrived at Bondi Beach on Sunday evening. Two gunmen opened fire on the Jewish community as they celebrated Chanukah, leaving at least 15 dead and 38 more in hospital. What was to have been a joyous celebration was horribly marred by the most horrific terrorist attack. It was the worst mass shooting in Australia since April 1996 when 35 people were killed in a mass shooting at Port Arthur in Tasmania.

As Caroline Overington wrote, “The cause of the massacre is screamingly obvious. Some people really hate Jews”. She added that anti-Semitism is “Writhing like a vile snake in Australia. We have to stomp on the head of this beast before it strangles the idea of Australia as the best, fairest, kindest, most peaceful nation on earth”.

Courage

A 43 year old Muslim man and father of two, Ahmed al-Ahmed suddenly emerged, unarmed and bravely tackled and disarmed one of the shooters. Ahmed was shot twice in the arm during the altercation. He was immediately hailed as a “hero” by Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. The Premier of New South Wales, Chris Minns described the footage of Ahmed tackling the gunman as “The most unbelievable scene I’ve ever seen” adding, “That man is a genuine hero and I’ve no doubt that there are many, many people alive tonight as a result of his bravery”.

Benjamin Netanyahu Speaks Out

Netanyahu accused the Albanese government of doing nothing to stop the spread of anti-Semitism in Australia. He had earlier accused Albanese of responding to anti-Semitism with “appeasement and more appeasement” saying he had repeatedly warned him that his support for a Palestinian state and his handling of domestic anti-Semitism would put Jewish people at risk. He called on the Prime Minister to “replace weakness with action and appeasement with resolve” and he praised Ahmed al-Ahmed saying, “We saw the action of a brave man – turns out a Muslim brave man, and I salute him”.

Messages of Goodwill

Australia has received multiple messages of goodwill from around the world, including from the New York City-mayor elect, Zohran Mamdani saying, “The attack at a Chanukah celebration in Sydney was a vile act of anti-Semitic terror” adding that the Jewish community had been plunged “into mourning and loss on a holiday of light so painfully reduced to a day of darkness”.

The National Imams Council and the Muslim community in Australia released a statement condemning the “horrific shootings” in Bondi and saying, “Those responsible must be held fully accountable and face the full force of the law”.

The Buck Must Stop with the Prime Minister

Australia’s Prime Minister must be held to account for the disaster. Australian weakness in the face of anti-Semitism has been evident ever since the slaughter of 1,200 Israelis on 7 October 2023 when it was celebrated in Sydney’s Muslim heartland of Lakemba – even before the sickening anti-Jewish hatred outside the Opera House on 9 October. Sadly, Albanese’s pathetic response was to say, “we should not celebrate such killing”. The Albanese government has failed to provide the necessary leadership and has not even been able to use the word “anti-Semitism” without also referencing “Islamophobia”. The time for weasel words and conflation is over.

The time to unleash real strength against those who seek to harm innocent Australians is now. However, Albanese appears to be both conflicted and compromised. It is said that a leopard never changes its spots and, in the same way, a person’s fundamental character, especially negative traits cannot, and cannot be expected to change.

In an interview with Deputy prime minister Richard Marles in the aftermath of the terror attack, Marles was interrupted by a furious outburst from the audience saying, “You and your government are an absolute disgrace. You, the Prime Minister, and Penny Wong should all go.” Indeed, there have been calls for Albanese to step down from his position, since he and his government has failed the Jewish community.

More Commentary

John Howard said of Albanese, “His greatest failure is not to provide the moral leadership that a Prime Minister can in denouncing anti-Semitism”. Australia’s Opposition Leader, Sussan Ley said, “We have seen a clear lack of leadership in keeping Jewish Australians safe and we have a government that sees anti-Semitism as a problem to be managed, not the evil that needs to be eradicated”.

In a brilliant speech by Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, she furiously criticized the Prime Minister for his weakness in tolerating anti-Semitism, saying that he was not fit to hold the office which he occupies. Her ten minute speech can be found on YouTube entitled “My thoughts in the wake of the Bondi Beach terrorist attack”. It is well worth listening to her speech, which is arguably the best commentary on the topic to date.

On Wednesday, politicians paid their respects at the funeral of Rabbi Eli Schlanger who was murdered on Sunday night. Former Prime Minister Scott Morrison, NSW Premier Chris Minns, Sussan Ley, nationals leader David Littleproud, Jewish Liberal MP Julian Leeser and federal Jewish Labor MP Josh Burns were all in attendance – but not Anthony Albanese.

Speaking at a remembrance service at St Mary’s Cathedral in Sydney, Archbishop Fisher warned that a “dark stain of anti-Semitism” had been spreading and that “For two years, week after week, demonstrations have taken place in Hyde Park, within earshot of the Great synagogue where inflammatory messages were articulated unchecked”. He added that Jewish Australians were “met with one of the oldest and darkest of human hatreds” on Sunday night.

Former intelligence official, Nick Warner said, “The tragedy of Bondi needs to be a turning point, led by the federal and state governments, for serious action to crack down on anti-Semitism, to stem the fear, hatred and anger in our communities” and adding, “Ahmed al-Ahmed is the symbol and inspiration – a Muslim man tackling a Muslim terrorist to save Jewish lives. We need to rebuild on his example and his bravery”.

Josh Frydenberg

Josh Frydenberg, the former Treasurer and most senior Jewish cabinet minister in Australia’s history spoke at the scene of the Bondi Beach massacre with strength, passion, conviction and courage driven by emotion and righteousness. As he said, “I am here to mourn but I’m also here to warn”.

Frydenberg accused Albanese of having “Allowed Australia to be radicalised on his watch”, telling him to accept “personal responsibility” for the anti-Semitic Bondi Beach massacre, referring to it as “The greatest stain on this nation”. He added, “We are here to fight for the soul of Australia and to fight for the survival of the Australian Jewish community that has been here since the arrival of the first Fleet”. He spoke of some of the great Jewish Australians, Sir John Monash, Sir Isaac Isaacs, Sir Zelman Cowen and others who had contributed so much to the nation. He concluded, “We need leaders who don’t just want the job but who are prepared to do the job”.

This is only a brief excerpt from Frydenberg’s speech which has been hailed as one of the greatest in Australia’s history.

Frydenberg is viewed by many conservatives as the party’s savior if he should return to politics. According to a report in Sky News on 17 December, he has indicated that he intends to make a return to federal politics but, only time will tell if that does eventuate. Watch this space! This country is screaming out for leadership and Frydenberg has skills and commitment to show the way.

Frydenberg’s seven pieces of advice for the PM

1. Ban hate preachers and close the Al Madina Dawah Centre, a controversial Islamic “prayer centre” that has been linked with the gunmen.

2. Ban extremist organisations starting with Hizb ut-Tahrir, an Islamic fundamentalist group.

3. Prosecute people who incite anti-Semitic violence and hatred.

4. Stop the weekly pro-Palestinian protests.

5. Invest in education to teach young people about the history of the Holocaust and the Middle East, and make sure the curriculum is coordinated across all states and territories.

6. Put in place a ‘more effective and rigorous’ immigration system that acknowledges it is a “privilege” to come to and stay in Australia.

7. Establish a Royal commission to into the Bondi terror attack and the rise of anti-Semitism in Australia, while acting on special envoy to combat anti-Semitism Jillian Segal’s report that was released in July.

The Anti-Semitism Envoy

Albanese’s hand-picked anti-Semitism envoy, Jillian Segal warned that the calls to “Globalize the Intifada” had finally come to Bondi Beach and she called on the government to accelerate her plan to tackle anti-Jewish hate. No progress has been made on her major recommendations which were produced almost 6 months ago.

Now, Albanese claims that he is acting on the plan by ramping up security in Jewish areas after the terrorist attack adding, “My Government will continue to stand with Jewish Australians and continue to stamp out anti-Semitism in all its forms. We have taken strong action”. It was nothing but more empty words! His government has conflated anti-Semitism with Islamophobia and has even established a Special Envoy to combat Islamophobia, alongside the Envoy he appointed to combat anti-Semitism!

A U-Turn and Late Change of Direction

Only on 18 December after rising anger in the wake of the Bondi massacre did Albanese finally acknowledged that more could have been done to combat anti-Semitism in the period since October 2023.

Eventually on the fifth day of Chanukah days after the murder of 15 innocent victims, Albanese has announced long overdue reforms to crackdown on anti-Semitism, hate speech and radicalisation. The reforms include - new powers for the home affairs minister to reject or cancel visas for those who spread hate; stronger penalties for hate speech and violence; an anti-Semitism Education Task force led by David Gonski; and the imposition of tougher rules on racism and anti-Semitism on campuses. He also said the government would (at last) work through recommendations in Jillian Segal’s report.

Jewish Australian leaders have cautiously welcomed the decision but have rightly said, “It shouldn’t take the mass murder of Jews to spur action to stamp out hate”.

Conclusion

There has been extensive commentary, criticism and recommendations in the short time since the horrifying attack on 14 December, particularly in The Australian, The Sydney Morning Herald, the Times of Israel, and many other publications – including the Russian news.

It is impossible to undo the disaster which has occurred. Only time will tell whether and to what extent the proposed reforms will have real and meaningful effect. Clearly, robust action by this government is absolutely essential if Australia is to achieve a better, safer and more harmonious Australian environment.

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

Subscribe now

China’s President Xi’s call to President Trump in November marked a watershed in the US-China relationship. For the first time, China’s President signalled his arrival as the US President’s “peer” while moving the US into a more accommodating position on Taiwan. China appears to have concluded that the era of US dominance is over and a multipolar world has arrived where peer relationships can be competitive instead of adversarial. It is increasingly clear that China is here to stay and Australia should adjust to this new strategic reality.[i]

In recognition of China’s new status, Trump spoke of a “G2” with China and he resurrected the idea that the US and China, as the two superpowers would together manage global issues. If the Trump administration follows through and renounces strategic competition with China, this will mark the most fundamental shift in American strategic thinking since the end of the Cold War. The US confirmed that Trump would visit China in April 2026 and Xi would reciprocate later the same year.

Cheng Li-wun, the newly elected leader of Taiwan’s Kuomintang (KMT) which holds a plurality in the Taiwanese parliament, has taken a more pro-Beijing line than her predecessor. A potential KMT victory at the next Taiwan election in 2028 could make peaceful absorption of Taiwan by China more likely.[ii]

The US 2025 National Security Strategy (NSS)

The NSS was released by the White House on 4 December 2025 marking a profound shift in US foreign policy, focused on protecting US core national interests, namely: Homeland security, economic prosperity, and regional dominance in the Western Hemisphere.

The document is critical of the “unrealistic expectations” of European leaders for settling the war in Ukraine and proposes an expeditious cessation of hostilities in Ukraine and establishing strategic stability with Russia as a “core interest of the US” while also calling for an end to NATO expansion. The NSS casts Washington as a potential moderating force between Moscow and Europe.

The NSS also calls for an adjustment of the US global military posture so that it can put more focus on and restore America’s pre-eminence in the Western Hemisphere, at the same time, calling for increased defence spending from Japan, South Korea, Australia and Taiwan.

The document is said to layout a coherent vision of a world dominated by three big powers – the US, China and Russia which have areas of cooperation and zones of influence while downgrading China from a “pacing threat” to that of an “economic competitor” and calling for selective engagement with adversaries.[iii]

Australia’s Changing Circumstances

The global order is changing rapidly, but Australia’s foreign policy continues to be made looking into the rear-vision mirror to a more comfortable and secure world. Instead of recognising that the world order has changed profoundly, Australia has surrendered much of its sovereignty, especially by allowing long-range US bombers to be based at Tindal near Darwin and for US nuclear-powered and armed submarines to be based at Stirling near Perth. Deploying US assets at these bases has only one purpose which is to prosecute a war on China. Consequently, these bases will potentially be nuclear targets for China. NO Australian national interests can be served by this. Instead, it is about paying dues to the US in the hope that Australia will be protected by the US although that has always been a dubious proposition.[iv]

Many knowledgeable commentators question the wisdom of the AUKUS deal for Australia to buy nuclear powered submarines and Paul Keating has called it “the worst deal in all history”. Australia’s historic willingness to do whatever the US wants has seen Australia take part in pointless wars including in Iraq and Afghanistan. Many Australians see China as the principal object of concern. However, Clinton Fernandes, in his recent book, Turbulence uses the debate about “freedom of navigation” to illustrate how misguided and limited the discussion about the “China threat” really is. He points out that China, as the world’s largest trading nation is even more reliant on safe passage of its exports than is Australia and the last thing China would want is a war in the western Pacific Ocean which would disrupt nearly all of its seaborne supplies.[v]

China on the Move

Deng Xiaoping

Deng Xiaoping (1904-1997) was the chief architect of China’s reform and opening up. In January 1992, Deng is reported to have said that while “The Middle East had oil, China had rare earth elements”! He recognised that the key to achieving modernisation was the development of science and technology and, unless China gave special attention to education, it would be impossible to develop the necessary knowledge of science and technology. It has since done so on a massive scale.[vi]

Trump chose not to attend the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in South Korea in October 2025 while Xi took the opportunity to portray Beijing as the leading global champion of free and open trade. Standing before the 21-member APEC bloc’s leaders, Xi called for political unity and greater economic cooperation and his agenda included high-level talks with the leaders of Japan, Canada and Thailand. Earlier, a trade agreement had been signed by Trump and Xi providing for the US to lower tariffs on Chinese goods and for China to suspend its rare-earth export controls. However, the deal indicated that the US was more dependent on Chinese goodwill than vice versa.[vii]

Japan

Japan’s newly elected Prime Minister, Sanae Takaichi recently said a possible attack by Beijing on Taiwan could be “survival-threatening” for Japan and Tokyo might be pushed to a military clash with China if Beijing’s aggression gave it no other choice. This resulted in an immediate downward spiral in ties between China and Japan, leading to Beijing suspending imports of Japanese seafood, advising its citizens not to travel or study in Japan (resulting in the cancellation of thousands of flights), and cutting intergovernmental exchanges.

However, several Japanese lawmakers urged Takaichi to retract her remarks urging her to return to normalisation of Japan-China relations. She has since sought to dial down tensions, referring to the 1972 commitment which led to the normalisation of ties between Beijing and Tokyo. China reiterated that Taiwan is an inalienable part of the territory of China and Takaichi said the Japanese government “fully understands and respects this stand”.[viii]

Xinjiang

Xinjiang stretches across China’s north-western region borders on eight other countries. It is located along the Silk Road which has fueled trade between the East and West for centuries. However, Xinjiang became infamous for some of the worst allegations of Chinese authoritarianism, from the detention of more than one million Uighur Muslims in “re-education camps”, to claims of crimes against humanity. Beijing has since pumped billions of dollars into Xinjiang to advance its development. The Uighurs are the largest ethnic group in Xinjiang but Han Chinese now make up 40% of the region’s population.

In recent years, Xinjiang has emerged as a tourist destination and investment has been pouring into the region. Some 200 international hotels are already operating or planning to open in Xinjiang and in 2024, the region welcomed about 300 million visitors. Although the vast majority were domestic visitors, foreign tourism is growing and an increasing number of foreigners are approaching Xinjiang with open minds and a genuine desire to see and assess the truth for themselves. Travel agencies describe the region as “exotic and mysterious” saying it offers a “magical fusion of nature and culture which you won’t experience anywhere else in China”. Xinjiang was described by a Singaporean visitor in May 2024 as “New Zealand, Switzerland and Mongolia all packed into one place”.[ix]

Thailand

Thailand’s relationship with China has entered a new phase with its King’s historic five-day state visit to Beijing in November 2025. It was the first by a reigning Thai monarch in 50 years. The King sent a strong signal to his nation that Beijing now stands at the apex of Thailand’s external partnerships. Beijing used the royal visit to express its readiness to intensify relations with Thailand and to accelerate major projects, chief among them being the China-Thailand high-speed railway. China is also Thailand’s largest trading partner.

The King’s visit showed that Thailand was open to deeper engagement with China while maintaining a careful balancing act between Beijing and Washington without choosing sides in the China-US rivalry. Although the US-Thai defence relationship continues to be robust, it no longer dominates and Thailand was the first country to conduct joint exercises with three branches of China’s People’s Liberation Army – its Ground Force, Navy and Air Force.[x]

ROK (South Korea)

Jeju is a small island to the south of ROK from which fresh produce is transported on the recently launched Qingdao-Jeju container line, Jeju’s first international shipping route which enables a journey which once took two weeks, to now be completed overnight. In early November President Xi Jinping met with the ROK President Lee Jae-myung and their relationship continues to move forward with mutual respect and mutual benefit.

China has been ROK’s largest trading partner for 21 consecutive years while ROK has regained its position as China’s second largest trading partner. Travel between the nations has surged with ROK citizens making nearly 2 million trips to China between January and August 2025. Recently, President Lee sent a delegation to China with a clear message to put bilateral relations back on a stable and constructive track and in September ROK’s National Assembly Speaker attended events marking the 80^th anniversary of the victory of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression.[xi]

What Next?

With the remarkable evolution of China and the most recent US recognition of China’s standing, it is high time for Australia to reassess its position and to seriously and meaningfully open up to the Australian public about what AUKUS really is and the implications of the $368 billion deal and the immense risks to which it exposes the Australian nation.

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

Subscribe now

[i] President Xi rang President Trump, thepoint.com.au, by Allan Behm 29 Nov 25

[ii] A newly confident China is jockeying for more global clout, Wall St Journal, 2 Dec 25

[iii] Trump’s new National Security Strategy takes aim at Europe, Wall St Journal, 6 Dec 25

[iv] The G2 revival, Trump & Xi to sort out the world’s problems, Geoff Raby, former Australia’s China Ambassador

[v] Hypocrisy and folly that Australia’s subservience to America, The Conversation, 1 Dec 25

[vi] How Deng secured China’s winning hand, SCMP.7 Nov 25

[vii] Fighting for the Limelight, Foreign Policy, 1 Nov 25

[viii] Sanae Takaichi moves to ease tensions with China over Taiwan, SCMP, 3 Dec 25

[ix] 300 million tourists just visited Xinjiang, BBC, 2Nov 25

[x] Unprecedented China-Thailand relationship, RT, 29 Nov 25

[xi] How China, ROK leaders open new prospects, CGTN, 1 Nov 25