Hugo Weaving made a rare intervention into politics last week by observing that we don't openly talk about the Israel-Palestine war in this country.
Create a free account to read this article
or signup to continue reading
The 64-year-old screen and stage A-lister has never been the most 'political' of public figures but saw a startling contrast after working in Ireland.
What struck him once home was Australia's meek discussion of civilian deaths in the Middle-East, despite Western commitments to human rights, and risks of a wider war.
"I think the problem in our country is we're all cowed into not speaking out ... I think it's true up to the highest echelons of power in our country and in the US," he told Nine's Louise Rugendyke.
Peter Dutton's overwrought attempt to muzzle Penny Wong for canvassing constructive foreign policy options with the community, proved Weaving's point.
In the most absurd statement from any federal opposition leader in a decade, he depicted her proposal to put Palestinian statehood on the table - an idea being progressed in other democracies, not least by Britain's Conservative Foreign Secretary David Cameron - as the betrayal of an ally and the most reckless statement from an Australian foreign minister in his 22 years in Parliament.
That from someone who said nothing just a few of years ago when an embattled Scott Morrison revealed confidential leader-to-leader text traffic with Australia's actual ally, French President, Emmanual Macron.
I say "actual" because "ally" is the term of art favoured by Dutton's opposition right now to justify full and unqualified support for Israel. The word warrants interrogation if only because allies don't typically inflame your domestic tensions, refuse all reason, defy international courts and ignore entreaties to desist in the starvation and annihilation of civilians.
Neither do they wantonly kill the heroic humanitarian nationals of their friends and then brush it off with 'the fog of war' defence - especially when they have done much to create that fog.
Australians have learned more about Dutton's particular form of nationalism in these last few months than they have cumulatively over his long career. While he might have been expected to shimmy towards the pragmatic centre now that his leadership has been secured and an election looms, he is, arguably, becoming more tribal, doctrinaire and combative.
In 2018 when tearing down Malcolm Turnbull's prime ministership, he was going to smile more and show a different side of his character. What happened to that guy?
Rather than moderating once in the leadership, he is vectoring in real-time towards fanaticism.
Some blame his outspoken and unelected media backers.
"Peter is far more liked in the party than Morrison but he won't win by listening to Sky and Fox News," one of his former colleagues tells me.
"He might find many people really are quite horrified by pictures from Gaza every night ... when that Australian aid worker was killed, what was he thinking taking Israel's side?"
It's a good question. Clearly, Dutton's judgement must now be a live question for his colleagues. On this issue, it has drawn him sharply astray which was why he dredged up a pro-Palestinian demonstration in Sydney from six months ago.
"While no-one was killed during the October 9 protests, [they] were akin to a Port Arthur moment in terms of their social significance," he stated, arguing that Anthony Albanese had failed to adequately condemn such behaviour.
Probably forgotten by voters not glued to the outrage multiplier of Sky 'after dark', that rally had surged onto the forecourt of the Opera House angered by the lighting up of its famous sails with the Israeli flag. There were some unsavoury men present and there were reports of some chanting "gas the Jews". Such sentiments are unforgiveable.
Instances of antisemitism have continued since according to the Jewish community. Muslim Australians say they have experienced hate-speech also. Both sets of claims are difficult to quantify but doubtless have truths at their core - a reminder of the need for moral leadership and utter consistency in Australia's application of international law and norms.
Did acting to lower these social tensions guide the would-be PM?
No. Tasmanian Liberal MP Bridget Archer thought her leader's disrespect for the families of the worst mass shooting in post-federation Australia was an egregious error.
Archer told Guardian Australia his scripted comments had been "incredibly disrespectful to the victims and survivors of one of the darkest days in our nation's history and a wholly inappropriate and somewhat bizarre comparison". The state's Liberal Premier Jeremy Rockliff also condemned the reference.
A defiant Dutton said he had merely been referring to John Howard's purposeful leadership in enacting world-leading firearms laws after the Port Arthur massacre.
But surely the relevant lesson of that moment, apart from overwhelming public support (shooters and farmers notwithstanding) was the cooperation of the opposition and the unity such bipartisanship facilitated. There was real courage in Howard's reforming legislation, to be sure, but Dutton missed it. It lay in Howard's resolve to stem the violent loss of innocent lives even though it meant defying his rural-regional own base.
If Dutton wants to emulate Howard, he will work with the elected government's international attempts to unlock the deadly riddle of war in the Middle-East while bolstering social cohesion at home.
That's the kind of constructive leadership people could vote for.
- Mark Kenny is The Canberra Times' political analyst and a professor at the ANU's Australian Studies Institute. He hosts the Democracy Sausage podcast.
Mark Kenny
Mark Kenny is The Canberra Times' political analyst and a professor at the ANU's Australian Studies Institute. He hosts the Democracy Sausage podcast. He writes a column every Sunday.
Mark Kenny is The Canberra Times' political analyst and a professor at the ANU's Australian Studies Institute. He hosts the Democracy Sausage podcast. He writes a column every Sunday.
