The silence of the ballot box: ignoring Gaza could cost Labor seats

In an era where the personal is political and the global is local, foreign policy silence and trying to appease one group over another, might not be a safe political strategy anymore.

The recent killings in Gaza of 15 medics and rescue workers by the Israel Defense Forces was one of the most horrifying developments that we’ve seen, in a spate of massacres that has long crossed the boundaries of legality, morality, and humanity. All available evidence doesn’t suggest accidental crossfire or collateral damage, but targeted killings – executions in the service of a slow, methodical ethnic cleansing campaign by the state of Israel. It is a campaign which has, over the past two months, claimed the lives of women, children, aid workers, journalists, and civilians of all types. The pretext, endlessly repeated by Israel and parroted by its international allies, is Hamas on all occasions, but the nature of these victims – their roles, ages, and identities – tells another completely different story. Medics are not militants. Babies are not insurgents. And yet, this indiscriminate slaughter continues, cheered on by the state of Israel and met with complicity, cowardice, and silence from much of the international community – including Australia.

In any democracy on morality and the rule of law, a moment like this – when the world is witnessing a slow genocide, broadcast in real time – should provoke urgent political debate. But in the middle of Australia’s federal election campaign, there is a glaring absence. Labor is not talking about Gaza. The Coalition is not talking about Gaza – except to score points on antisemitism – and the mainstream press, with a few notable exceptions, is hardly questioning them at all. It’s as though the issue of Gaza – one that has moved hundreds of thousands of Australians to protest, to grieve, and to question their own government’s international allegiances – simply doesn’t exist within the official campaign narrative, as though the conflict has never happened and doesn’t even exist. And this is all by design.

Labor, under Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, is aware that any criticism of Israel can and will be quickly weaponised as an accusation of antisemitism – a smear that has already crippled political debate in Britain, the United States, and many other countries in the Western world. Rather than confront this risk head-on, the party appears to have opted for evasion: relying on vague talking points, offering sterile platitudes, and hope the issue just doesn’t appear in the public view before election day. When Foreign Minister Penny Wong was asked about the killing of those 15 medics, she responded not with outrage or condemnation, but with bureaucratic diplomacy. There must be a “full and thorough investigation,” she said, and the need for protection of humanitarian workers under international law, suggesting that Australia was working with other countries on a “declaration” to that effect. A ‘declaration’ is the only thing Australia can offer at the moment? On parchment, or sent via e-mail? Or perhaps a post on Twitter. A declaration of cowardice, that’s all it was.

This is the language of delay, of ambiguity, and of passive complicity. It’s not designed to call out war crimes, or hold power to account, or provide moral clarity. It is designed to appease, and to downplay any public debate. Labor has taken refuge in the bland language of ‘international humanitarian law,’ knowing that these mechanisms are slow, ineffective, and easily bypassed by powerful vassal states such as Israel. A ‘declaration’ won’t stop bombs. A statement about the importance of ‘every innocent life’ won’t bring back the dead. And a generic call for a ceasefire, without demanding accountability from those committing the crimes, is not a political position – it’s just an abdication of responsibility.

The Prime Minister, too, has offered little of substance. Albanese has acknowledged the trauma felt by Australians with families in Gaza, Israel, or Lebanon, but quickly moved back to cautious generalities. Every innocent life matters, he said. We want a ceasefire and we want hostages released. And then came the inevitable cliché of the ‘two-state solution’ – a phrase that nobody understands the meaning of anymore, and in the context of Israel’s ongoing settlement expansion, military occupation, and de facto annexation, has become little more than a diplomatic ghost. It’s a slogan with no plan behind it, no timeline, no enforcement, and no credibility. And it’s used because it allows politicians to appear principled while doing nothing about the issue.

If the Labor government cannot speak clearly about such an issue during an election campaign – and on an issue that is so clearly defined within the Labor Platform – if it cannot defend the rights of journalists, doctors, and children not to be bombed into oblivion, then what does it stand for? How many more headless children does it need to see being held by grieving parents before it can go beyond the stage of offering meaningless platitudes and gratuitous declarations?

There is still time in this election campaign for these issues to be confronted. But at the moment, the silence from both major parties, in the face of genocide, is not neutrality. It’s just complicity.

The Greens are speaking up on Gaza

While the major parties bury their heads in the diplomatic sand, one political force in Australia has consistently refused to look away. The Australian Greens have emerged as the only parliamentary party willing to speak with moral clarity about what is happening in Gaza, and calling it what it is: genocide. While Labor and the Coalition tiptoe around the truth, desperate to avoid offending powerful lobbyists or inviting bad-faith accusations of antisemitism, the Greens are campaigning unapologetically on a platform grounded in international law, human rights, and humanitarian principles.

The leader of the Greens, Adam Bandt, hasn’t minced his words: “Tens of thousands of children have been killed,” he said during the week, “a health care system has been destroyed… people’s homes have been reduced to rubble”. Bandt also pointed out that this is not a radical opinion but a matter of public record, supported by reports from organisations such as Amnesty International and corroborated by the International Criminal Court, which has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In an age where truth is filtered, managed, and spun into silence, the Greens have opted for confrontation – willing to challenge the orthodoxy of Australia’s outdated foreign policy influenced by Israel and the U.S., and are risking a political backlash to stand on the side of justice.

This is not a fringe opinion. As the death toll in Gaza climbs and images of mass graves, bombed-out hospitals, and murdered medics circulate globally, more Australians are beginning to demand that their government takes a stand. But it is only the Greens – and a few independents in electorates with high Muslim populations – who are prepared to call out the obvious: a genocide is being perpetrated by Israel, and the Western world is watching on and aiding this genocide, including Australia.

While Gaza issue might not reshape the entire election outcome, it will influence thousands of votes. In tightly contested seats – such as those in inner Melbourne – those votes will matter. For many Australians, particularly younger and ethnically diverse voters who see the situation with a sense of moral urgency, Labor’s timidity is seen as a betrayal. These voters are not confused by the talking points about ‘balance’ and ‘both side-ism’ – they see a state with overwhelming military power crushing a besieged population – and a Western-backed government too cowardly to call it for what it is.

That cowardice is further exposed when comparing the Greens’ straightforward language with Labor’s evasive rhetoric. Where Senator Wong hides behind procedural jargon and vague diplomatic gestures, Bandt confronts the brutal reality of a military occupation, settler violence, and the long-standing refusal of Israel to recognise Palestinian sovereignty. He links peace to justice; he ties any resolution to the fundamental requirement of ending the occupation. And most importantly, he points the finger at Australia’s complicity: the military contracts, the diplomatic cover, the deference to Israeli lobby groups who shape domestic narratives through fear and misinformation.

Even the most recent atrocity – where Israeli forces bombed clearly marked ambulances belonging to the Red Crescent – has failed to stir outrage from the government. First, Israel lied: it claimed the vehicles weren’t identifiable. Then, as footage emerged showing sirens blazing and markings visible in plain sight, the truth was undeniable. And yet again, silence from the Australian government: no condemnation; no consequences; no re-evaluation of diplomatic or military ties. Just the same mealy-mouthed statements about implementing more ceasefires that Israel doesn’t abide by, and platitudes about ‘balanced positions’. The facts are there for all to see, but those in power prefer the politics of evasion.

The blowback in multicultural areas

The Albanese government’s silence and indifference on Gaza won’t be without some electoral consequences. While there are certain seats in western Sydney that might feel some of that heat – Watson and Blaxland – the more likely electoral blowback will occur in Melbourne, which is placing Labor under increasing strain in seats where multicultural identity, foreign policy, and local politics are strongly mixed. Two electorates in inner Melbourne – Wills and Macnamara – will offer a clear test for whether Labor can hold together a fragile coalition of support amid an international crisis it refuses to confront honestly.

The seat of Macnamara is probably the more tenuous out of the two, and is home to one of Australia’s most politically active and tightly knit Jewish communities, where the sitting Labor MP Josh Burns – a staunch supporter of Israel – finds himself politically exposed and under criticism from both sides: pro-Israel groups see Labor’s statements as weak and insufficiently supportive of Israel’s military actions, while pro-Palestinian activists condemn the government’s refusal to call out Israeli war crimes or to demand an end to the occupation.

Despite the debate around Israel and Gaza, cost-of-living concerns and other issues will ultimately swing the vote in this seat, which will be a close and genuine three-way contest between Labor, the Greens and the Liberal Party. There were under 3,000 primary votes between Labor (29,552), Green (27,587) and Liberal (26,976) at the 2022 federal election and preference flows will, again, decide the winner. Of course, there won’t be the one overriding issue that will determine the ultimate result, but it will be the combination of different issues and how they influence different parts of the community, with Gaza being one of those issues.

But how much will Gaza affect the final result? No-one really knows. Voters are dealing with soaring rents, housing shortages, and climate change, and these are the bread-and-butter issues that every candidate must address. But the genocide committed by Israel in Gaza hovers in the background – not as a distraction, but as a test of political and moral integrity, and not just in Melbourne or in western Sydney. It has become a proxy for whether candidates truly represent the values of their constituents or just echo the empty rhetoric of the Labor–Liberal foreign policy consensus.

Labor is in a difficult electoral position, but it’s all of its own making. In trying to be all things to all people – offering strong support to the Jewish community and tepid words to Islamic communities, but avoiding hard truths – it is alienating both. In the one electorate – and it’s just in these electorates in Melbourne – it’s losing trust for not being supportive enough of Israel; in another, for refusing to hold Israel to account. This double bind reflects the broader crisis of moral leadership that haunts the Albanese government’s foreign policy posture. The party’s refusal to confront the reality of Gaza, to speak with clarity and principle, is not just eroding its moral standing – it may cost it seats.

As preference flows and final rankings become decisive, the Gaza conflict may yet leave a mark on this election in ways few anticipated. Not with sweeping national swings, but through precise, community-driven acts of electoral defiance in places where silence feels like betrayal and inaction feels like complicity. The lesson for the Labor Party is clear: in an era where the personal is political and the global is local, foreign policy silence and trying to appease one group over another, might not be a safe political strategy anymore.