Demanding an election is easy. Ensuring people can safely campaign, reach a polling station and choose their representatives is a much harder test of commitment to democracy. Penny Wong’s criticism of the postponed Palestinian elections raises a basic question for Australian foreign policy: what responsibilities should come with the demand for a vote?
Palestinians deserve accountable leadership, there’s no question about that, and Mahmoud Abbas’s prolonged presidency deserves much scrutiny. An entire generation has grown up without participating in national elections. But democratic renewal requires more than just replacing an ageing president or announcing a polling date: it requires freedom of movement, independent observers, reliable political competition and protection from intimidation. In Gaza and the occupied West Bank, those conditions cannot be separated from Israeli military control, displacement and the destruction of civilian infrastructure.
Occupation can’t become an indefinite excuse for unaccountable government, but neither can demands for reform disregard the external issues and interference – from Israel – that determines whether elections are practically possible.
For the Albanese government, its credibility depends on making those links between diplomatic demands with practical action. Although Australia’s joint statement acknowledges obstacles to Palestinian elections, the bigger test is what will be done to remove them. Interestingly, Australia was part of a joint statement to condemn the Palestinian leadership, but was absent when it came to issuing another joint statement to end trade and sanction the brutal Israeli settlers in the West Bank. It’s a confused message.
Beyond the argument over election timing, there is a bigger issue: is democracy being pursued as a right Palestinians can exercise, or presented as yet another impossible condition they need to satisfy?
