24 December 2023, The Age, Letters
Could it be that recent criticisms of the Australian government’s decision to not send a vessel to the Middle East are just a little mischievous?
Australia has a long record of support for international peace operations and for the United States. In addition to military personnel committed to the process, do critics really believe that Australia wouldn’t send a vessel if it really felt it had capacity?
Given commitments in the Pacific region and to freedom of navigation, the government has made a considered strategic decision.
For reasons relating to national security it cannot be expected to publicly give explanations to critics and the opposition with all the details of its naval operational capabilities (or shortcomings).
Brendan O’Farrell, Brunswick
Russia and the United States both abstain on a UN vote for relief to Gaza. Isn’t it interesting how we can join when we want to?
Bruce Dudon, Woodend
A Clayton’s ceasefire
The recent UN resolution finally passed by the US found a semantic compromise between agreeing and not disagreeing. It’s a kind of Clayton’s ceasefire when there will be no ceasefire. Go figure.
Nick Toovey, Beaumaris
Give Palestinians refuge
As Christmas is celebrated with the birth of Jesus and a family finding refuge in a stable, let us reflect deeply on what is happening in Gaza. It would be a humanitarian gift of the spirit of this season if the Australian government were to offer fleeing Palestinians from Gaza refuge. In recent history we offered refuge to Afghans and Ukrainians fleeing war and conflict. Are Palestinians lives worth less than others? We could offer Palestinians temporary humanitarian visas, which offer a range of support. It is hard to be festive when a humanitarian crisis of such proportions is happening.
Judith Morrison, NunawadingArticle link: https://todayspaper.smedia.com.au/theage/shared/ShowArticle.aspx?doc=AGE20231224&entity=Ar02601&sk=1C546208&mode=text
Article source: The Age | Letters | 24.12.23