Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's championing of 'social coherence' as a national ideal is facing intense scrutiny, with critics arguing his government's actions are achieving the opposite effect. The phrase, now ubiquitous in political discourse, is increasingly seen as hollow rhetoric as Australian society appears to fracture.
Policy Setbacks and Leadership Incoherence
The government's record on major initiatives intended to unify the nation is marked by division and retreat. The proposal for an Aboriginal Voice to Parliament, initially popular, ultimately resulted in a deeply divisive debate and a resounding defeat at the referendum. Similarly, legislation on climate change, hailed by the Prime Minister as ending the argument, has seen the opposition firmly reject emission targets, pushing the debate backwards.
In foreign and defence policy, coherence has been notably absent. The government's stance, particularly in the six months following the election of US President Donald Trump, has been criticised for a lack of clarity and a slavish alignment with American interests that may not serve Australia's own. Defence Minister Richard Marles and Foreign Minister Penny Wong have failed to adequately explain or justify this approach to the public, leaving doubts about commitments like the AUKUS nuclear submarine pact.
The Gaza Conflict and the Charge of Anti-Semitism
Albanese's handling of Australia's response to the October 2023 conflict in Gaza has been a focal point of criticism. For an extended period, the government was seen as slow to acknowledge the scale of civilian casualties and the humanitarian crisis, instead framing its response primarily through solidarity with Israel. While eventually joining allies in criticising Israeli actions and supporting Palestinian statehood, the Prime Minister and his colleagues have been accused of persistently viewing the conflict through an Israeli lens.
This has fuelled a fraught domestic debate about anti-Semitism. Security agencies and many Jewish groups use a definition that allows for criticism of Israel but warns it can cross into anti-Semitism. However, the Israeli state and some of its supporters often label any criticism as inherently anti-Semitic, a tactic used to shield the government from scrutiny. Meanwhile, some pro-Israeli rhetoric in Australia unfairly implicates all Muslims or Palestinian supporters with terrorism.
The article stresses that the overwhelming criticism of Israel's war conduct targets the state and its leaders, not Jewish people or their religion. It notes that opposition to Zionism—the political movement establishing a Jewish homeland in Palestine—is not, by itself, anti-Semitic, as it challenges a political project, not the right of Jewish people to self-determination elsewhere.
A Leadership Vacuum and Political Opportunism
Albanese has struggled to assert control over the national conversation. His initial resistance to a royal commission into the Bondi massacre, even after his party shifted position, left him on the back foot. This allowed the opposition, led in effect by Josh Frydenberg despite Sussan Ley being the nominal leader, to seize the agenda and rally critics.
The government's legislative response, hastily crafted to address anti-Semitism, risks being seen as a political 'sausage making' exercise—a messy process without clear principle or adequate checks on new powers. Promises to later address other forms of discrimination do little to assuage concerns about government overreach.
Despite winning an overwhelming mandate less than a year ago, Albanese has appeared reactive rather than decisive. His natural reluctance for public conversation and failure to project national leadership in a crisis have weakened his standing. The dysfunction of the opposition underlines the opportunity he is missing to lead with coherence and authenticity.
The analysis concludes that before the Prime Minister can credibly talk of social cohesion, he must first demonstrate coherent and authentic leadership. The government's current approach resembles a mishmash, failing to inspire confidence or present a potent answer to the nation's divisions.
