Australia leans towards supporting resolution extending Palestinians' rights as United Nations observer

Penny Wong says Australia is still negotiating over the UN vote.  ()

Australia is leaning towards supporting a resolution to extend Palestinians’ rights as a United Nations observer, sources have told the ABC.

The ABC understands the UN General Assembly is no longer trying to grant membership to Palestine in a vote due to be put to the assembly later on Friday night AEST.

Instead, the resolution would extend rights to submit proposals, the right of reply regarding the positions of a group, and the right to raise procedural motions as an observer at the UN.

The resolution still expresses the aspiration for Palestine to attain membership.

It also explicitly rules out Palestine having a vote in the General Assembly.

The draft also expresses support for Israel’s right to peaceful existence: “unwavering support for the two-state solution of Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security within recognized borders”.

Australian sources said that the changes mean more “no” votes will now move to “abstentions” and more abstentions will move to “yes” votes.

A source said the prime minister was closely involved in the final deliberations, with Australia shifting to a “yes” disposition on the motion.

On Friday morning Foreign Minister Penny Wong said Australia was still considering its vote, as were other countries as new information is shared between them.

“Countries are still negotiating … there is a lot of negotiation and discussion,” she told ABC’s RN.

“We will look at what the actual meaning [of] the resolution is, we will look at and we are focused on the situation on the ground, we want a humanitarian ceasefire, we want the release of hostages, we want to increase humanitarian aid.”

The minister said that timing and the “situation on the ground” were impacting the country’s decision on how it would vote.

“It’s not a question of if we will recognise a Palestinian state, it is a question of when,” Senator Wong said.

Senator Wong made her comments before it became clear that the UN did not intend to vote on granting full membership to Palestine.

In early April, the foreign minister used an address at the Australian National University to announce that the federal government continued to contemplate recognising Palestinian statehood, which she said remained in line with Australia’s long support of a future two-state solution.

“There is a distinction between this vote in the United Nations and bilateral recognition, that is recognition by Australia, and one does not necessarily lead to the other,” Senator Wong said.

When asked if Australia, which had previously abstained from voting on a call for an immediate humanitarian truce in the war last year, would abstain from this UN vote, Senator Wong would not be drawn. However, she did defend the choice of abstaining.

“It can send a message that whilst you don’t agree with it in full, you’re not going to stand in the way. So, abstentions are a common diplomatic position that countries take on matters,” she said.

Wong weighs in on encampments

The senator’s comments come as encampments continue at Australian universities in support of Palestine. The encampments sprung up at campuses in Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide and Canberra last week.

Students have called on their teaching institutions to disclose and cut ties with weapons manufacturers they say are supplying arms to Israel.

The minister said on Friday morning some of the language being used on campuses was “anti-Semitic” after the opposition had called for there to be an inquiry into anti-Semitism on campuses.

“Universities have to ensure that they are safe spaces for all students, regardless of who they are. Secondly, we do have a right to peaceful protest in this country. And people are entitled to protest in support of their views in a democracy,” Senator Wong said.

Senator Wong referred to her speech given in April, which touched on social cohesion in Australia over the conflict in the Middle East.

“We must defend people’s right to disagree, respectfully. We must ensure that we don’t diminish each other in how we disagree,” she said.

“There is too much of that … not only on campuses, but in our parliament, and amongst our politicians. The diminution of the other, the personal denigration, and the tenor of the language used by some in this debate, I think, is irresponsible.”

The senator said she hoped the Coalition was “genuine” in its calls for an inquiry.

“If the objective is to actually try and generate social cohesion, then I’ll be supportive. But if the objective is to create conflict and division, I think that’s a problem,” she said.

Albanese says chant ‘not appropriate’

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese doubled down on comments that the chant “from the river to the sea” would be incompatible with a two-state solution.

“The reason why ‘from the river to the sea’ is not appropriate whether it be, and it’s been used from time to time over the years to describe either Palestine or Israel as one state, we support a two-state solution,” he said.

He also echoed the call for social cohesion and respect in the debate over the conflict in the Middle East. He said there was no place for anti-Semitism or Islamophobia.

Senator Wong said she had always believed the chant was contrary to a two-state solution.

Australia Palestine Advocacy Network president Nasser Mashni said this week the prime minister was “using the words of Palestinians against us, and is in essence telling us that the colonisation of Palestinian land is not enough”.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton said the pro-Palestinian chant was about “elimination, annihilation, extermination of the race of people of the Jewish faith – it’s as simple as that”.

On Sunday, Minister for Education Jason Clare said the phrase means different things to different people.

“I’ve seen people say that those words mean the annihilation of Israel. I’ve seen people say that it means the opposite. I’ve seen people say that they’re slogans that Israeli political parties have used too,” he said.

“What I’d say is this: what I want all Australians to be calling for is a two-state solution.”