Morrison should recognise West Jerusalem but defer embassy move

Illustration: Eric Lobbecke.

Scott Morrison was right in his policy ­instinct, and perfectly defensible on process, when he announced his government would consider moving our embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. There is no case in principle against this, and none has been made.

But the government has been let down by poor explanation, a serious lack of discipline among senior ministers, a generally poorly informed and hysterical commentariat, and the normal opportunism of an opposition that can smell government trouble.

Morrison must now decide the matter quickly, probably as soon as parliament rises. The dynamics remind me eerily of the first year of Tony Abbott’s government, espec­ially his decision to turn around illegal ­migrant boats and in reaction to revelations that, under Kevin Rudd, Australian agencies had spied on the Indonesian president’s wife, neither to confirm it, apologise or promise it wouldn’t happen again.

Abbott was absolutely right. His policies succeeded and profoundly served the ­national interest. He was also right about the real long-term cost of international reaction; to wit, nothing. Almost every commentator condemned him. Labor was hysterical.

But Abbott was right, the commentators wrong. Exactly the same syndrome is true now. Morrison is right, the commentators wrong. But this is still a dangerous issue for the government and Morrison needs to decide it clearly, with a full and precise ­explanation.

Morrison has been let down by his senior ministers. Josh Frydenberg is normally the government’s best communicator and an unmitigated success. However, he was grievously ill-advised to personalise this dispute by attacking Malaysia’s Mahathir Mohamad, in the context of the embassy, when the government was trying to narrow the fronts of contention and quiet the issue down. Christopher Pyne is one of the government’s most effective ministers. He should not have scolded his colleagues publicly for canvassing the issue. That was advice to give in private. Frydenberg was even more ill-­advised to then bite back at Pyne. What are these guys doing? Steven Ciobo’s intervention, undermining Morrison with Indonesian ministers and then opposing his own Prime Minister’s direction in a national ­security matter under review, was frankly ­bizarre and just continues the undisciplined strategic incompetence from a very overrated politician.

Now Victorian Liberal leader Matthew Guy has joined the foolishness by declaring he will move Victoria’s trade office from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. This is an improper ­intrusion into foreign policy by a would-be state government and is absurd in substance, given the overwhelming dominance of Tel Aviv and nearby Herzliya in Israeli business.

Morrison’s explanations of the proposed embassy move also have been slightly miscast. The idea that Canberra can materially influence the peace process through such ­action is foolish. We are not without influence but neither are we a principal actor. Our move would help disabuse the Palestinian leadership of the idea that their refusal to negotiate doesn’t hurt them because they can veto how other nations relate to Israel. That’s the limit of any effect by an Australian move. If Morrison presents a decision as ­involving conditionality or as part of a bigger contribution to the peace process, he will be savagely mocked.

The main argument to use is that this move represents justice and gives life to our values. To talk narrowly and exclusively of the national interest can mislead the debate because it can obscure the vital role that being true to our values plays in the enlightened, long-term pursuit of our interests.

This proposed move has overwhelming idealistic support within the Liberal Party. It is the policy of the federal council of the party and of the Victorian division.

The day Morrison made his announcement three cabinet ministers — from different factions and with different voting histories in the leadership contests — got in touch to tell me that days like that made them proud to be in politics. It is on the basis of values and justice that Morrison must make and sell his decision.

In principle, no one could argue seriously against the move. Every nation, certainly ­including Australia, that recognises Israel at all recognises West Jerusalem as sovereign Israeli territory today. Almost no country recognises Israel’s annexation of East Jerusalem. Nor should we. The US congress recognised West Jerusalem as Israel’s capital more than two decades ago. Bill and Hillary Clinton, George W. Bush and, for a time, Barack Obama (though he quickly changed his mind) all supported moving the US embassy there in principle. They didn’t do so for various practical reasons. Last year Russia formally recognised West Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. The new Brazilian government has committed to moving its embassy there.

There used to be upwards of two dozen embassies in Jerusalem but they were chased out in the 1970s by Arab boycotts. In 1980 the UN Security Council passed a resolution condemning Israel for imposing its domestic law on East Jerusalem. At the end the resolution advised countries to ­remove their embassies from Jerusalem.

To emphasise its annoyance with Israel, the Carter administration didn’t veto the resolution but abstained. It was a non-enforceable chapter six resolution, it did not say countries could not re-establish embassies in Jerusalem, and as soon as it was passed the Carter administration denounced the idea that anyone should be prevented from situating their embassy in Jerusalem. There are no international legal impediments to putting the embassy there and if the Morrison government says there are it will be ­condemning the US and moving to a newly hostile position on Israel. That would be very dumb.

The Indonesian reaction has been wildly overblown among Australian commentators. The issue has hardly figured in the ­Indonesian media. The Australian hysteria, however, plays back into the Indonesian ­debate and encourages Jakarta to push Canberra around.

For all that, actually moving the embassy physically cannot be accomplished before the election and is probably finally more trouble than it’s worth. But Morrison must decide, not any technical review. Therefore he should make a formal statement that Australia officially recognises West Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. This would be a big, pro-Israel advance, an advance towards justice, on every previous official Australian position. He should add that for practical reasons there are no plans to move the embassy. This would be very hard for Labor to oppose and impossible for Jakarta to complain about.

Only Morrison, with the backing of cabinet, has the authority to do this. And if he ­explains the decision in terms of values and justice, as part of our national interests, the issue can still be a winner for him.