Australia’s Defence Department has taken the unexpected step of removing an online resource detailing its contributions to the F-35 fighter jet program, raising concerns about potential government concealment regarding the use of these aircraft by Israel in its military actions in Gaza.
The now-defunct webpage, which was taken down in late 2023, previously highlighted how Australian companies supported the US-led F-35 Joint Strike Fighter initiative. The resource promoted the project as one that was “transforming Australian industry” and listed over 70 local firms engaged in contracts exceeding 4 billion Australian dollars (approximately 2.6 billion USD), which included the production of various components, such as flight controls and engine parts.
Australia is part of a global production ecosystem for the F-35, managed by Lockheed Martin alongside the US government. This network has come under scrutiny in light of United Nations allegations accusing Israel of committing acts of genocide in Gaza. Chris Sidoti, an Australian human rights expert who previously served on a UN inquiry, emphasized the moral implications of Australia’s involvement: “If components that are being manufactured here in Australia are finding their way into F-35 aircraft being used by Israel to bomb the hell out of Gaza, we share responsibility.”
In an attempt to clarify Australia’s position, Foreign Minister Penny Wong stated that the country only provides “non-lethal” parts to Lockheed Martin and mentioned that the US is in control of any transfers to Israel. However, concerns have been voiced by various political figures. Senator David Shoebridge contended that the government possesses the ability to modify agreements and contracts to prevent complicity in what he termed a genocide.
The removal of the webpage has raised alarms about a lack of transparency surrounding Australia’s defense exports. Critics argue that without public access to detailed information about military goods sold abroad or their final destinations, the public is left with insufficient means to hold the government accountable. Suzanne Varrall, an expert in international law and security from the University of Melbourne, remarked that the government’s non-disclosure policy hinders public scrutiny of its decisions. “It removes the ability for us to question or challenge the [government’s] decisions and to hold them accountable for them,” she noted.
Josh Paul, a former official with the US State Department, pointed out that Australia retains leverage within the F-35 program and could set clearer conditions for its participation. He suggested that the government could establish a policy whereby it halts the provision of spare parts unless it receives assurances that they would not be supplied to Israel.
The unfolding situation emphasizes the complexities surrounding Australia’s involvement in international military programs and the ethical implications of its defense exports, calling for a heightened discussion about transparency and accountability in the context of global military engagements.
