Richard Marles is wrong; Australia’s supply of weapon components makes us complicit in Israel’s genocide
By an anonymous contributor
Pieces like this one are free to read, please consider becoming a paid subscriber so Cheek can continue paying writers for their insight and expertise.
Defence Minister Richard Marles has claimed that Australian-made weapons components have no meaningful impact on Israel’s military operations, suggesting there is no justification for an arms embargo.
On Sunday, Marles told ABC Insiders that there is “no step we could take” comparable to Germany’s suspension of arms exports to Israel. He also dismissed components as a “separate issue.”
However, Australia has legal obligations under the Arms Trade Treaty, the Genocide Convention, and the Geneva Conventions to prevent arms transfers where there is a clear risk of serious violations of international law. These obligations cover components—not just fully assembled weapons.
Further, the Minister’s comments seem to directly contradict publicly available evidence that Australian components enable Israeli bombing. Australian companies like Rosebank Engineering and Ferra Engineering play critical roles in the F-35 fighter jet program used in Israeli airstrikes on Gaza. Rosebank produces the F-35’s uplock actuators, while Ferra supplies bomb-release latches and weapons adapters—essential parts without which F-35s could not deploy JDAM bombs.
The AUKUS ‘permit-free’ export regime introduced in 2022 removes due diligence processes for Australia’s military exports to the US and UK - potentially facilitating indirect transfers to Israel.
Lockheed Martin, which removed references to Australia’s contribution to its F 35 jets from its website, remains supported by the Australian Government, which has placed the company on a priority buyer panel for Australian suppliers, with no human rights safeguards. Elbit Systems, another major Israeli arms supplier, continues to profit from Australian contracts—some linked to Marles’ own electorate. It begs the question: is Australia fulfilling its legal obligations?
Australia’s obligations under the Arms Trade Treaty include the obligation to make reasonable inquiries about the potential end use of arms and conduct proper risk assessments prior to any arms transfer authorisation. The Government is also obliged to prevent and prohibit arms transfers in certain circumstances (such as if there is a clear risk that they would facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law).
Most critically, Australia has an obligation to prevent genocide, and under the Genocide Convention and customary international law, that means we can not be complicit. In this context, Marles’ claims do not hold ground.