LATIKA M BOURKE: Albo’s timidity on Trump’s Gaza plan, a lack of leadership or is he just out of his depth?

Anthony Albanese’s timidity in responding to what may be Donald Trump’s most jaw-dropping idea yet — to “clean out” Gaza of its Palestinian inhabitants and commercialise the heavily bombed enclave into the “Riviera of the Middle East” stood in stark contrast to the widespread condemnation from world leaders.

It was as shock-and-awe as you could get from the US President who we’ve grown accustomed to breaking all the rules.

And it was yet another indication that Mr Trump, in his second iteration, is less an isolationist and more an imperialist in his inclinations.

But astonishingly the Prime Minister had zilch to say when he was asked about the President’s proposal, other than retreating to the pro forma position of stating Australia’s long-held support for a two-state solution.

“What I would say is that Australia’s position is the same as it was this morning, as it was last year, and it was 10 years ago and it was under the Howard Government,” Mr Albanese said.

“The Australian Government supports on a bipartisan basis, a two-state solution in the Middle East.”

The Prime Minister couldn’t seem to grasp or adapt to the concept that Trump, with his repeated statements wishing to move Gaza’s Palestinians to countries he could not even name, had “blown that apart,” as one journalist put it to him.

By contrast, other leaders had no problem finding their voice and expressing their horror.

While Trump claimed “everybody loves my idea” the truth was the opposite.

Leader after leader, from the democratic left and right as well as monarchs and strongmen, lined up to condemn it.

The UN’s Secretary-General Antonio Guterres declared it “ethnic cleansing” whilst reaffirming support for a two-state solution.

Across the Arab region, the message was unequivocal. There would be no acceptance or tolerance of the idea of displacing Gaza’s 2 million Palestinians off of their land to Egypt, Jordan or elsewhere.

“We will not allow the rights of our people, for which we have struggled for decades and made great sacrifices to achieve, to be infringed upon,” said Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in a statement.

The Saudis, critical to any enduring peace agreement in the Middle East and closely allied to the Trump administration, warned they would not normalise ties with Israel without an independent Palestinian state, adding this was “non-negotiable and not subject to compromises.”

The normalisation of ties between the Saudis and Israel would be the crown jewel in terms of diplomatic triumphs and was something President Trump was working towards in his first administration under the widely-lauded Abraham Accords.

It would be such a game-changer in the region that it is speculated to be one of the reasons Hamas launched its deadly assault on Southern Israel on October 7, 2023, to try and stop it from going ahead.

Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi said: “Any attempt at forced resettlement would be a very serious crime”. Egypt and Jordan reiterated their opposition to taking Palestinians.

Turkey said Mr Trump’s suggestion was “unacceptable” and that neither Turkey nor the region would accept the forced deportation of the Palestinians.

In London, Mr Albanese’s ideological brother, fellow Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer and Prime Minister of a fellow Five Eyes Allied country said Gaza was home for the Palestinians.

“They must be allowed home, they must be allowed to rebuild, and we should be with them in that rebuild on the way to a two-state solution,” Sir Keir told the House of Commons on Prime Minister’s Questions.

But even with the UK Prime Minister taking a clear stand, still around 38 Labour MPs and four Labour Members of the House of Lords wrote to the Foreign Secretary David Lammy saying it was “ethnic cleansing” and that the government’s views must be made clear to Mr Trump.

Another left-wing leader who Mr Albanese admires, Brazil’s Lula Da Silva did not hold back either.

“It makes no sense (for the US president) to meet with the president of Israel and say: ‘We are going to occupy Gaza, we are going to recover Gaza, we are going to live in Gaza’,” he said.

“And the Palestinians – where will they go, where will they live?

“It is something practically incomprehensible to any human being.”

German foreign minister, Annalena Baerbock from the Greens Party, said the United States would be violating international law if Mr Trump’s ambitions for the Palestinians were realised.

“And their expulsion would be unacceptable and contrary to international law,” she said.

“It would also lead to new suffering and new hatred.

“There must be no solution over the heads.”

France too, offered its swift rejection.

Mr Albanese’s trepidation to offer anything beyond noting the historical, Howard-era support for a two-state solution against this cacophony of blistering criticism once again leaves him looking either limp and adrift on a key moral question or out of his depth.

And neither explanation is good, given he approaches an election when voters will be re-examining the values that define how he will chart the dramatically reshaped geopolitical environment since his political ascendancy in 2022.

Mr Albanese is right to deem that Australians don’t want him to pick unnecessary fights with a President who thinks his radical thoughts out loud and often throws them on the table as an opening negotiating tactic.

But they do want their Prime Minister to realise the moment to articulate Australian values, as leaders of so many other countries did in response.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton, who had more time to consider an answer, tried to explain the President’s thinking when asked on 2GB Radio on Thursday morning.

“If you look at the President’s track record, there’s a lot of desire to do that deal, to get that outcome,” Mr Dutton said.

“When you look at it in that context, it’s perfectly reasonable that he would try and leverage near neighbours who don’t want to take any Gazans, any Palestinians — that’s the reality of the position of many of the near neighbours — he wants them to contribute to a peaceful solution, to a rebuild.

“They should be the objectives of every person that we want peace and stability for Palestinians, for Israel, for the region – and that’s, I think, what he’s trying to achieve.”

The looming poll and the domestic tinderbox involving the wave of anti-Semitic incidents in Australia that the federal opposition blames the Labor government for not stopping may explain some of the PM’s caution.

He has repeatedly used questions about Trump’s scheme to reiterate that he wants those behind the anti-Semitic acts put “in the clink.”

And the Prime Minister is right to say that he doesn’t want to run ongoing commentary on Trump’s presidency as he repeatedly did on breakfast television this morning, as he dodged answering questions about Australia’s views.

But in failing to recognise the difference between being an armchair critic or setting out a values-based position on a question of international law and morality either way, the Prime Minister just ends up pleasing no-one.

Too often he gives the impression that he is out of his depth when it comes to foreign affairs or goes to jelly when a leadership moment is required and thinks hiding under a doona will see him through.