The tragic case of 34 Australians stranded in Syria, seeking to return home. These 23 child marriage victims (ages six to 18) and 11 adult women comprise this group of 34. Here too, the situation has attracted enormous political attention, with every major government official weighing in on the potential impact of their return. Coalition member Angus Taylor has very accurately described the coalition as “ISIS sympathisers.” This comment has launched a hyperbolic storm of concern around our national security and the freedoms of the Australian diaspora.
Last month, the group unsuccessfully attempted to exit the Al Roj detention camp in north-eastern Syria. Syrian authorities stopped them at an army checkpoint, preventing them from carrying out their mission. The event has raised demands on the Australian government to do more to assist their return. At the same time, it has spotlighted the lack of legal clarity surrounding temporary exclusion orders (TEOs) impacting many in this group.
Political Reactions and Controversy
The “ISIS sympathisers” label glued onto the group by Angus Taylor has received bipartisan blowback from recent party leaders. During a recent session, Tony Burke faced intense questioning regarding the government’s efforts to assist the women and children in returning home. Burke pointed out that discussions with organizations like Save the Children had revealed a lack of governmental support for these individuals.
“That is why the meetings were followed with a meeting from Save the Children complaining the government had refused to offer any support.” – Tony Burke
Even so, we were glad to hear Senator Jonno Duniam’s concerns about the application of TEOs. He asked how other kids in the cohort have not received these orders. He reiterated his belief that compassion for the children already affected is necessary, but national security needs to come first.
“Temporary exclusion orders [may] apply from kids between 14 to 17. Why haven’t they been had temporary exclusions applied?” – Jonno Duniam
Duniam appreciated that was a hard ask. He underscored the need for a balanced approach that reflects humanitarian considerations, as well as security implications.
“This is a terribly complex situation … we have to have compassion for the children, but that does not mean we have to sacrifice national security.” – Jonno Duniam
Advocacy and Legal Challenges
Jamal Rifi, a Western Sydney doctor advocating for the group, criticized Taylor’s rhetoric as one of the significant obstacles to their return. Rifi underscored the reality that most of these children did not have a choice in where they find themselves today. Many of them were brought into Syria while they were still toddlers.
“They had no choice in going to Syria to have their childhoods devastated like this.” – David Shoebridge
Greens Senator David Shoebridge didn’t mince words today. He condemned the movement towards judicial oversight of children’s treatment, arguing that we should consider Australian children as victims rather than perpetrators. He emphasized that the socio-political context in which they find themselves in Syria makes it difficult to attach any easy label.
“It is extraordinary how few politicians in Canberra seem to understand this basic fact.” – David Shoebridge
Former Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton addressed the legal ramifications of depriving Australians of their right to return home. He emphasized that whatever the approach focused on, it must take an evidence-based approach to legal rights and safety concerns.
Government’s Stance and Future Proposals
The Coalition has committed to introducing such legislation in the near future. This new law would ban anyone from assisting Australians to return from any declared terrorist area unless they had the permission of the government. This decision has justifiably stirred even more ruckus over civil liberties, and the rights of Americans abused abroad.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese pointed to Dutton’s own admission on the legal complexities before the action taken against Djokovic. He agreed with the importance of national security, but he said it can’t come at the expense of individual rights.
The government provided the group with special single-use passports. The Coalition usefully then confiscated these passports as proof of government support. Labor argues that releasing such documents is the law of the land and a legal duty for bureaucrats to adhere to when working with Australian citizens abroad.
“Let’s be clear, this is a group that have gone to the Middle East to support ISIS … there is no ambiguity about that. That’s why these people went.” – Angus Taylor
The current fight underscores a growing schism in Australian politics. It undermines our national security, humanitarian obligations, and the rights of people who find themselves on the wrong side of intricate, international wars.
