标签： Oceania

A fierce political clash has erupted between Australia’s ruling Labor Party and center-right Liberal opposition over a blockbuster anti-government fundraising campaign by far-right populist party One Nation, which has pulled in more than $2.5 million in less than 48 hours to oust sitting Labor MPs. Titled “FIRE THE LIAR!”, the campaign accuses Prime Minister Anthony Albanese of breaking campaign promises on three high-profile issues: the stage 3 income tax cuts, national energy prices, and the Indigenous Voice to Parliament referendum. Unlike most mainstream political fundraising platforms, the campaign does not publish public records of donor identities or individual contribution amounts, a lack of transparency that prompted Albanese to question the veracity of the posted fundraising totals just days after the campaign launched. To address these doubts, One Nation leader Pauline Hanson took to social media Wednesday to share what she called a “forensic audit” conducted by independent software developer Daryl Monnink, which she claimed confirmed the legitimacy of the fundraising haul. One Nation says more than 28,000 individual donors contributed to the campaign in its first 24 hours, with the largest single donation topping $15,000. The party plans to direct the full war chest to unseating Labor incumbents, starting with key seats in Western Australia – which Hanson called a top “hit list” target – and electorates held by high-profile Labor cabinet ministers including Tony Burke, Clare O’Neil and Madeleine King. Appearing on Seven Network’s morning current affairs program Sunrise Friday, federal Health Minister Mark Butler, a senior Labor figure, sought to downplay the significance of the large fundraising haul. He argued the amount raised would be far smaller than the six- and seven-figure donations One Nation has previously received from billionaire mining magnate Gina Rinehart. Butler framed the campaign as little more than a targeted personal attack on Albanese, which would quickly fade from public attention. “It’s not a big story beyond this week and maybe next week,” he said. Butler also pushed back against claims of a hidden ideological alignment between the Liberals and One Nation, arguing the partnership between the two right-wing parties represents a rebranded Coalition with the same conservative policy platform. “At the end of the day, what we’re seeing here is a remaking of the Coalition with some different faces but the same agenda,” Butler said. “Opposed to wage increases, we’ve heard that from the Liberal Party and One Nation, hostile to Medicare, determined to sow the politics of division and talk this country down.” Those remarks drew an immediate sharp response from Deputy Liberal Leader Jane Hume, who appeared alongside Butler on the same program. Hume accused the Labor government of panicking over the strong grassroots response to One Nation’s campaign, telling Butler: “You are rattled, aren’t you Mark? You are rattled.” She argued the massive donation total reflects widespread public anger at the current government’s performance, pointing out that a single Liberal colleague had raised more in donations in the month following Labor’s 2024 federal budget than he had in the entire preceding year. “Australians are angry, and that is playing out in our politics now,” she said. When pressed on whether the Liberals would negotiate a formal preference-sharing or non-compete agreement with One Nation ahead of the next federal election, scheduled for 2025, Hume ruled out any such deal for the immediate future. “That’s not on the cards. And an election is now 18 months to two years away,” she said. “To begin with, we never ever talk about preferences before an election is actually called because you don’t know what policies they have, you don’t know what candidates they have, you don’t know what One Nation are going to be doing in two years time.” The response from the junior Coalition partner, the National Party, was far more welcoming of One Nation’s anti-Labor campaign. Nationals leader Matt Canavan told Sky News that only a full Liberal-National government can deliver the stable economic plan Australian voters are demanding, but he praised One Nation’s efforts to target Labor incumbents. “I welcome everybody trying to take down this government, because that is the first step,” Canavan said. “So, good on One Nation for doing this. They’re saying that funding, now over $2 million, is going to be used to root out Labor members of parliament.” Canavan added that any efforts by One Nation to challenge sitting Nationals MPs would not help achieve the shared goal of removing the current Labor government, but emphasized that all anti-Labor forces are aligned on the immediate priority of defeating the ruling party. “We’re all on the same page here of getting rid of this government, it’ll be then up to the Australia people about what form of government they want,” he said.

On a Thursday that already carried high geopolitical and economic stakes, U.S. President Donald Trump upended global expectations with a sudden announcement: he had called off planned military strikes against Iran and claimed a historic peace deal to end the months-long U.S.-Iran war could be finalized and signed within days.

The announcement broke as the 2026 FIFA World Cup kicked off in Mexico, sending immediate ripples through global financial markets. Major stock indices rallied sharply, while international oil futures dropped more than 3% — a clear market signal that investors welcomed the de-escalation of a conflict that has roiled energy supplies for months.

In a social media post that quickly dominated global headlines, Trump stated that bilateral talks with Iranian officials had advanced to the highest levels of Iran’s leadership and received formal approval. “I have cancelled the scheduled strikes and bombings against Iran scheduled for this evening,” he wrote. “Time and place of the signing to be announced shortly.” He added that the core terms of the arrangement had already been signed off by the U.S. and its regional allies, most notably Israel, which joined Washington in launching the offensive against Iran back in February.

The conflict, which began with a massive wave of joint U.S.-Israeli airstrikes on February 28 that killed long-time Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, entered a paused state under a temporary truce brokered in April. But negotiations for a permanent ceasefire and peace agreement had appeared deadlocked in recent weeks, with both sides trading escalating threats in the days leading up to Trump’s announcement. Just 24 hours before his Thursday announcement, Trump had threatened to intensify U.S. airstrikes and seize control of Kharg Island, Iran’s critical oil export terminal in the Persian Gulf.

Iranian officials quickly pushed back against Trump’s claims of a finalized, approved deal. Hours after the U.S. president’s announcement, foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei stated that “Iran has not reached a final conclusion on the agreement.” Iran’s semi-official Tasnim news agency pointed out that Trump has now claimed an imminent deal 38 times over the past two months, advising that any statements from Trump on the topic should be treated as unsubstantiated until confirmed directly by Iranian authorities. When pressed by reporters on the Iranian pushback, Trump doubled down on his claim, saying “I understand the answer is yes” when asked if Iran’s new supreme leader Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei had personally approved the deal.

An official statement from the office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu confirmed that Netanyahu had spoken with Trump following the announcement, and that Trump had committed any final agreement would require Iran to remove all existing enriched nuclear material and dismantle its entire ballistic missile infrastructure program. Tehran’s municipal government also confirmed Thursday that the delayed funeral for former supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei will be held no earlier than late June, further adding to the atmosphere of ongoing uncertainty.

Trump’s announcement suggests that months of quiet back-channel mediation led by U.S. partners Pakistan and Qatar may have produced tentative progress, despite the sharp public denial from Tehran. Even as hopes for peace rose, however, new reports of hostilities emerged: Kuwait announced Thursday that an Iranian strike targeted its territory, damaged an air defense radar installation, and forced a temporary closure of its airspace.

Domestically, hardline factions on both sides have continued to undermine progress toward a deal. Earlier Thursday, amid escalating U.S. threats of new strikes, senior Iranian General Ali Abdollahi warned that any new American attack would draw a far harsher response than previous exchanges, warning that a widening of the war would spread instability across the entire Middle East. For ordinary Iranian civilians already reeling from months of conflict, that instability is already a daily reality. Majid, a 35-year-old Tehran pharmacist, expressed deep pessimism about the prospects of a final deal. “I am absolutely not optimistic about the agreement being finalized, because the gap between the two countries is too wide,” he said, blaming the ongoing deadlock on both Israel — which has exchanged frequent cross-border fire with Iranian forces in recent days — and hardline Iranian factions opposed to any compromise.

The conflict has already hit the global economy hard. Earlier on Thursday, the World Bank downgraded its global growth forecast to its lowest level since the height of the coronavirus pandemic, explicitly citing the expanding economic fallout from the Iran war as a key driver of the downgrade. One of the most damaging ongoing economic impacts stems from Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the critical global chokepoint through which roughly 20% of the world’s daily oil and gas supplies pass. Iran’s newly established strait oversight body reaffirmed Thursday that the waterway “will be closed until further notice”, keeping ongoing pressure on global energy markets despite the post-announcement drop in oil prices.

In a shocking move that has sent ripples through British politics, Defence Secretary John Healey stepped down from his post Thursday, launching a blistering rebuke of Prime Minister Keir Starmer and the UK Treasury over what he calls insufficient funding commitments for national defence. The sudden exit comes after months of repeated delays to the Labour government’s much-anticipated 10-year Defence Investment Plan (DIP), a policy framework the prime minister has yet to publicly release.

In a resignation letter published on his X social media account, Healey made clear his frustrations with the leadership: “You have been unable, and the Treasury has been unwilling, to commit the resources that the nation needs to defend the country at this time of rising threats.” He added that after warning Starmer he would not sign off on a DIP that failed to deliver adequate funding for British armed forces, he had no choice but to resign, warning that the underfunded proposal would leave Britain “less safe” amid growing global security risks.

Within hours of Healey’s announcement, two more members of the defence team resigned: Armed Forces Minister Al Carns, who has previously been named as a potential Labour leadership contender, and Pamela Nash, a senior aide to Healey. The resignations mark a significant blow to Starmer’s already fragile authority, coming just one week ahead of a critical by-election that could open the door to a leadership challenge.

Starmer responded quickly to Healey’s departure, pushing back against the criticism in a reply letter. The prime minister insisted his proposed spending plans would allow the UK armed forces to undergo necessary transformation and modernization, adding, “I will always do what is needed to keep our country safe.” He has repeatedly reaffirmed his commitment to publishing the DIP ahead of the NATO summit scheduled to take place in Turkey on July 7, despite repeated delays that have frustrated defence industry stakeholders and security experts.

Starmer’s centre-left Labour government took power in July 2024, ending 14 years of Conservative Party rule. It campaigned on a promise to increase defence spending and prioritize NATO alliance commitments, a pledge that comes as Russian threats to European security grow and former U.S. President Donald Trump continues to pressure NATO allies to shoulder more of the cost of collective defence, reducing reliance on Washington.

The prime minister has publicly pledged to raise UK defence spending to 2.5% of gross domestic product starting next year, with planned increases to 3% by 2029 if Labour wins re-election, and a final target of 3.5% by 2035. But behind the scenes, media reports have long pointed to deep internal discontent over the fine print of the spending plan. Healey revealed in his letter that he only received full access to the DIP draft earlier this week, and the proposal only projects defence spending will reach 2.68% of GDP by 2030, falling far short of public commitments. A source close to the former defence secretary added that the Treasury’s offer failed to set any firm timeline for reaching the 3% spending target. Calling the current proposal inadequate for Britain’s current security challenges, Healey said the plan fell “well short of what is required for defence and the country at this dangerous time”.

Tan Dhesi, Labour MP and chair of the UK Parliament’s Defence Select Committee, urged the government to treat Healey’s warning “with the utmost seriousness”, describing the resignation as “a grave moment” for the government.

The political pressure on Starmer is already mounting ahead of next Thursday’s by-election in the Makerfield parliamentary constituency, where Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham is running for a seat. Both Burnham and former Health Secretary Wes Streeting, who resigned last month in the wake of disastrous local election results for Labour, have confirmed they would run in any future Labour leadership contest, though no challenge has formally been launched yet. While Healey has also been named as a potential leadership contender, there is no immediate evidence linking his resignation to leadership plotting.

Political analysts warn the resignations have exposed deep divisions within Starmer’s government that further erode his standing. Patrick Diamond, a politics professor at Queen Mary University of London, told AFP the development “underlines that Starmer has become a lame duck prime minister who cannot get decisions through his own government”.

Ed Arnold, senior associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), a leading UK defence and security think tank, noted that Healey’s resignation “creates a sequence of political headaches” for Starmer. The prime minister must first quickly fill the vacant defence secretary post, then work to shore up internal support to finally get the delayed defence investment plan over the line for publication ahead of the NATO summit, a task that has grown far more difficult in the wake of the resignations.