Australia’s Role in F-35 Supply Chain Under Scrutiny Amid Gaza Conflict

Human rights advocates and political figures in Australia are raising alarms over the federal government’s alleged concealment of information regarding the nation’s involvement in the global supply chain for the F-35 fighter jets, which are utilized by Israel. This scrutiny has intensified following the outbreak of conflict in Gaza, prompting calls for greater transparency in military exports.

Disappearance of Key Information

Previously, the Australian Department of Defence maintained a webpage detailing the contributions of Australian companies to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program. This page highlighted the various components manufactured domestically, including flight control systems and engine parts, and celebrated the program’s role in transforming the Australian defense industry.

However, in late 2023, this information vanished from the website without explanation. The Department of Defence did not respond to inquiries from the ABC regarding the removal of this content. Internal emails obtained by the Greens through Freedom of Information requests revealed that plans were in place to update the page with new information, yet it remains inaccessible, displaying a 404 error.

The F-35 Program and Its Global Implications

The F-35 program, led by Lockheed Martin, is a multinational initiative involving several partner countries, including Australia. Since the onset of the Gaza conflict on October 7, 2023, the Australian government has faced mounting pressure to clarify its military exports, particularly concerning the F-35 program.

Australia is one of several nations contributing parts to a supply chain that supports Israel’s military operations. The recent findings from a UN commission of inquiry, which accused Israel of committing genocide in Gaza, have further amplified scrutiny of Australia’s role in this program. Chris Sidoti, an Australian human rights expert involved in the commission, emphasized that if Australian-manufactured components are being used in F-35s deployed in Gaza, Australia shares in the responsibility for the consequences.

The Local Impact of Global Supply Chains

Experts have pointed out that over 70 Australian companies are involved in the production and supply of parts for the F-35 jets, with many critical components manufactured in Victoria. For instance, RUAG Australia is identified as the sole supplier of the “uplock actuator system,” which plays a crucial role in the aircraft’s operational capabilities.

The F-35 jets require constant maintenance and parts from a global supply chain, which is coordinated by Lockheed Martin. Rob Wittman, head of the US F-35 Joint Program Office, recently stated that efforts to support Israel have been accelerated, including increasing the supply of spare parts and enhancing weapon capabilities.

Government Responses and Accountability

In response to the growing concerns, Foreign Minister Penny Wong has asserted that Australia only supplies “non-lethal” parts for the F-35s, placing the responsibility for any transfers to Israel on US arms companies. However, critics argue that this stance is misleading. David Shoebridge, the Greens’ Defence and Foreign Affairs spokesperson, contends that the Australian government has the power to alter agreements and contracts to prevent complicity in alleged war crimes.

The UN Human Rights Council has urged nations to take all necessary measures to prevent the commission of genocide, including ceasing the transfer of arms and related equipment to Israel. The report specifically calls for an end to the supply of items that could be used in military operations linked to human rights violations.

The Call for Transparency

The Australian Centre for International Justice has expressed concerns over the removal of the F-35 webpage, viewing it as a troubling sign of a lack of transparency in the supply chain and military exports. Lara Khider, the acting executive director, emphasized that the absence of publicly available information raises questions about accountability.

Suzanne Varrall, a research fellow at the University of Melbourne, highlighted that the government’s failure to publish details about military exports allows it to evade scrutiny. She noted that the only means of obtaining such information has been through Freedom of Information requests or Senate inquiries, which limits public oversight.

International Context and Legal Precedents

Australia is not alone in facing scrutiny over military exports to Israel. Other F-35 partner countries have also been held accountable for their roles. In February 2024, a Dutch court mandated the government to halt the supply of F-35 parts to Israel due to international law concerns. Conversely, the UK High Court rejected a similar challenge in June 2025 but acknowledged the risk of components being used in violations of international humanitarian law.

Josh Paul, a former director in the US State Department, suggested that Australia possesses leverage to influence the F-35 consortium. He argued that Australia could assert that it will not provide spare parts unless it can be assured they will not be used in Israel.

Conclusion

As the conflict in Gaza continues, Australia’s involvement in the F-35 supply chain raises significant ethical and legal questions. The disappearance of critical information from the Department of Defence website has sparked accusations of governmental concealment, prompting calls for greater transparency and accountability. With international scrutiny intensifying, the Australian government faces mounting pressure to reassess its military exports and their implications for human rights. The ongoing debate underscores the complex interplay between national defense interests and global humanitarian responsibilities.