The federal government directly approved and signed off on the participation of Israeli weapons firm Elbit Systems in a major Australian defence procurement — contrary to denials by defence ministers Richard Marles and Pat Conroy, documents obtained under freedom of information reveal.
Elbit Systems, a company deeply engaged in and profiting from Israel’s genocide in Gaza, provided the drone used by the Israel Defense Forces to execute Australian aid worker Zomi Frankcom, along with six of her colleagues, in a deliberate and targeted attack on aid workers in April 2024.
In February last year, Elbit Systems announced it had won a $900 million subcontract with South Korean defence manufacturer Hanwha to produce turrets for the $7 billion “Redback” infantry fighting vehicle for Australia. In the uproar over Elbit’s role in the Palestinian genocide and the execution of Frankcom, the government insisted it was not responsible for the Hanwha-Elbit subcontract and was not a party to the contract.
Related Article Block Placeholder
Article ID: 1214093
In parliament in June last year, Labor, up to and including the prime minister, resorted to extraordinary evasions and outright lies in an attempt to thwart Green MPs trying to obtain answers on the government’s role regarding Elbit. Defence Industry Minister Pat Conroy told parliament: “Hanwha Defence Australia has contracted to Elbit to build the turrets of those vehicles in Australia without the Commonwealth being a party to that contract.”
Conroy would go on to accuse the Greens of “lying” about the Commonwealth having a contract with Elbit. On August 23, Defence Minister Richard Marles claimed “we are not a direct contractor with Elbit”.
But documents obtained by Crikey under FOI contradict both Conroy and Marles. The documents, very heavily redacted and released only after substantial foot-dragging by the Defence Department, reveal three moments of direct Commonwealth engagement in contracting with Elbit.
Prior to Elbit being subcontracted for the vehicles, Defence said in August 2023 that “the Commonwealth will conduct a cost investigation of the Turret proposal from Elbit Systems Land (ESL).” What form the investigation took, and its outcome, aren’t known from the documents.
Know something more about this story?
Contact Bernard Keane securely via Signal using the username @Bernard_Keane.66. Or use our Tip Off form.
Second, the Commonwealth’s involvement in the subcontracting of Elbit extended to being asked by Hanwha to approve lines that would appear in Elbit’s media release announcing the deal in late February last year. “HLS [likely Head Land Systems, the executive in the relevant area of Defence] has cleared the additional line. Formal advice will come through the normal process,” the department replied to Hanwha.
Most significantly of all, in mid-March 2024, two weeks before an Elbit drone would incinerate Frankcom and her aid worker colleagues, the Commonwealth itself directly signed a deal with Elbit Systems.
Related Article Block Placeholder
Article ID: 1214011
On March 13, two Hanwha employees, copying in Defence officials, had the following exchange in emails with the subject “Elbit systems land Approval Subcontractor Deed”:
Hi, just clarifying process here so we get it right for all subs. Elbit has delivered the Approved Subcontractor Deed to both CoA and HDA simultaneously in the email from [redacted] I assume this is the obligation of the sub to prepare and sign, and then forward to Coa for counter-signing. Is this correct? As it’s a deed between Coa and the Approved Sub — what action does HDA need to take in having the Approved Subcontractor Deed reviewed and executed?”
The colleague replies: “No action is required of HDA [redacted] we await the Commonwealth comment in that regard. At this stage [redacted] there is nothing for HDA to do but await a signed copy from the Commonwealth, or otherwise a request for clarification regarding the point stated above.”
In April, Commonwealth officials were also invited by Hanwha to be involved in an unspecified review involving Elbit, and in July closely vetted the deed to be signed by Elbit, in cooperation with Hanwha employees.
The emails are difficult to reconcile with the government’s position — stated in parliament — that the Commonwealth is not a party to the contract. The government initiated a review of Elbit’s proposal, signed off on the announcement by Elbit and signed the contract engaging Elbit.
Defence and the office of Richard Marles were contacted for comment. As has long been the case when approached by Crikey, neither responded.
Does this prove the government lied about its engagement with Elbit?
We want to hear from you. Write to us at letters@crikey.com.au to be published in Crikey. Please include your full name. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.
