Governments love playing a waiting game. When a foreign military kills an aid worker, diplomats issue stern press releases, summon ambassadors, and promise to leave no stone unturned. Then months bleed into years. Public outrage cools. Files gather dust.
Australia is currently learning this painful playbook firsthand regarding the death of Zomi Frankcom. The Australian aid worker was killed alongside six World Central Kitchen colleagues in a 2024 Gaza drone strike. Israel's military justice system recently closed the investigation without finding any criminal misconduct, ruling it a "reasonable mistake." Canberra isn't buying it. Foreign Minister Penny Wong called out the decision as falling short of basic accountability. If you enjoyed this piece, you should read: this related article.
Yet, looking at how military investigations operate historically, harsh statements change very little. Israel knows how to run out the clock. If you look past the diplomatic friction, a darker reality emerges about structural impunity, internal military reviews, and why justice for international aid workers remains an uphill battle.
The Anatomy of an Internal Military Investigation
How does a modern military investigate its own lethal blunders? In Israel, the process runs through the Military Advocate General (MAG). The Fact-Finding and Assessment Mechanism handles the initial groundwork, reviewing operational data before passing findings to the MAG. For another angle on this story, see the latest update from Reuters.
Critics point out a glaring conflict of interest. The exact same legal advisors who clear operations beforehand also oversee the investigations into whether those operations broke the law. Legal experts call this self-policing by design. Independent human rights organizations note that the historical odds of a soldier facing criminal prosecution for killing civilians are remarkably low.
When international pressure peaks, systems like these often pivot to create the appearance of a functioning judicial process. But data collected by groups like Action on Armed Violence shows that the vast majority of reviewed cases close quietly without charges, prison time, or structural reform. Frankcom's case fits neatly into this established historical pattern.
Unanswered Questions About the Frankcom Strike
Australia's frustration isn't irrational. Former Australian defence force chief Mark Binskin reviewed the 2024 incident and concluded the strikes violated standard operating procedures and rules of engagement.
Consider the operational timeline. The aid convoy moved through a deconflicted humanitarian zone. Brigade commanders were explicitly informed of their route. Even if the first drone hit was a catastrophic accident, two subsequent strikes followed at two-minute intervals, systematically targeting survivors fleeing from vehicle to vehicle. Drone footage requested repeatedly by the Australian government remains unreleased.
When a military refuses to publish primary evidence while clearing its own personnel, it destroys public trust. Australia faces a stark choice. Canberra can keep issuing polite diplomatic objections, or it can accept that statements alone won't puncture a culture of military protectionism.
What Real Accountability Looks Like
What can a middle power like Australia actually do when its citizens are killed abroad? Relying entirely on another nation's internal courts rarely delivers results.
Legal scholars suggest several escalation pathways that go beyond angry letters. Broad-based trade restrictions, real scrutiny of military supply chain links, and active diplomatic backing of the International Criminal Court are concrete options on the table. The ICC has already issued arrest warrants for top Israeli leadership over wartime conduct, putting pressure on allied nations to choose a side between international law and diplomatic convenience.
Another precedent involves joint criminal investigations, similar to the model used by the Netherlands following the MH17 downing. Countries whose citizens died in the World Central Kitchen convoy—including Australia, the United Kingdom, and Canada—could theoretically pool resources and evidence to pursue independent legal accountability.
Israel is betting that Australians will eventually stop caring. The diplomatic strategy relies on exhaustion. If Canberra wants to honor Zomi Frankcom's memory, it has to prove that timeline wrong. Stop waiting for a foreign military to investigate itself. Push for independent international tribunals, use economic leverage, and make it clear that some lives cannot simply be written off as collateral damage.
