The long-standing goal of the Aboriginal land rights movement to splinter Australia into separate nations has been pushed closer to realization, through the resurrection of the debate about a possible treaty between Aborigines, and non-indigenous Australians. This revival of the treaty idea follows the May 28 "Corroboree 2000" event, when an estimated 250,000 Australians walked across the Sydney Harbor Bridge in support of "reconciliation" between Aborigines and their non-indigenous antagonists. Organizers and promoters of the event cite the volume of marchers as evidence that Australians have voted with their feet in a groundswell of support for "reconciliation": "[T]he tide has turned in favor of national reconciliation," Australian Democrats leader Meg Lees said at the march. However, the lofty ideal of "reconciliation" has proven to be a Trojan horse for the more divisive goal of a treaty that will see the Australian population classified into separate Aboriginal and non-indigenous nations, which the schemers behind the push for national reconciliation have planned all along.

Corroboree 2000 was the culmination of what can only be described as a social engineering project, that over the past decade has firmly planted Aboriginal claims to land, and the nation's culpability for injustices suffered by Aborigines at the hands of white Australia for the past 200 years, at the forefront of the national consciousness. Those injustices were very real and their legacy is still evident today: in health terms, Aborigines have a life expectancy 20 years below that of white Australians, and are twice as likely to be admitted to hospital as the rest of the population, usually for kidney or respiratory disease or injury. However, attempts to address the Aboriginal health crisis have been an abject failure, partly because of budget cuts that have crippled Australia's entire health industry over the past two decades, and partly because of an insistence by the Aboriginal industry that improvements in Aboriginal health, education and welfare cannot be separated from the "spiritual" issues of land rights and culture. In fact, the professional government approach to dealing with Aboriginal welfare in the 1950s and 1960s, under the pre-multiculturalism policy of assimilation, was denounced in a 1998 Human Rights Commission report, entitled "The Stolen Generations", as "genocide".

Instead of implementing policies that would result in practical reconciliation, by raising the health and living standards of the Aborigines, the reconciliation push has focussed on symbolic gestures, like a national apology to be delivered by the Prime Minister, on behalf of the nation, to Aborigines, and a treaty. A formal treaty was first officially proposed by then-Prime Minister Bob Hawke in 1988, but the idea originated in 1924, when the Communist Party of Australia's Worker's Weekly newspaper issued the first call for Aboriginal land rights, involving the handing back of large tracts of land to Aborigines for them to form separate "states or republics", "independent of Australia", with "the right to make treaties with foreign powers, including Australia". The Aboriginal land rights movement really got started in 1963, when Prince Philip founded the Australian Conservation Foundation with funding from global mining giant Rio Tinto, whose largest shareholder is the Queen. Philip founded the ACF to do what his own World Wildlife Fund and its Primitive People's Fund were doing worldwide: sponsoring indigenous insurgencies in order to split up sovereign nation states. The ACF continued the treaty push: ACF president Nugget Coombs, the "father of Aboriginal land rights", was also the longtime chairman of the Aboriginal Treaty Committee.

Two years after Hawke's 1998 call, the controversial treaty idea was seemingly dropped, and the government replaced it with the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation (CAR). Among others, the Council included as its deputy chairman Rio Tinto director Sir Gustav Nossal, and Normandy Mining chief Robert Champion de Crespigny, the Australian frontman for the Anglo American Oppenheimer family, also WWF sponsors. Despite appearances, the CAR also kept the Communist/ACF Aboriginal sovereignty agenda, hidden in its official Reconciliation Declaration in phrases such as "the right to self-determination".

Prime Minister John Howard rejected that wording in CAR's Reconciliation Declaration, and also rejected the treaty push as inconsistent with Australia's nationhood. "A nation, an undivided united nation, dopes not make a treaty with itself," Howard told Sydney Radio 2UE on May 29. "I mean, to talk about one part of Australia making a treaty with another part is to accept that we are in affect two nations." However, far from this being a principled stance of Howard himself, it is a reflection of the political backlash against the Aboriginal land rights agenda that was first exposed by Lyndon LaRouche's Australian co-thinkers in the Citizens Electoral Council, whose 1997 groundbreaking expose entitled "Aboriginal land rights: Prince Philip's racist plot to splinter Australia" shaped the anti-land rights movement that found voice in Pauline Hanson's One Nation political party in 1997/1998; Howard's stance has been formed purely by sniffing the political winds.

Nevertheless, his position has come under huge attack from the self-proclaimed spokesmen for Australia's Aborigines in Geoff Clark, the chairman of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission, and Michael Mansell, who are respectively the deputy chairman and secretary of Australia's unofficial Aboriginal state, the Aboriginal Provisional Government. Clark and Mansell don't hide their agenda: "It is two nations. It always has been," Mansell said on May 29. "A treaty"has to be the end product of the reconciliation process."