One Nation has declared it is targeting Liberal MP Andrew Hastie over his betrayal of former SAS comrade Ben Roberts-Smith

A political storm is rapidly building inside conservative Australia — and this time, the battle is becoming deeply personal.

Pauline Hanson’s One Nation has officially set its sights on senior Liberal MP Andrew Hastie, accusing him of betraying former SAS comrade Ben Roberts-Smith during one of the most controversial military and political sagas in recent Australian history.

And according to explosive new polling, the political consequences could be devastating.

A recent Redbridge survey reportedly projects Hastie now faces a catastrophic electoral collapse, with modelling suggesting he has virtually no path to retaining his seat if current trends continue.

The numbers immediately triggered shockwaves across conservative political circles.

Because Andrew Hastie was once viewed as one of the Liberal Party’s future leaders.

A decorated former SAS officer, respected by many conservatives for his military background and national security credentials, Hastie built much of his political identity around loyalty, service and conservative principles.

But now, critics inside the Australian right say those same values are exactly what voters believe he abandoned.

At the center of the controversy stands Ben Roberts-Smith —
Australia’s most decorated living soldier and one of the country’s most divisive public figures.

The Victoria Cross recipient has spent years at the center of allegations, legal battles, media investigations and now criminal proceedings connected to alleged war crimes in Afghanistan.

Roberts-Smith strongly denies all allegations and has repeatedly maintained his innocence.

The case has deeply divided Australians.

Some view him as a war hero unfairly destroyed by media campaigns and political agendas.

Others argue the allegations must be fully investigated regardless of military status or public reputation.

But within parts of the conservative base, a separate anger has emerged entirely:
the belief that former military colleagues failed to stand beside him publicly during his darkest moments.

That anger is now being weaponized politically.

One Nation figures and supporters increasingly argue Andrew Hastie failed a test of loyalty.

The accusation is not necessarily about legal guilt or innocence.

It is about solidarity.

And emotionally, that distinction matters enormously to many conservative and veteran voters.

The phrase “betrayal of a former SAS brother” has begun circulating heavily across political commentary online, particularly among nationalist and anti-establishment communities.

For One Nation, the issue creates a powerful opening.

The party has spent years positioning itself as the political home for voters who believe mainstream conservative parties have become weak, disconnected and overly cautious.

Attacking Hastie allows One Nation to present itself as more loyal, more aggressive and more willing to confront institutions directly.

Especially institutions many voters increasingly distrust:
major media,
government agencies,
bureaucracies,
and political elites.

The strategy also taps into growing frustration within parts of the electorate toward the Liberal Party more broadly.

Many conservative voters feel politically homeless.

They see the Coalition struggling with internal division, leadership instability and declining confidence among traditional right-wing supporters.

One Nation wants to convert that frustration into electoral momentum.

And targeting a high-profile Liberal figure like Hastie sends a clear message:

no seat is untouchable anymore.

The Redbridge polling intensified those fears dramatically.

While modelling projections should never be treated as guaranteed election outcomes, the symbolism itself became politically explosive.

A projection suggesting a senior Liberal MP could face near-certain defeat to One Nation reflects something much larger than one electorate.

It signals a potential restructuring of the Australian right.

For decades, conservative politics in Australia largely revolved around the Liberal-National Coalition.

But recent polling trends increasingly suggest fragmentation is accelerating.

Housing pressures.
Cost-of-living frustration.
Migration debates.
Energy policy conflicts.
Distrust of institutions.

All are creating fertile ground for insurgent political movements.

One Nation has aggressively positioned itself inside that environment.

And unlike previous protest movements, the party now appears increasingly confident it can directly challenge major-party dominance in outer suburban and regional seats.

The Roberts-Smith controversy therefore becomes more than a military story.

It becomes symbolic.

To supporters, it represents broader frustrations about loyalty, media power, political courage and national identity.

That emotional intensity explains why the issue continues resonating far beyond the courtroom itself.

For many voters, the argument is not purely legal.

It is cultural.

Who stands with veterans?
Who defends institutions?
Who resists media narratives?
Who stays loyal under pressure?

Those questions carry enormous emotional power in modern politics.

Especially during periods of broader public distrust.

Andrew Hastie now finds himself trapped directly inside that emotional battlefield.

If he defends institutional processes too carefully, critics accuse him of abandoning comrades.

If he attacks investigations too aggressively, he risks accusations of undermining legal accountability.

Politically, it is an extraordinarily difficult position.

One Nation understands that perfectly.

Its strategy appears designed not merely to criticize Hastie —
but to force a symbolic choice between establishment caution and emotional loyalty.

That is often how populist political movements operate most effectively.

Not through detailed policy debates alone,
but through emotionally charged symbolic conflicts.

And few symbols carry more emotional weight in Australia than military service and loyalty among soldiers.

Meanwhile, broader instability inside conservative politics continues worsening.

Recent polling shows declining support for both major parties, rising voter volatility and increasing openness toward smaller populist movements.

Economic frustration is amplifying everything.

Australians facing rising living costs, housing stress and institutional distrust are increasingly drawn toward political figures who speak emotionally rather than technocratically.

One Nation’s rhetoric fits that environment perfectly.

Simple.
Confrontational.
Personal.
Emotional.

The attack on Hastie therefore may only be the beginning.

Political analysts increasingly warn that Australia could be entering a period where traditional party loyalty weakens dramatically and insurgent parties become capable of reshaping entire electoral maps.

If that happens, symbolic cultural conflicts like the Roberts-Smith controversy may become central political battlegrounds.

Not because every voter follows every legal detail —
but because the story itself taps into broader anxieties about trust, identity and institutional power.

For Andrew Hastie, the stakes are now enormous.

This is no longer merely about defending a parliamentary seat.

It is about political survival inside a rapidly changing conservative movement.

And for One Nation, victory against a senior Liberal figure would send a message impossible for Canberra to ignore:

the political landscape on the Australian right is changing —
and much faster than many establishment figures expected.