Pauline Hanson has launched a fierce new attack on the Albanese government over the return of women and children linked to ISIS, warning the decision could create what she described as a “generational national security risk” for Australia.

The controversy erupted after Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke confirmed that a group of 13 women and children associated with ISIS-linked families would be allowed to return to Australia. Reports also revealed that another proposed return group had previously been blocked earlier this year, further intensifying the political debate.

Senator Hanson said she was “disgusted” by the decision and accused the government of placing ideology and international pressure ahead of public safety. According to the One Nation leader, ordinary Australians could now be forced to carry the long-term financial and security burden of monitoring individuals connected to extremist networks.

“This is not compassion — this is recklessness,” Hanson argued during a fiery media appearance.

She questioned whether intelligence agencies, police and border authorities already stretched by rising security pressures would be capable of managing ongoing surveillance and deradicalisation efforts over many years.

The issue has immediately reignited broader national debates around immigration, border security, terrorism laws and multiculturalism — all topics that remain highly sensitive in Australian politics more than a decade after the height of the ISIS conflict in the Middle East.

Supporters of the repatriation process argue Australia has legal and moral responsibilities toward citizens and children stranded in overseas detention camps, particularly minors who may have had little or no choice in the circumstances that brought them into conflict zones.

Critics, however, warn that even if some returnees pose no immediate threat, extremist ideology can persist across generations and create future security concerns that are difficult to predict or contain.

Hanson argued Australians were never properly consulted about the risks involved and claimed the government was underestimating community fears surrounding terrorism and radicalisation.

The One Nation leader also questioned the long-term welfare and integration costs involved in resettling returnees, arguing taxpayers could eventually fund years of housing support, mental health services, security monitoring and social programs.

Political analysts say the controversy is likely to intensify pressure on the Albanese government as cost-of-living frustrations and concerns over social cohesion continue growing across parts of the country.

The debate also exposes a widening divide in Australian politics over how democracies should handle citizens connected to extremist organisations abroad. Some argue repatriation allows governments to monitor returnees more effectively under domestic law, while others believe preventing re-entry entirely is the safer option.

Security experts remain divided over the long-term risks. Some former counterterrorism officials have warned that unmanaged detention camps overseas can themselves become breeding grounds for future extremism, particularly among children raised in violent ideological environments.

Others argue bringing individuals back into Australia introduces unnecessary uncertainty and creates political, legal and intelligence challenges that could last decades.

The Albanese government has defended the repatriation framework by pointing to existing legal safeguards, security assessments and monitoring mechanisms already used in previous return cases.

But Hanson insists the public is being asked to accept risks without clear guarantees.

“The Australian people should not have to pay the price for decisions made by people who chose to align themselves with one of the most brutal terrorist organisations in modern history,” she said.

The comments have sparked fierce reactions online, with supporters praising Hanson for taking a hard line on national security, while critics accuse her of inflaming fear and targeting vulnerable children caught up in a conflict they did not create.

As the political storm grows, the issue is rapidly becoming another major flashpoint in Australia’s already heated debate over immigration, border control and national identity.