Concerns surrounding a comprehensive plan to combat anti-Semitism in Australia have been addressed by the government-appointed envoy who authored the report. Jillian Segal dismissed worries that the proposed measures would suppress legitimate criticisms of Israel, asserting that the plan aims to address a troubling rise in anti-Jewish sentiment.
The recommendations from Segal’s report are currently under review by the federal government as it seeks to respond to a significant increase in discrimination against Jewish Australians. A key point of contention is the suggestion to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of anti-Semitism. Critics, including the definition’s original author, Kenneth Stern, argue that it blurs the line between anti-Semitism and criticism of Israel and Zionism.
Executive officer of the Jewish Council of Australia, Max Kaiser, denounced the report as a “blueprint for silencing dissent.” He expressed concern that its focus on surveillance and funding control echoed authoritarian tactics. In response, Segal contended that such criticisms misinterpret the definition, stating, “The train has moved on, if I might put it that way, and Kenneth Stern has been left behind.” She emphasized that while criticism of Israel is acceptable, calls for the state’s elimination constitute anti-Semitism.
Segal further asserted that the Jewish Council of Australia does not represent the broader Jewish community. In contrast, other organizations, such as the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council and the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, have voiced support for the full adoption of the plan.
The report outlines various initiatives, including the integration of Holocaust education into school curricula and the strengthening of legislation against hate speech. Significant measures also include the recommendation to cut funding for universities and cultural institutions that fail to adequately address anti-Semitism, as well as the possible deportation of immigrants involved in discrimination against Jewish individuals.
Segal highlighted the need for universities to ensure that campuses are safe environments for all, pointing out “hotspots” where entrenched anti-Semitism persists. She emphasized the importance of targeting these areas specifically, particularly within academic institutions.
Critics of the plan, including Ashlyn Horton, president of the National Union of Students, raised concerns about the portrayal of student protests related to Palestine. Horton argued that equating legitimate criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism is problematic. “Most student activists who have been part of the Palestine movement have never actually been anti-Semitic,” she stated, emphasizing their focus on humanitarian concerns regarding Gaza and university involvement in weapons manufacturing.
The Australia Palestine Advocacy Network warned that marginalized communities, including First Nations and Muslim groups, could be disproportionately affected by the proposed measures.
Highlighting the severity of the situation, journalist Jan Fran noted that Israel had reportedly killed nearly 200 people in Gaza in a recent escalation of violence. She expressed concern that if the envoy’s plan stifles criticism of Israel’s actions, particularly in the media, it could lead to troubling outcomes.
Segal’s report indicates that threats, vandalism, and physical violence against Jewish Australians tripled between October 2023 and September 2024. She noted that envoys globally are collaborating with social media platforms to combat hate speech, suggesting that artificial intelligence could play a role in addressing this issue without infringing on free expression.
In response to the report, Universities Australia has committed to considering its recommendations as discussions continue regarding the balance between free speech and the need to combat anti-Semitism effectively.
