Australia has seen a notable rise in often violent and destructive antisemitic incidents in the past two weeks, including arson on synagogues, anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish graffiti, as well as attacks on Jewish-owned businesses, raising alarm among community members and the Australian government. The attacks are ostensibly a form of protest against the Israeli military intervention in Gaza, ongoing since 2023 with recent escalations, although it is possible that antisemitism is the sole motivating factor for certain incidents. Moreover, the attacks have prompted a swift response from state and federal authorities, as well as condemnation from key political figures.
The Israeli military operation in Gaza after the October 7th attacks from Hamas quickly resulted in worldwide condemnation once the human toll began to mount, and it became apparent that the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) were allegedly committing significant violations of international law. This sparked major protests in cities across the world, such as in Berlin, New York, Istanbul, and Paris, and generally rallied many globally into an anti-Israeli and Palestinian solidarity movement. The majority of these protests were largely peaceful, such as the student-led ones across U.S. college campuses in 2024, and primarily condemned the actions of the IDF and the State of Israel itself, rather than pushing the blame on the Jewish community as a whole. In fact, some protests even saw participation from Jews opposed to Zionism, with support from organizations like American Jewish Voice for Peace or the UK-based Jewish Voice for Labor.
However, the movement as a whole did have a darker side: many participants and proponents were directly opposed to the idea of Judaism itself, criticizing the Jewish people as a whole. In Australia, for instance, a report found that antisemitic incident quadrupled in 2024 compared to the previous year, no doubt as a result of the Israeli response to the October 7th attacks. Moreover, some of the attacks may have been either loosely connected or not connected at all to the pro-Palestinian movement itself, as evidenced by graffiti including symbols such as swastikas. In the U.S., meanwhile, analysis reveals that neo-Nazi groups such as the National Justice Party used the movement as a bandwagon to spread their own antisemitism, citing conspiracy theories that claim “Jewish control of our banks, our media, our politicians.” Notably, these are developments have occasionally been used to unfairly discredit the pro-Palestinian movement as a whole. However, it is still important to recognize that many other violent attacks, such as the recent ones in Australia, are likely ideologically aligned with the pro-Palestinian movement. Analysis from the University of San Francisco claims anti-Semitic elements within the movement to be “all too real,” alleging that it has been “downplayed” by activists.
In this context, the recent attacks in Australia are simply a continuation of potentially anti-Semitic elements within the Palestinian solidarity movement, potentially motivated by the recent Israeli escalation of its offensive in Gaza, which continues to kill scores of civilians. The most notable recent incident occurred on July 4th at a synagogue in Melbourne, where a man poured flammable liquid on its door in an apparent arson attack, before setting it on fire. Although 20 people were eating dinner inside the building, it was safely evacuated without any injuries. Moreover, the attacker, who was reportedly from New South Wales, is set to appear in court soon. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese condemned the incident as an “attack on Australia,” vowing to use the “full force of law” against any violence from protestors and activists. Reports compared the attack to a similar one on the Adas Israel Synagogue last year, which as of now still remains unsolved.
Another attack on the same night occurred at an Israeli-owned restaurant, in which up to 20 protestors from a larger group were involved with an altercation with diners, in which chairs were thrown, and a glass door was damaged. The attackers also allegedly chanted slogans such as “Death to the IDF.” So far, three people have been charged with crimes such as assault, riotous behavior, as well as criminal damage. Finally, a third incident the next day saw perpetrators set fire to three vehicles, as well as spray the vehicles and a nearby wall with anti-Israeli graffiti. A source from the Melbourne police also confirmed that the graffiti contained “references of antisemitism.”
The Australian government has promptly responded with a comprehensive plan to address antisemitism, spearheaded by the special envoy on antisemitism Jillian Segal. The major points of this plan include withholding funding from universities that don’t effectively protect their Jewish student body, as well as “screening visa applicants and non-citizens for extremist views.” Segal, who was appointed to the position in 2024 for a three-year term, and reports directly to Prime Minister Albanese, explained that antisemitism “attacks the foundation of [Australia].” She further elaborated that the prejudice has become “ingrained and normalised within academia and the cultural space.”
Therefore, an important aspect of Segal’s plan is public awareness campaigns to create “a thorough understanding of antisemitism.” This would mean including Holocaust and antisemitism education in the national curriculum for secondary schools, as well as requiring public institutions to adopt the IHRA definition of antisemitism. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition is a commonly-used standard for determining anti-Semitic speech and action created by U.S. historian Kenneth Stern, and notably adopted by the European Commission. Segal’s intentions thus seem to be the enforcement of a much more strict perception of antisemitism, through both the promotion of awareness and threats to educational institutions over funding.
However, the plan has received its fair share of criticism. Amnesty International, for instance, rejects the IHRA definition for being used to “suppress criticism of human rights violations by the Israeli authorities.” An international law expert at the University of Sydney and UN special rapporteur also called the definition “vague” and “not workable.” Even Stern, the creator of the definition, has since distanced himself from the concept, citing similar concerns. However, Segal responded to the fact by claiming that “Stern has been left behind” and sticking to it. The plan also echoes certain policies of the Trump administration in the U.S., which previously froze funding to major universities and threatened further cuts over an apparently inadequate response to the 2024 pro-Palestinian campus protests, and inability to protect Jewish students. Indeed, Max Kaiser, executive officer of the Jewish Council of Australia, called the new plan “straight out of [Donald] Trump's authoritarian playbook.”
Meanwhile, Albanese reportedly welcomed the plan and stated the Australian government would “carefully consider” its implementation, emphasizing that “there is no place in Australia for antisemitism.” The plan was also lauded by most Australian Jewish organizations as a welcome antidote to the anti-Semitic trends the country has been seeing for the past two years. However, Albanese did maintain that the Australian government would continue to advocate for a two-state solution regarding Israel and Palestine, highlighting the rights of both people to security and their own independent states.
Overall, as Australia confronts the recent wave of anti-Semitic violence, which included an attack on a synagogue, it finds itself navigating a delicate path: protecting its Jewish community while preserving the right to free speech and freedom of expression. How Australia responds may cement a new approach within the West, first seen in the U.S., seeking to boldly address anti-Semitic speech and action in the context of the Palestinian solidarity movement.