OVERVIEW OF APAN’S SUBMISSION TO THE ROYAL COMMISSION

Our core argument is that antisemitism is often conflated with anti-Zionism, and that this conflation is harmful both to the Palestinian solidarity movement and to the effort to combat antisemitism.

APAN’S STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE & APPROACH

APAN’s strategic objective is to secure recognition that anti-Zionism is not antisemitic, and that criticism of the State of Israel constitutes valid political speech unless it targets Jews as Jews.

Why it matters

The Commission’s findings will shape national policy on how antisemitism is defined and how it is distinguished from political criticism of Israel. Without a strong, evidence-based counter-submission, the Commission risks adopting definitions and recommendations that would criminalise Palestinian political expression and entrench the false equation of anti-Zionism with racism.

ZIONISM IS A POLITICAL IDEOLOGY. ANTI-ZIONISM IS NOT ANTISEMITISM.

APAN’s submission sets out a detailed historical and political analysis of Zionism as a political movement, distinct from Jewish identity and Jewish religious practice.

Why it matters

The Commission’s counsel assisting has stated that a key task of the inquiry is “to identify when anti-Zionism becomes antisemitism.” Australia’s Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism has declared that “antisemitism and anti-Zionism are both expressions of hatred towards Jews.” If that position is adopted, advocacy for Palestinian rights, from protest chants to academic criticism to calls for boycott, divestment and sanctions, could be treated as racist conduct.

THE HARM OF CONFLATING ANTI-ZIONISM WITH ANTISEMITISM

APAN’s submission sets out five distinct harms caused by the conflation of antisemitism and anti-Zionism.

Why it matters

Since October 2023, APAN has documented a marked increase in anti-Palestinian racism (APR) in Australia as supported by our groundbreaking report on APR. Palestinians are subject to discrimination in schools, workplaces and public life. Yet this racism has received a fraction of the public attention.

APAN manages the anti-Palestinian racism (APR) Register where Palestinian Australians can document their experience of racism, and has collaborated with academics to document these experiences.

IHRA WORKING DEFINITION SHOULD NOT BE ADOPTED

The Commission has indicated it will use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Working Definition of antisemitism. APAN’s submission argues that this definition is counterproductive to effectively defining or combatting antisemitism, and should not be adopted or operationalised.

Why it matters

If the Commission recommends that Australian governments and institutions adopt the IHRA definition, the consequences would extend far beyond this inquiry.

APAN’S FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

APAN has put to the Commission specific proposed findings and recommendations. These are below.

A – THE DEFINITION OF ANTISEMITISM

Finding 1A

The Commission should find antisemitism is a form of racism that is appropriately defined as hatred of or animus against Jewish people because they are Jews.

Finding 1B

The Commission should find that the IHRA Working Definition is counterproductive to effectively defining or combatting antisemitism.

---

Recommendation 1A

The Commission should recommend that Australian governments and public institutions (including universities and the public service) should not adopt the IHRA Working Definition, and to the extent that they have, they should reverse that adoption.

Recommendation 1B

In the alternative to Proposed Recommendation 1A, the Commission should recommend that any Australian governments and public institutions (including the public service) that have adopted the IHRA Working Definition should clarify that, notwithstanding the illustrative examples it contains, criticism of Israel, Zionism and Israeli government policy that is not motivated by hatred of, or animus against Jews as Jews is not a manifestation of antisemitism.

B – THE CONFLATION OF ANTISEMITISM AND ANTI-ZIONISM

Finding 2A

The Commission should find that criticism of the political ideology of Zionism (anti-Zionism) and/or of Israel, that is not motivated by hatred of, or animus against Jews as Jews is not a manifestation of antisemitism.

Finding 2B

The Commission should find that conflating antisemitism with anti-Zionism that is not motivated by hatred of, or animus against Jews as Jews is harmful because it has a chilling effect on the Palestinian solidarity movement and on truth-telling. 

Finding 2C

The Commission should find that conflating criticism of the political ideology of Zionism (anti-Zionism) with antisemitism is harmful because it enables and legitimises attacks on Australians involved in the Palestinian solidarity movement, including (but not exclusively) Palestinians and other Arabs.

Finding 2D

The Commission should find that conflating antisemitism with anti-Zionism that is not motivated by hatred of, or animus against Jews as Jews is harmful because it diverts attention from bona fide instances of antisemitism and relatedly distorts consideration of the measures that could properly be deployed to address antisemitism. Proposed

Finding 2E

The Commission should find that incident reporting and survey data of antisemitic incidents which conflate antisemitism with anti Zionism that is not motivated by hatred of, or animus against Jews as Jews is unhelpful to assessing the prevalence of antisemitism in Australia and must be assessed critically.

---

Recommendation 2A

To combat the harmful conflation of antisemitism with anti-Zionism that is not motivated by hatred of, or animus against Jews as Jews (the Conflation) the Commission should recommend:

• Elected officials should refrain from making public comments which reinforce the Conflation;
• Elected officials and their staff should be provided with education programs on the distinction between antisemitism and anti-Zionism and the harm caused by the Conflation; and
• Media guidelines on the responsible reporting on antisemitism which avoids the Conflation.

Recommendation 2B

The Commission should recommend against the enactment of any laws that seek to address antisemitism through the criminalisation (or prohibition) of political expressions made by, or in support of the Palestinian solidarity movement, and the repeal of any such laws such as Part 2 of the Fighting Antisemitism and Keeping Guns out of the Hands of Terrorists and Criminals Amendment Act 2026 (Qld).

Recommendation 2C

The Commission should recommend that Australian governments ensure the right to peaceful protest by Palestinians and the Palestinian solidarity movement is respected and facilitated by police, in accordance with international human rights standards.

Recommendation 2D

The Commission should recommend that when assessing the prevalence of antisemitism Australian governments should give primacy to incident reporting and survey data of antisemitic incidents which do not conflate antisemitism with anti-Zionism that is not motivated by hatred of, or animus against Jews as Jews.

Recommendation 2E

The Commission should recommend that to address antisemitism and all other forms of racism Australian governments must:

• Must address the founding and enduring colonial racism of this country that faced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people; and
• Should recommend the implementation of the Australian Human Rights Commission’s National Anti-Racism Framework