Australian government aids and abets the view of a person implicated for inciting genocide

February 9, 2026
bill
Freedom, Personal, Politics
0 Comments

The Australian government has made an extraordinary decision to deeply divide the Australian community under the guise of advancing social cohesion and bringing us all together. How such a patently stupid political decision could be made by educated adults is beyond comprehension. Once again this is not one of my typical blog posts where I write as a professional (academic) macroeconomist. I am writing this as an active author that is now facing suppression of my capacity for self-expression by an increasingly authoritarian government machine (at both federal and state levels) that has been, it seems, captured by a particular lobby group that exercises its influence and power in the most pernicious and robust fashion. What is the issue? The Australian government has invited the Israeli President Isaac Herzog to visit Australia as their guest and is tipped to make a formal address to our federal parliament. The decision is wrong on so many levels and the subsequent responses of the governments (state and federal) to what they now realise is a mass groundswell of opposition among the community to the decision is even worse.

The decision to invite Herzog is extraordinary given his own track record and the track record of the current Israeli government.

The Australian government claims that his invitation was extended to allow him to support the mourning of people of Jewish faith after the brutal murders of their community at Bondi Beach on December 14, 2025.

However, Herzog is not a religious figure, which one would think to be a more approach source of succour for those of any faith who are grieving their lost ones after a shocking event such as unfolded at Bondi Beach.

Herzog is the head of state and thus is the titular representative of that state.

And whether you like it said or not, that state is a monster.

In 2024, the – International Court of Justice (ICJ) – released their – Summary of the Advisory Opinion of 19 July 2024 – which is an extensive documentation of the way in which Israel has treated the Palestinians since the ‘Six-Day War’ in 1967, when Israel first “occupied all the territories of Palestine under British Mandate beyond the Green Line” and then progressively started “to establish or support settlements in the territories it occupied and took a number of measures aimed at changing the status of the City of Jerusalem.”

It documents how the state of Israel conducts “the ongoing violation by Israel of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination”; and supports the ““prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem”; and adopts “discriminatory legislation and measures” aimed at thwarting the freedoms of the Palestinian people.

It believes the common thread is that “these policies and practices are contrary to international law.”

It declared the continued Israeli presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) to be illegal.

It found that while Israel is a signatory to several international human rights agreements but consistently violates them and denies the Palestinian people the right to self determination.

It demands that Israel immediately end their occupation of the OPT, evacuate the illegal settlements and provide full reparation for the damage it has caused as a result of that occupation.

It is a very powerful statement by the ICJ, which countries such as Australia have long accepted as being the legitimate UN institution for resolving conflicts between states.

Like much of the UN apparatus, its decisions can be scuppered by the veto power of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, which makes it a rather lame duck body in terms of enforceability but not in terms of defining the moral compass for countries such as Australia, which holds itself out as a good international citizen.

So without even considering the personal conduct of the Israeli President in the persecution of the Palestinians, the fact that he is the head of state and represents that state is sufficient to disqualify him from reasonable discourse with nations that purport to defend the principles of international law.

The occupation is not only illegal under that law but Israel has been required by the ICJ to stand trial for genocide as a result of its Gaza invasion and brutal and unconscionable mass murder of tens of thousands of innocent civilians.

In 2024, the ICJ issued this note – Summary of the Order of 26 January 2024 – which addressed South Africa’s petition to institute “proceedings against Israel concerning alleged violations in the Gaza Strip of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide”.

The Court found that “the allegations were plausible enough to warrant immediate, precautionary measures” and in March 2024, a UN special rapporteur found that there were “reasonable grounds” for adopting the conclusion that the genocide threshold had been met.

While it is Netanyahu and his political cronies that have been making these military decisions, the President stands responsible for them as head of state.

Otherwise, the concept of head of state has no meaning.

Under the – Basic Law – of Israel, the President’s role is to:

… stand at the head of the State, representing the state of Israel abroad and fostering national unity at home.

Interestingly, Israel’s first president, Chaim Weizmann wrote in a letter of resignation (July 30, 1948) that (Source):

I have decided to sever my ties with the position that has been forced upon me. I am not prepared to use my name to provide cover for everything currently taking place in the Land of Israel and cannot make peace with everything that the government is doing without being able to influence anything or prevent it … I really and truly do not want to cause any problems or difficulties for the newborn state, which, in any case, is mired in serious and difficult problems, but I cannot reconcile myself to being only a passive partner to this enterprise, which is being conducted along lines that I cannot tolerate.

There have been notable examples, when the normally symbolic head of state in Israel, has transcended into the political domain.

For example (Source):

After the Yom Kippur War, President Ephraim Katzir triggered a public outcry when he said, “We are all guilty.” President Yitzhak Navon threatened to resign unless a state commission of inquiry was established to investigate the massacres at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Lebanon.

So, history tells us that when the politicians are pursuing disdainful policies, the President has made it clear they stand against them.

There has been many ugly decisions taken by the Israeli government over the years but the massacres in Gaza stand out as heinous and without justification.

As a consequence, there is no way a head of a state that has committed war crimes should be allowed into Australia and he should be arrested at the border if he tries to enter.

The fact that the Australian government has invited him is an abrogation of our national responsibility to respect international law.

Further, Herzog’s own position is not acceptable.

On September 16, 2025, the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel released a report – Legal analysis of the conduct of Israel in Gaza pursuant to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide = which among other things concluded that Herzog was implicated in the genocide as a result of him saying on October 13, 2023 that:

… it’s an entire nation out there that is responsible. It is not true, this rhetoric about civilians who were not aware and not involved. It is absolutely not true. They could have risen up. They could have fought against that evil regime which took over Gaza in a coup d’état.

Just as Herzog could resign over the conduct of the Israeli government.

The UN Commission argued that:

The Commission notes that the statement of President Isaac Herzog did not expressly call for the genocide of the Palestinian people in Gaza. However, the statement must be assessed in the context of the beginning of a war where the Israeli security forces had just initiated their military operations in Gaza. Hence, the statement that an entire nation is responsible for the attack of 7 October 2023 may reasonably be interpreted as incitement to the Israeli security forces personnel to target the Palestinians in Gaza as a group as being collectively culpable for the 7 October 2023 attack in Israel.

The UN Commission interpreted Herzog’s claim that if the people of Gaza didn’t agree with Hamas they could rise up as saying because they didn’t instigate an uprising “they were all equally responsible”.

An earlier UN Human Rights Council report (issued June 10, 2024) – Detailed findings on the military operations and attacks carried out in the Occupied Palestinian Territory from 7 October to 31 December 2023 – noted that “Several statements by Israeli officials advocated for collective punishment against the Palestinian people as a whole or the population of Gaza in particular”.

The 2025 Commission report noted that the President’s message that “there are no uninvolved” was relayed to IDF soldiers and prominently repeated in “several public places”.

The important conclusion the Commission reached was that:

On incitement to genocide, the Commission concludes that Israeli President Isaac Herzog, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, have incited the commission of genocide and that Israeli authorities have failed to take action against them to punish this incitement.

Then there is the infamous photo of Herzog signing the missile to boost the morale of the IDF murderers.

Such a person should not be invited by our government as a dignitary to tour the nation.

The ultimate conflation

One of the consequences of inviting a character like Herzog to Australia is that is consolidates the conflation that the Zionist ideologues have been pushing that criticism of the government of Israel and the conduct of the IDF is equivalent to anti-semitism.

That conflation has been promoted as a way of avoiding any scrutiny of the murderous behaviour of the Israeli state.

It is proving to be a very successful strategy.

The attacks at Bondi Beach in December have been constructed as an anti-semitic action and I don’t intend to dispute that representation.

Respected commentator Laura Tingle, however, does make the obvious point in her article (February 7, 2026) – Albanese’s invitation to Herzog is a shift in his approach to Israel:

But an uncomfortable question still to be answered has always been the extent to which the motivation for that hatred was in any way a response to the actions of the Israeli government in Gaza after October 7.

I considered that issue somewhat in my earlier blog post – Curbing the freedom of writers will not advance human rights (January 15, 2026).

The anger over the Gaza action by the Israeli government has made people of the Jewish faith around the world less safe.

And by bringing Herzog, who is now implicated by the UN Commission and by his own actions as being party to the genocide (tacit or not), to Australia to console the Jewish community, is conflating those actions with being Jewish.

Australians generally are appalled by anti-semitic actions but are now confused by the presence of Herzog as a Zionist symbol.

The Australian government was pressured by the Zionist lobby in Australia, including the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, to bring Herzog out here.

However, the more progressive Jewish group in Australia – The Jewish Council of Australia – published a statement (January 28, 2026) – Jewish Council calls on Albanese to rescind Herzog invitation – which said:

The Jewish Council of Australia has expressed outrage that the Albanese Government would fuel the flames of division by inviting Herzog to visit Australia, warning that his trip is completely inappropriate and offensive and will rightly spark mass protests.

President Isaac Herzog is directly implicated in Israel’s genocide against Palestinians in Gaza …

This should be a moment for collective mourning, reflection and care. It is not a moment to host the head of a state which has been found to have committed a genocide in Gaza …

Inviting a foreign head of state who is implicated in an ongoing genocide as a representative of the Jewish community is deeply offensive and risks entrenching the dangerous and antisemitic conflation between Jewish identity and the actions of the Israeli state. This does not make Jews safer. It does the opposite.

That is a very powerful statement from a leading Jewish lobby in Australia, which I support 100 per cent.

They also have a petition that anyone can sign opposing Herzog’s visit – Petition: say no to Herzog visiting Australia.

Increasing constraints on our freedoms imposed

The NSW Labor Premier responded to the groundswell of opposition to the visit by granting the NSW police ‘extra powers’.

These extra powers include granting the police the power to close off access to various parts of the city and forcing people to move out of certain parts of the city.

It will be the first time that the NSW government has invoked those powers to deal with a visit from a high profile foreign visitor.

It has only previously been used for the largest sporting events.

The motive is to suppress legitimate protest by people who deeply oppose this decision of the government.

It goes with a number of increasingly authoritarian rules and regulations that are designed to stifle public opinion that that the Zionist ideologues in Australia don’t want the public to hear.