The shame of anti-Israel proponents

Michael de Percy and Sascha Dov Bachmann I 25 September 2024 I Spectator Australia

Israel’s ingenious pager attack against Hezbollah last week (followed by a second attack targeting walkie-talkies the next day) was not only a clever supply chain infiltration, but one of the most sophisticated, intelligence-driven, surgically targeted strikes executed in modern military history. Shamefully, many anti-Israel proponents condemned Israel rather than condemning the terrorists.

Israel’s targeted attacks were a major blow to the terrorists and took out Hezbollah’s command and control capability, thus preparing the ground for a major Israeli pre-emptive strike. Israel was right to strike Hezbollah as it continues to battle Hamas in the southwest while defending itself against Houthi missiles from the southeast.

While Israel’s strikes against the terrorists comply with the principles of International Humanitarian Law, and especially with its two main requirements of proportionality and distinction (with regrettable collateral casualties which were incidental), we immediately witnessed a global wave of condemnation of the Israeli action against a terrorist organisation proscribed by both the UK and Australia.

In the UK, moral support or approval of a terrorist organisation is a criminal offence. It is also a criminal offence to express an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation.

Australia is less prescriptive but an organisation which ‘advocates the doing of a terrorist act’ can lead to the government listing such an organisation as a terrorist organisation. Such ‘advocating’ is described as where one ‘directly praises the doing of a terrorist act, where there is a substantial risk that this praise might lead someone to engage in a terrorist act’.

Israel is currently fighting against Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and the Houthis in Yemen, three non-state terrorist actors that are all supported by Iran.

Some Australians refuse to condemn the actions of these terrorist groups while shamefully decrying Israel’s legal right to defend itself. This frequently manifests as political support for Palestine, which is controlled by Hamas in Gaza, in the mistaken belief that not condemning the terrorists provides a pathway to peace.

One junior solicitor wore a keffiyeh during his admission address to the NSW Supreme Court. The Chief Justice was quick to demand why the court had been hijacked for political purposes.

The junior solicitor explained:

‘I am proud to wear the keffiyeh, proud to show what being by a lawyer (sic) means to me personally. I hope with small acts of solidarity like these, we can move towards a more peaceful, fulfilling world.’

In our opinion, this so-called peaceful world certainly won’t be brought about by terrorist regimes who are proxies of the murderous Iranian Islamist regime.

These groups operating in the Middle East are not poorly armed freedom fighters, they are radical Islamist terrorist actors that are well-equipped with modern weapons of warfare. As terrorist organisations, they are all proscribed by the Australian government. The Houthis, also known as Ansar Allah, are also fighting against the internationally-recognised Yemeni government while Hezbollah is effectively holding Lebanon and its democracy hostage.

Recently, a Houthi hypersonic missile travelled just over 2,000 km in under 12 minutes to strike Israel. This is no backward capability but signals that Israel is under threat from modern weapons in the hands of terrorists. Fortunately, the missile was hit by Israeli defence measures and fragmented, causing only minor injuries to civilians.

To put that capability in perspective, Australia is yet to develop a hypersonic missile. The SCIFiRE Program is a collaborative agreement between Australia and the US to develop the capability but it is some time away.

In Australia, the Greens party have repeatedly called for the provision of arms to Israel from Australia to be prohibited. The Greens claim that Australia ‘should not be fuelling war crimes’. Such claims are ludicrous given Israel’s enemies have weapons capabilities that Australia is yet to develop.

The Greens have little clue when it comes to national security challenges or indeed defence technologies – they would rather focus on whatever suits their anti-colonial narrative – and they refuse to condemn the proscribed terrorist groups.

Soft footing around antisemitism makes the situation worse. Labor is caught in the middle and appears to be dividing its loyalties between Australia’s national interests and some voters’ concerns for Palestine.

This will become a bigger problem in the future as the Middle East edges closer to all-out war. As the leftists in the West refuse to condemn terrorist groups, this only emboldens Iran and its proxies. But many don’t appreciate how localised the usefulness of ‘useful idiots’ in Australia have become.

Antisemitic behaviour in Australia is a major problem. For instance, Mark Scott, former ABC managing director and now vice-chancellor of Sydney University, recently apologised to Jewish students, admitting that he ‘failed them’ when it comes to the pro-Palestinian encampment on the grounds.

We see this as a metaphor for the Labor government.

It is only a matter of time before continued support for Palestine (in whatever form), and the normalising of antisemitism in our institutions, impacts negatively on our national security.

Freedom of speech and opinion is central to liberal democracy, but so too is the rule of law. Our laws are designed to protect us from terrorists. The groups Israel is fighting against are proscribed because they would destroy the very fabric of our otherwise peaceful nation if given half a chance.

Australians who refuse to condemn Iran-sponsored terrorist groups are not doing our national security any favours. Anti-Israel proponents are shamefully doing nothing for our future other than ceding our hard-won liberties to those who would otherwise yoke us to their terrorist ways.

Dr Michael de Percy?@FlaneurPolitiq is a political scientist and political commentator. He is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, a Chartered Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport (CILTA), and a Member of the Royal Society of NSW. He is National Vice President of the Telecommunications Association, Chairman of the ACT and Southern NSW Chapter of CILTA, and a member of the Australian Nuclear Association. Michael is a graduate of the Royal Military College, Duntroon and was appointed to the College of Experts at the Australian Research Council in 2022. All opinions in this article are the author’s own and are not intended to reflect the views of any other person or organisation.

Professor Sascha-Dominik (Dov) Bachmann?@SdBachman is Professor in Law and Co-Convener National Security Hub, University of Canberra, and a Research Fellow with the Security Institute for Governance and Leadership in Africa, Faculty of Military Science, Stellenbosch University. Sascha is an extraordinary Reader in War Studies with the Swedish Defence University. He is a Fellow with NATO SHAPE – ACO Office of Legal Affairs where he works on Hybrid Threats and Lawfare. All views and opinions are the author’s own and do not represent the views of the organisations the author is affiliated with.