RCASC SUBMISSION
Here’s my submission. I hesitated at first to post this publicly because I knew the repercussions. I knew it would attract abuse and threats. Been there, done that. I just hope it will encourage others to do the same.
SUBMISSION TO
THE ROYAL COMMISSION ON ANTISEMITISM AND SOCIAL COHESION
RON BAUMANN
14 May 2026
Background
I make this submission as an Australian Jew born in Israel in 1957 to Holocaust survivors. My parents carried deep trauma from Europe and, like many Jewish families of that era, they believed passionately in the necessity of a Jewish homeland after the horrors of the Holocaust. When I was three years old, our family moved to Australia and settled in Sydney’s eastern suburbs, where I was raised in a strongly Zionist environment.
My childhood and adolescence revolved around the organised Australian Jewish community. I attended Jewish school and synagogue, and participated in several Zionist youth organisations. The education and guidance I received focused intensely on Jewish survival, antisemitism, the Holocaust, and the moral necessity of the Israeli state. At no point during those formative years do I recall meaningful education about the Palestinian experience, including the Nakba, military occupation, displacement, or the daily realities faced by Palestinians living under Israeli control.
This was long before social media, independent online journalism, or widespread access to alternative perspectives. Information came almost entirely through community institutions, mainstream media, and Zionist organisations. Within those tightly connected circles, Israel was presented as fundamentally moral, perpetually defensive, and existentially threatened. Palestinians were largely invisible except when portrayed as violent or hostile.
At the age of sixteen, in 1972, I made Aliyah alone. The intention was to complete Year 12 on a kibbutz while learning agriculture and then fulfil military service obligations as an Israeli citizen. I arrived in Israel as an idealistic and heavily indoctrinated child of sixteen who believed unquestionably in the righteousness of the Zionist project.
I returned to Australia eight years later with a profoundly different worldview and both physical and emotional injuries from my time in service. Those years fundamentally changed me. Over subsequent decades, I increasingly distanced myself from organised sections of the Australian Jewish community, not because I rejected my Jewish identity and heritage, but because I became deeply troubled by what I perceived as entrenched racism, ethno-nationalism, hostility towards Palestinians and Arabs, and intolerance towards dissenting Jewish voices.
After the Hamas attacks of October 7, 2023, and Israel’s subsequent military campaign in Gaza, I felt morally compelled to speak publicly against Israel’s actions, against unconditional Australian government support for those actions, and against what I viewed as deeply aggressive, racist and dehumanising rhetoric coming from parts of the Australian Jewish establishment and pro-Israel lobby organisations.
As a result, I have experienced relentless abuse online, including intimidation, threats, harassment, attempts at social ostracism, and accusations of being a “self-hating Jew”, “Kapo” or traitor. My experience is not unique. Many Jewish Australians who publicly oppose Israel’s actions have faced similar treatment.
I strongly oppose antisemitism. I oppose racism in all forms. I also believe that serious discussion about rising antisemitism in Australia cannot occur honestly if legitimate contributing factors are excluded from examination for political reasons.
1. Conflation of Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism
In my view, it is unrealistic to expect the broader public to completely separate antisemitism from anti-Zionism under current conditions. Firstly, many prominent Australian organisations advocating strongly for Israel explicitly identify themselves as Jewish organisations, including the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ), the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC), the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies, the Jewish Community Council of Victoria (JCCV), and the Australian Jewish Association.
Secondly, Israel itself explicitly defines itself as “the Jewish State” and routinely invokes Jewish history, Jewish identity, Jewish suffering, the Holocaust, and Jewish religious and cultural connections in defence of state policies and military actions.
Thirdly, according to the major survey “Australian Jews in the Shadow of War”, approximately 90% of surveyed Australian Jews supported Israel’s military actions in Gaza in the immediate aftermath of October 7. While Jewish Australians are obviously not a monolith, public perceptions are inevitably shaped when community leadership, major Jewish organisations, and overwhelming survey majorities publicly align themselves with Israeli military actions.
This does not justify antisemitism. Criticism of Israeli policies must never become hostility towards Jewish people as an ethnic or religious group. However, refusing to acknowledge why conflation occurs makes meaningful solutions impossible.
2. Israel’s Conduct and Its Impact on Public Sentiment
A major factor contributing to rising hostility towards Jews is the widespread perception that Western governments and influential organisations have excused or minimised serious alleged crimes committed by the Israeli state. Many international legal experts, human rights organisations, United Nations officials, aid agencies, journalists, and genocide scholars have alleged that Israel’s conduct in Gaza has involved acts including indiscriminate attacks on civilians, disproportionate force, collective punishment, starvation tactics, forced displacement, attacks on hospitals and schools, torture and mistreatment of detainees, destruction of civilian infrastructure, killings of journalists and aid workers, and other potential breaches of international law.
Proceedings before international legal bodies, including the International Court of Justice, have intensified global scrutiny and public debate around these allegations. Whether or not every allegation is ultimately upheld legally, the sheer scale of destruction and civilian suffering broadcast globally has had a profound impact on public opinion. Many ordinary Australians perceive double standards in the willingness of governments and media organisations to condemn atrocities committed by some states while defending or downplaying similar conduct when committed by Israel. Suppressing discussion of this reality does not reduce antisemitism. It fuels resentment and mistrust.
3. Extremist and Dehumanising Rhetoric from Israeli Politicians
Public statements by some Israeli ministers, parliamentarians and public figures have significantly damaged perceptions of both Israel and those seen to support it uncritically. Numerous comments reported internationally have included rhetoric advocating collective punishment, mass displacement, destruction of Gaza, denial of Palestinian nationhood, or language comparing Palestinians to animals or existential threats. Examples here. Such rhetoric is widely circulated online and contributes heavily to international outrage. When Australian Jewish organisations or political figures fail to strongly condemn such statements, many members of the public interpret this silence as tacit approval.
4. Australian Political Bias and Selective Concern
Another contributor to rising resentment is the widespread perception that Australian governments at both federal and state levels have displayed disproportionate concern for antisemitism while giving far less attention to Islamophobia, anti-Arab racism, or anti-Palestinian hatred. Many Australians observed politicians rapidly mobilising around antisemitism while remaining comparatively muted regarding the deaths of Palestinian civilians, including thousands of children.
Statements by politicians, including Peter Dutton, Michaelia Cash, Pauline Hanson, Angus Taylor and others have at times contributed to hostile portrayals of Muslims, Palestinians, refugees, or pro-Palestinian activists. Recent legislative responses by premiers, including Chris Minns and David Crisafulli, have also been viewed by many as politically selective and targeted in ways that disproportionately affect pro-Palestinian activism and free expression. Whether these perceptions are fair or not, they exist widely within the broader public.
5. The Special Envoy Role
The appointment of a Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism has also generated concern and resentment among many Australians. In a joint statement with the Zionist Federation of Australia on 12 November 2023, Jillian Segal criticised Foreign Minister Penny Wong and the Albanese government for urging Israel to stop attacking Gaza hospitals and for supporting a ceasefire. The statement called such criticism a “libel,” claiming the hospital attack allegations were unfair and that Australia should avoid legitimising narratives that “demonise” Israel. This alone raises questions about how Segal views dissent, criticism of state violence, and the line between antisemitism and political disagreement.
Australia’s appointment of Jillian Segal as Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism was presented as a move towards social cohesion amid rising tensions and polarisation. On the surface, the role appears reasonable. Antisemitism is real. It exists across the political spectrum, has increased in many countries, and deserves serious attention from governments and civil society alike.
Jewish people should be able to live free from harassment, intimidation, hatred and violence, just like every other community. But almost immediately after Segal’s appointment, concerns emerged about whether she was the right person for the role and, more broadly, about the position's direction and purpose.
Segal’s background is deeply tied to Australia’s political, corporate, and institutional establishment. She is a corporate lawyer, former National Australia Bank board member, former UNSW deputy chancellor, and past president of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry. This is not the background of a grassroots anti-racism campaigner or a community-level bridge-builder; it is that of someone connected to elite power.
While this does not disqualify her, it shapes her approach: institutional, top-down, and aligned with established centres of influence.
Further controversy arose when it was revealed that a company linked to her husband donated $50,000 to Advance Australia, a right-wing lobbying group known for aggressive campaigns on issues like Indigenous recognition, immigration, climate policy, and the Israel–Palestine conflict. Advance has been criticised for amplifying division and culture-war politics. Whether Segal was involved with the donation is almost secondary; the association is significant because the role depends on public trust and perceived impartiality.
For many Australians, particularly during a period of severe housing stress, economic insecurity and social fragmentation, the creation of such a role contributes to perceptions of unequal political influence.
6. Perceptions of Disproportionate Lobby Influence
Whether accurate or exaggerated, there is a widespread public perception that pro-Israel lobby organisations exercise disproportionate influence over Australian politics, media institutions, universities, and public discourse. This perception is intensified when politicians appear reluctant to criticise Israeli government actions while rapidly condemning criticism directed at Israel or Zionism. Ignoring these perceptions rather than addressing them transparently contributes to public distrust and cynicism.
7. Media Coverage and Double Standards
Many Australians perceive mainstream media coverage as heavily skewed towards Israeli narratives and overwhelmingly focused on antisemitism while minimising Islamophobia or Palestinian suffering. Prominent media commentators have frequently framed criticism of Israel as extremist or antisemitic while dismissing or marginalising Palestinian perspectives. The imbalance in emotional framing, language, and prioritisation has contributed to growing public anger towards media institutions and, unfairly, sometimes towards Jewish Australians generally. Media edia organisations have, in many instances, failed to maintain consistent standards regarding human suffering, international law, and moral outrage. I urge the Commission to review some of Sharri Markson’s work to get an understanding of this issue.
8. Propaganda, Misinformation and Public Trust.
Public trust has also been damaged by highly publicised atrocity claims made in the immediate aftermath of October 7 that were later disputed, revised, or insufficiently evidenced. The rapid spread of emotionally charged and sometimes inaccurate information through governments, media outlets, commentators and advocacy organisations has contributed to cynicism and distrust. When members of the public later discover that some widely repeated claims were unreliable or exaggerated, they often conclude they were manipulated. This erosion of trust has broader social consequences.
9. Aggressive Conduct, Harassment and Intimidation
Many critics of Israel, including Jewish critics, have experienced aggressive online harassment, professional intimidation, doxxing, blacklisting attempts, and pressure campaigns. There have been repeated allegations involving coordinated complaints against academics, journalists, artists, performers, authors, medical professionals, activists and ordinary citizens who express pro-Palestinian views. These actions create the perception that powerful groups are attempting to suppress legitimate political speech through intimidation rather than debate. Such tactics are deeply damaging socially and politically.
10. Cancellation Campaigns and Public Controversies
High-profile controversies involving journalists, artists and public figures have intensified community tensions. Cases such as Antoinette Lattouf’s removal from the ABC became symbolic for many Australians of perceived political pressure surrounding the discussion of Israel and Palestine. A growing number of Australians believe there are unequal consequences for expressing sympathy towards Palestinians compared with expressing support for Israeli military actions. Whether entirely accurate or not, these perceptions significantly shape public attitudes.
11. The Victim Card
Many ordinary Australians have also become increasingly frustrated by what they perceive as the constant framing of Israel and organised Jewish institutions primarily through the lens of victimhood, while Palestinian suffering is minimised or ignored. The widespread emergence of the so-called “victim card” meme reflects this growing public sentiment.
12. Final Reflections
Antisemitism is real and must be condemned unequivocally. Jewish Australians deserve safety, dignity, and freedom from hatred just like every other community. However, antisemitism cannot be examined in isolation from political context, media behaviour, foreign policy, community leadership, or public perceptions surrounding Israel and Zionism.
Attempts to silence, stigmatise or criminalise criticism of Israel risk worsening community tensions rather than reducing them. Similarly, attempts to portray all or most criticism of Israel as antisemitic undermine genuine efforts to combat real antisemitism.
The Royal Commission should be willing to hear difficult evidence, including testimony from Jewish Australians whose experiences and perspectives differ sharply from those of official communal organisations. There is no path towards social cohesion built upon censorship, exceptionalism, selective empathy, or political double standards. Australia needs a universal and consistent opposition to racism, dehumanisation, collective punishment and supremacist ideologies — regardless of who commits them.
I’ll end by expressing my utmost disdain and anger at the repeated invocations of Holocaust trauma and the suffering of survivors to morally justify or shield the actions of the modern Israeli state from criticism. While the Holocaust must never be trivialised or forgotten, many believe its memory should not be used as a political instrument to excuse the suffering of another population.
