A prominent Australian politician has been criticized for what is being called "destructive overreach" in his attempt to link campus protests and antisemitism within the higher education sector to the Bondi massacre. Julian Leeser, an opposition education spokesman, identified a "genuine, serious failure" regarding antisemitism on Australian university campuses, but his assertion that these protests led to the Bondi massacre has been widely condemned.
Peter Van Onselen, a commentator and professor, argued that while Leeser's criticism of universities fostering a climate where antisemitic language was present is valid and deserves scrutiny, asserting a direct causal link between campus politics and the mass murder at Bondi is unsubstantiated. Van Onselen stated that Leeser's claim transforms legitimate institutional criticism into an accusation of collective complicity in mass murder.
Leeser's proposed definition for identifying antisemitism – criticizing Israel to a standard not applied to the U.S. or Britain – was also criticized as "impossibly loose." Van Onselen explained that while Israel often faces double standards, selectivity in criticism does not automatically equate to antisemitism; it can also stem from ignorance or hypocrisy.
Universities, Van Onselen contended, should focus on policing conduct such as threats, harassment, and support for violence, rather than acting as arbiters of foreign policy critiques. He noted that Leeser's condemnation of vice-chancellors as "weak and spineless" and his branding of campuses as the "epicentre" of antisemitism are hyperbolic.
Beneath the hyperbole, however, lies a valid grievance. Van Onselen acknowledged that after the October 7 attacks, some university administrators were notably silent on issues of cultural safety for Jewish students, a contrast to their usual responses for other minority groups. Leeser is commended for exposing this hypocrisy, but Van Onselen cautioned against painting all institutional leaders with the same brush, comparing such generalizations to the very antisemitic thinking Leeser rightly condemns.
A parliamentary inquiry into antisemitism in Australian universities, chaired by Labor MP Josh Burns, revealed varying realities across institutions. Some universities experienced significant disruptions, while others managed incidents swiftly. At the University of Western Australia, where Van Onselen is a professor, heated arguments did not escalate into prolonged encampments or intimidation as seen at some other campuses.
Van Onselen emphasized that addressing problems requires acknowledging local realities, not manufacturing a crisis by extrapolating from specific incidents in Sydney or Melbourne. He pointed out that several universities, including Melbourne, Monash, and Wollongong, have adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism, which Leeser advocates for as a solution.
The commentary also turned to Leeser's own political actions, referencing his 2023 resignation from the frontbench to campaign for the Indigenous Voice referendum. While acknowledging this as an act of courage, Van Onselen suggested it was undertaken with the perceived political safety of a referendum expected to pass, questioning whether a similar sacrifice would have been made had polling indicated a significant defeat. "His sacrifice was made in the belief that solid political ground awaited him on the other side," Van Onselen wrote.
Van Onselen concluded that the issue of antisemitism on campus is too serious to be addressed with exaggeration and collective blame, asserting that Leeser's overreach risks undermining his otherwise legitimate case.