The new Universities Australia (UA) , endorsed on February 26 for adoption by 39 Australian universities, is an ugly attempt to quash the pro-Palestine solidarity movement on campuses and to silence academics, university workers and students who critique Israel and Zionism.
While the Scott Morrison Coalition government first proposed tightening the definition, and a recent joint Labor-Coalition parliamentary committee recommended the same, it is yet another example of the Labor government鈥檚 overreach.
It seeks to mould discussion in universities to one that suits its pro-US and pro-Zionist imperialist agenda, while shielding Israel from accountability.
So far, the聽UA definition has been widely condemned.
Nasser Mashni, Australia Palestine Advocacy Network president, has slammed it as 鈥. The聽(JCA) has criticised it as 鈥渄angerous, politicised and unworkable鈥. The聽聽said it poses 鈥渟erious risks to freedom of expression and academic freedom鈥.
The UA definition comes in the context of a war against Palestinian activism on campuses.
The false claim that antisemitism is 鈥渞ampant鈥 across universities has been weaponised to subdue the Palestine solidarity movement within higher education and, particularly, to snuff out any repeat of the student-led Gaza solidarity encampments, which sprung up on campuses across the country last year.
Some students and staff who have protested the genocide since October 2023 have come under attack by university managements.
Some students have been threatened with suspension and many universities are giving themselves, through new policies, more powers to liaise with police and surveil students and staff.
Palestinian, Arab and Muslim academics, as well as other anti-racist scholars, have been silenced and disciplined, or face legal action on false counts of antisemitism, merely for criticising Israel鈥檚 genocidal war on Palestine.
Randa Abdel-Fattah, for example, has become the target of a Zionist smear campaign that has successfully managed to strip her of Australian Research Council funding.
Intensify repression
The UA definition will further intensify the ongoing repression of people鈥檚 rights on campuses to discuss racism, apartheid and occupation in historic Palestine.聽
By its own admission, UA聽acknowledges that聽its聽definition is informed by聽the聽antisemitism taskforces at Columbia University, Stanford University, Harvard University and New York University,听which have meted out draconian聽and violent聽repression聽of聽pro-Palestine activism.
The catalyst for the new definition was the聽聽on antisemitism on Australian campuses. That urged universities to adopt a definition of antisemitism that 鈥渃losely aligns鈥 with the聽.
It should be noted that the controversial IHRA definition has been聽opposed by the (NTEU)聽for its serious challenge to academic freedom.
As聽many leading academics and university workers,听, have聽repeatedly聽stressed, criticism of Israel and criticism of Zionism is not antisemitic.
UA鈥檚 definition is arguably more detrimental to freedom of speech and pro-Palestine activism and scholarship than the IHRA definition.
In the vague IHRA definition, a number of examples聽of antisemitism are given that conflate criticism of Israel with antisemitism, but not the main text itself.
By contrast, the new UA definition overtly equates criticism of Israel and Zionism with antisemitism and claims Zionist ideology is a component part of Jewish identity.
The definition聽states that 鈥渃riticism of Israel can be anti-Semitic 鈥 when it calls for the elimination of the State of Israel鈥.聽
Dangerously, anyone advocating for a single bi-national democratic state in historic Palestine will be labelled antisemitic under this new definition.
Anyone who justifiably questions the right of the ethnonationalist, apartheid and genocidal state of Israel to exist will be accused of antisemitism.
Sweeping claims
The UA definition also makes the sweeping claim that 鈥渇or most, but not all Jewish Australians, Zionism is a core part of their Jewish identity鈥.
But, as the JCA points out, Zionism is a national political ideology and is not a core part of Jewish identity historically or today, since many Jews do not support Zionism. The JCA warns that the UA definition 鈥渞isks fomenting harmful stereotypes that all Jewish people think in a certain way鈥.
Moreover,听JCA said, Jewish identities are聽already聽鈥渁 rightly protected category under all racial discrimination laws, whereas political ideologies such as Zionism and support for Israel are not鈥.
Like other aspects of politics, political ideologies, such as Zionism, and political stances, such as support for Israel, should be able to be discussed critically.
According to the UA definition, criticism of Israel can be antisemitic 鈥渨hen it holds Jewish individuals or communities responsible for Israel鈥檚 actions鈥.
While it would be wrong for聽any聽individual or community, because they are Jewish, to be held responsible for Israel鈥檚 actions, it is a fact that the聽聽for Israel鈥檚 Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his defence minister Yoav Gallant for Israel鈥檚 war crimes and crimes against humanity.
But under the UA definition, since Netanyahu and Gallant are Jewish, would holding them responsible be considered antisemitic?
Is the ICC antisemitic? .
The implication of the definition for universities, which teach law and jurisprudence, is that international law should not be applied to the Israeli state, because it is antisemitic to do so.
The UA鈥檚 definition is vague enough to have a chilling effect on any academic who wants to teach about genocide, apartheid and settler-colonialism. It states that 鈥渃riticism of Israel can be antisemitic when it is grounded in harmful tropes, stereotypes or assumptions鈥. What these are is not defined.
Anti-racism challenge
Within the academy,听there is a聽strong聽tradition of聽anti-racism聽and decolonial scholarship,听particularly the concept of settler colonialism, which, by definition, calls into question聽the very notion of 鈥渟tatehood鈥.
With this new definition of antisemitism, will academics be prevented from teaching students the works of聽,听 or Edward Said?
The definition will have聽serious聽and damaging聽repercussions聽for decolonial scholars and severely聽impinges聽the rights of scholars,听in particular First Nations scholars聽and students, to critique empire and colonisation.
UA is the 鈥減eak body鈥 for higher education in Australia, and represents and lobbies for聽capitalist class interests in higher education.
It聽is therefore not surprising聽that it has developed this聽particular聽definition, given its strong聽bilateral relations with Israeli higher education, including signing a 2013 memorandum of understanding with Association of University Heads, Israel.聽
It聽should be noted that the聽NTEU National Council last October called on UA to withdraw from this as part of its Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions resolution.
All university students and staff committed to anti-racism, academic freedom and freedom of speech should join the campaign against the UA definition.
Local NTEU branches and student groups are discussing and passing motions rejecting the new definition聽and聽NTEU for Palestine has called a聽聽for March 26 with that as one of its key demands.
We will not be silenced on Palestine!
[Jonathan Strauss and Markela Panegyres are members of the National Tertiary Education Union and the .]