A (3:47)

And we're going to get into of course, how his visit has played out so far because it has been explosive in many ways. But first off, can you just explain for us, you know, Herzog's position. This is. Isaac Herzog's position has been described as being a non political head of state. He's very notably not the Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of course, but he is the president. And this is meant to be akin to our Governor General. Is this the case? Is he very much in action a non political head of state?

B (4:15)

He is a, he is a political head of state. I don't think it's quite like the Governor General. The big difference being that he was elected. So he, he did, he's got a popular mandate. He was elected as, as president and he does have some executive powers that say for example, our Governor General doesn't have. I think probably the best parallel is maybe the Irish president, very similar role, directly elected, but a very much a more of a ceremonial head of state. And so this goes down, gets down to I guess the tensions inherent in, in Herzog's position because he is so he's from the labor tradition, he is much more left leaning than the current Israeli government. He's, he's very much a two state solution guy. Through his whole life he's believed that that's the, that ultimately there has to be a way for a Jewish state and a Palestinian state to coexist. But he has also said, and he, and he said so in the interview that he did with our reporters Matthew Knott and Peter Harcher over the weekend that October 7th. Like so many Jews around the world, it's really shaken his belief in not so much the theory of a two state solution, but the practicalities of it and whether it's really plausible to be even talking about right now. So the, what's that meant is that in his position as president, like he really hasn't weighed in very often into either domestic or international political issues. And this is, this is. There's been criticism, particularly from the left of that and even predating October 7th, but he just didn't see that as his job. And particularly after October 7th, he's felt like whether or not he personally agrees with all the policies of the Netanyahu government, he's not there to run an opposition against them. He's there to be an apolitical head of state. And he, and he's stuck to that script.

A (6:21)

And let's get into, of course, his visit to Australia, because as soon as this visit was announced, there was immediate criticism, particularly in relation to the war in Gaza. A UN commission of inquiry said it could be, quote, reasonably interpreted, unquote, that Isaac Herzog incited genocide by making the statement that all Palestinians, quote, an entire nation, unquote, are responsible for the Hamas attack on October 7. Now, we know that Herzog has said that his words were taken out of context, and he also said that there was, quote, no excuse for murdering innocent civilians, unquote. But clarify for us what is Isaac Herzog's position on Gaza and the war and Palestinians?

B (7:00)

Well, if we go back to what he said, and I think that the timing of this is important. So this is, this is a. Comments that he made that Isaac Herzog made in a, in a press briefing on October 13, 2023. So this is six days after the Hamas atrocities, the greatest loss of Jewish life since the Holocaust. And he did say, in responding to a question that I think this is again, important, the question he was asked. Well, what happens is quite a prescient question, right? You're starting this, you're launching this military campaign in, in Gaza. But what happens, the question went, when, when the, the civilian deaths and the deaths of innocent people in, in Gaza gets to the point where international opinion really turns against Israel about, about what you're doing. What's, what are you going to do then? And in, that's, that's when in response to that, he said, you know, 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'. Etat. And it was on the, on the basis of that comment that the independent National Commission of Inquiry of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, which was established by the UN's Human Rights Council, that they, they found that that amounted to an incitement to genocide. Now, in the same briefing, Herzog said Other things, he pointed out that the world had seen the, so the worst atrocity committed in, in quite some time. But he also emphasized the following. He said, we are very cautious in the way we operate. The IDF uses all means at its disposal in order to reduce harm to the population, but Israel will defend its, its people and do whatever it takes with an iron fist to change the reality. So in a sense, he was unapologetic for what Israel was about to do in Gaza, but at the same time he was trying to draw a distinction about who they were targeting. And this is why Herzog now says, well, that, that particular line that I said about an entire people being responsible, that is taken out of context. It is more complicated than that. And, and whatever your view about whether this, this could reasonably amount to an incitement to genocide, I think, I think people can appreciate that the sort of complex complexity with what Israel was dealing with at the time.

A (9:42)

After the break.

B (9:44)

No, I think, I think that completely misreads what's gone on here. There isn't, it hasn't shifted an iota.

A (9:57)

It is very complex. But I would be remiss if I didn't mention the other incident that has provoked international condemnation, which you definitely wrote about in your piece, which is that Isaac Herzog scrawled a message on an IDF artillery shell to be used in Israel's military campaign in Gaza. This was about two months after the October 7th attack, this was in December 2023. And he scrawled on that art shell, I rely on you. So that again, I guess complicates things. But do we know further, I guess what his position on Gaza and the war and Palestinians is beyond what you've said because, you know, you've mentioned that he's a left wing social reformer, but there are those that say that, sure, within the context of Israel, maybe he's a left wing social reformer, but that, that is not nearly as left as it might be, say, in other parts of the world. You know, perhaps he's just left wing in the context of the government currently reigning in Israel, which is extremely far right.

B (10:57)

Well, we can really only judge him by what he's said and done. And really, in the two years and a bit since October 7th, there hasn't been any distance between Isaac Herzog and the Netanyahu government in terms of what they've said publicly about the conduct of the war in Gaza. So his position as Israel's president is very much in support of, of, of the, of the military campaign, the need to destroy Hamas and And so there's no, there's been no inkling of him holding a differing view or, or being a critic of how, of how the, the IDF has gone about its operations in Gaza.

A (11:45)

And so let's get to what Isaac Herzog's visit actually means to the victims of Bondi and their families. Why is it important?

B (11:53)

Well, I think there's a couple of levels for this. I mean, immediately for the, and we saw the, the scenes in Sydney when Herzog met the families of, of Bondi victims and, and spoke to them. And I mean there's, there's just that immediate consoling, there's that comfort that comes from the head of the Jewish state coming all the way to Australia. At a broader level, I think it's also something else because there have been, there's significant policy differences, probably more so at any time in, in kind of living memory between the Australian government and the Israeli government. The, the, the most significant one was when the Australian government decided to recognize the state of Palestine. And you know, Netanyahu was absolutely scathing of Anthony Albanese for that decision, saying that he's a, that he's a weak leader. He's been very critical of the, the way that the, that the labor government here has, has handled the rise in anti Semitism. So there's all sorts of serious disagreements between Australia and New Zealand at a governmental level about not just the war in Gaza, but the settlement policies in, in the west bank and the, and the, the best way forward to try to resolve this seemingly sort of intractable dispute. But what Herzog coming here does is send a message that, or reinforce the idea that on another level, a level that's above those disagreements, that there is still this inherent link and relationship between Israel and Australia which really goes back to very much the, the time when, when Israel was established. And it's important for many Jewish Australians to hear that message and get, have that reinforced here because over, over the past few years there have been times when they've been left wondering. They've been left wondering, well, what does Australia still support the idea of Israel? Do we still think that they have a, that there is a place for a Jewish state? And so in a lot of ways, I think the trip has that kind of high degree of sort of symbolic reconnection for Jewish people with Israel.

A (14:24)

And do you think it's also perhaps a primal comfort for a lot of Jewish Australians? I'm just thinking of something our colleague Peter Hartcher wrote on the weekend. He said Jewish Australians are a tiny and vulnerable Minority they're frightened and frustrated. Frightened by the virility and violence of the Jew hate directed against them for no fault of their own. Frustrated at the unique unfairness that they are held somehow responsible for the decisions of a foreign government. No other people is held to this standard. So do you think it's provided that primal comfort beyond sort of the symbolic comfort perhaps?

B (14:54)

Oh well, absolutely. And particularly if, if we think of what happened on December 14 as being not an awful event in isolation but the culmination of Jewish hatred that have been building this country for two years. And so yes, it absolutely provides that comfort. It's also a double edged sword because of course for the same reasons that Jewish people living in Australia quite rightly feel, feel that it's incredibly unfair that they are in any way judged for the actions of Israel and the Israeli government. The difficulty with Herzog coming is it kind of blurs that distinction. And this is where Jewish people who don't support the Herzog visit have kind of made that point that it conflates these two things which is the state of Israel and the government of Israel and Jewish people in Australia and that it's not helpful to them at this point of time for that to happen. So you've got, so the Jewish Council of Australia which is a, it's a very small group, self appointed. It's essentially a pro Palestinian lobby that's made up of some prominent Jewish people like Louise Adler and Josh Bornstein the lawyer. And so they, they take this view that Herzog shouldn't be coming here. They point to what the, the UN Commission found and said that the last thing we should be doing is, is inviting someone who's been accused of indicting genocide to visit here and so forth. Right. So very hard line view against the visit. There's, there's other Jewish Australians who've talked and written about this who reflects more on just the, the idea that they're bloody exhausted. Like it's been the whole, the last two years just been horrendous and at some point they just want to break. So look, there's a, you know, as you can imagine there's a sort of a range of different views and to.

A (17:05)

Those who do make the point that they're not happy that our government has invited a head of state whose political leaders again not Isaac Herzog but you know, people like Benjamin Netanyahu that they've been indicted by the International Court for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza. I mean did this actually have to be a state visit like could this not have been something not sponsored by our government? Would that have helped all of the sort of, you know, criticism and divisions that we've been seeing?

B (17:31)

I don't think so. I think those criticisms would have been made irrespective if, I mean if Isaac Herzog comes to this country there's going to be protests, the arguments are going to run. I don't think that makes a difference. But it is interesting that Anthony Albanese decided to elevate this to a state visit so that the Zionist Federation of Australia wanted Herzog to come, issued an invitation for Herzog to come just on a community level to make a community visit. Separately, the Australian government decided that they would issue their own invitation through the Governor General quite formally to make this a state visit which is really the first one that we've had by a Jewish head of state since Chaim Herzog came here back in 1986. So this doesn't happen very often. I think it's really significant that it has and there's some sort of formalities that go with this but, but I think again that's an important part of the message that the Australian government wanted to send about this visit but also the, that higher level connection and support that Australia has always had and continues to have for Israel.

A (18:44)

Well, this is so interesting because I wanted to ask you whether you think, you know, this state sponsored visit signals any shift in the position from the Albanese government on Gaza and Palestine. There's been a variety of perspectives analysis on this out there. I know that Laura Tingle, the ABC's global affairs editor just said that. Yeah, she thinks that this does signify a shift. Others disagree. What do you think, Chip?

B (19:09)

No, I think, I think that completely misreads, misreads what's gone on here. There isn't, it hasn't shifted an iota. Israel. Australia's disagreements with, with Israel remain serious and unchanged about the conduct of the war, about their settlement policies in the west bank, about the future of a Palestinian states. I mean we are fundamentally at odds with Israel about very important matters. This doesn't signal a change in that at all. Rather what it, what it says is that despite those differences that high level support and connection between the two countries still remains strong.

A (19:53)

And you posed a really interesting question in your piece over the weekend that the visit to a conflict weary Australia would either salve the wounds of Bondi or open fresh ones. So where do you think the dial sits at the moment as, as we're discussing this? You know, has this visit been worth.

B (20:10)

It, well, of course it's, we're speaking on a Tuesday and he's only, and he's only been here for a little bit over 24 hours. He's going to spend the rest of Tuesday in Sydney. In Wednesday he'll go to Canberra for, for both, some formal engagements and, and some more intimate ones with the Prime Minister. And then on Thursday he's in Melbourne. And one of the events that they're running in Melbourne is a, is a, a large community event similar to what we've just seen in Sydney where we'll have lots of people from the Jewish community, including children from Jewish schools and so forth will come together and get a chance to, to meet and listen to the Israeli President. I think everyone understands that the Israeli president, his visit is always going to prompt protests and in a sense it's legitimate for people. And if you're ever going to protest the fact that the Israeli president here, that's as good a reason as any you would think. But it would be awful if you had a situation where protesters are heckling just ordinary Jewish people and with their kids and their mums and dads as they're trying to get into a community event to listen to a head of state who's here basically on a bit of a mission of consolation if it doesn't. I think that on balance it will have been a good thing for Jewish people and indeed for Australia's relationship with Israel for this to have happened.

A (21:51)

I mean, it's interesting just that one comment you said there that you know, if there was ever a time to protest it would be when the Israeli President comes. And I think that sort of strikes at the heart of why this is so explosive because of course for some people that's absolutely rock solid true for them, right. Like of course you're going to protest if you're unhappy with what's happened in Gaza, of course it's a no brainer, you'll protest when the Israeli President comes. But of course for many people in the Jewish community it's quite the opposite.

B (22:15)

Right.

A (22:15)

They think I know that. I've definitely heard from people who say like we are mourning in the aftermath of this, this horrific terror attack which has changed our lives forever. Can we not just have this one time when you know, we're getting some consolation in our grief and this doesn't become political. So this is kind of the heart, I think, as to why this is perhaps so intractable.

B (22:37)

Yeah, look at, you know, it'd be nice to think if, if that could happen but I think the, the practical reality is it's the, it's the head of a state of a nation that's been engaged in an awful war and a war that's really been brought directly into, in our consciousness with just the images coming across our phones. And I mean these images are, for the most part they're true, it's what's happening, it's awful. But also I wonder whether our kind of brains are really wired to even digest this. I mean, people aren't, I mean, for people who, this is all they've looked at all the time. It's like they, it's like they've been living in a war zone for two years. And I think that, and that comes with it, it's almost like a radicalizing impact that that's had and I think that maybe helps to explain why. Why, yes, if the different camps were talking then maybe there might be some, there might be some sort of shared empathy where the protest movement would think, okay, we feel, we feel that we're, that this is a just cause, but maybe now isn't the right time. But there isn't that empathy. There isn't that communication. The camps are just so polarised now and that's the real, that's the real shame. And it's kind of reflective of like a lot of what's going on in national affairs and international affairs at the moment.

A (24:01)

Well, Chip, we're lucky that you're writing on this, so thank you so much for your time.

B (24:05)

No worries. Thanks.

A (24:15)

In other news today, Australians are paying the price for second best policies to deal with climate change, according to the head of the productivity commission who has said that a carbon tax is still the best way to deal with climate change. And singer Chapel Roan has become the first high profile artist to sever ties with Casey Wasserman, a leading talent agent, over Wasserman's ties to Jeffrey Epstein. Wasserman's name appears in the recently released files on the late convicted pedophile for messages he purportedly sent to Ghislaine Maxwell. Today's episode was produced by Josh Towers. Our executive producer is Tammy Mills and our podcasts are overseen by Lisa Muxworthy and Tom McKendrick. If you like our show, follow the Morning Edition and leave a review for us on Apple or Spotify. Thanks for listening.