Israel Dossier Raises Foreign Interference Alarm in Australia

Published: 07 January 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online.

A New South Wales MP has formally urged the home affairs minister to investigate potential foreign interference, after Israel allegedly targeted him in a dossier naming Australian politicians. The focus on “foreign interference” has immediately sparked debate in Canberra, as Anthony D’Adam, a convenor of Labor Friends of Palestine, called on Minister Tony Burke to review whether Australia’s foreign influence laws were violated. The dossier, reportedly authored by Israel’s Ministry for Diaspora Affairs, identifies 25 individuals and groups it claims are promoting antisemitic and anti-Zionist content, placing political figures under scrutiny.

Published in September and referenced recently by the Australian newspaper, the document names prominent MPs including D’Adam, former Greens leader Adam Bandt, Greens senator Mehreen Faruqi, and independents Fatima Payman and Lidia Thorpe. It categorises Bandt and Faruqi among the top ten generators of antisemitic and anti-Israel material. Groups such as the Palestine Action Group, Free Palestine Melbourne, Disrupt Wars, the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network, Students for Palestine USyd, and University of Melbourne for Palestine were also listed. The dossier explicitly aims to identify influencers promoting antisemitic or anti-Israel content, raising immediate concerns over foreign interference in Australian politics.

D’Adam has strongly rejected the dossier’s claims, asserting he is a long-standing critic of Israel’s actions in Gaza and a consistent advocate for Palestinian recognition. In his letter to Burke, he emphasised: “I reject any assertion that I have engaged in antisemitism. This dossier is clearly an attempt by a foreign government to interfere in Australian political discourse.” He further explained that a recent Australian newspaper story relied heavily on the dossier to attack several politicians, community activists, and NGOs, demonstrating the document’s tangible impact on public opinion.

The dossier, according to D’Adam, conflates legitimate criticism of Israel with antisemitism. Politicians like himself were labelled as “political figures in office who promote antisemitism, whether online or through their official duties,” despite no evidence of antisemitic statements. “To be targeted by a foreign power is deeply concerning. This document includes personal photos and is designed to intimidate,” D’Adam told Guardian Australia. His concerns echo broader warnings in Australia’s home affairs’ guide, which notes foreign interference can involve attempts to restrict or control critical media, or to harass and discredit journalists, activists, and politicians.

D’Adam questioned the consistency of governmental response to foreign interference, asking: “How would we react if China or Iran produced similar material?” He warned the dossier represents a deliberate attempt to stifle criticism of Israel and manipulate public discourse in Australia. Most of the dossier’s content appears to have been derived from publicly accessible sources, but D’Adam urged Burke to investigate whether individuals in Australia were operating on behalf of foreign powers or surveilling those named.

The Israeli government reportedly maintains a recurring “Anti-Israel Protest Forecast,” often categorising protests as potentially violent without clear evidence. D’Adam suggested that the Israeli Ministry’s data collection may have relied on Australian sources, further raising the possibility of domestic actors contributing to foreign interference. The methodology, the report explains, included social media and traditional media searches, proprietary databases of hate speech and political sentiment, and direct observation of online influencer activity.

Burke’s office, when contacted by Guardian Australia, noted that correspondence alleging unlawful conduct is routinely referred to the appropriate agencies, leaving the formal investigation in the hands of national authorities. Analysts have warned that the situation highlights increasing risks of foreign interference targeting political discourse in democracies. The dossier’s publication illustrates how foreign governments might employ detailed monitoring of social media and public activities to attempt shaping political narratives abroad.

The New South Wales MP’s action underscores a growing tension between diplomatic relations and domestic political protection. Critics argue that while governments must maintain strategic international ties, safeguarding political freedoms and preventing foreign interference is paramount. Legal experts emphasise that any attempt to intimidate, discredit, or surveil politicians could constitute a violation of Australia’s foreign influence legislation, prompting rigorous scrutiny.

Public debate has intensified as advocacy groups and political commentators dissect the dossier’s claims. The incident has sparked broader concerns about the transparency of foreign government data collection methods and the potential chilling effect on political criticism. D’Adam noted that, despite personal impact, the focus must remain on protecting democratic integrity, ensuring foreign powers do not influence internal political discourse or public opinion.

As investigations proceed, attention will focus on verifying the extent of foreign interference and whether any Australian actors were complicit. Meanwhile, D’Adam continues to highlight that targeted individuals are not antisemitic and are instead exercising legitimate political expression. The dossier case exemplifies how modern political conflicts increasingly intersect with sophisticated information gathering and international diplomatic sensitivity, making vigilance essential.

The Australian government’s response and subsequent findings will likely influence policy discussions about foreign interference, media reliance on international sources, and the safeguarding of democratic freedoms in the digital age. With ongoing monitoring and potential legislative review, Australia faces a critical moment in balancing national security with freedom of political expression.

The emergence of this dossier demonstrates the delicate interplay between global diplomacy, domestic political discourse, and the growing importance of preventing foreign interference. Ensuring transparent investigations and accountability will be key to maintaining public trust, defending democratic norms, and discouraging future targeting of politicians or advocacy groups for their lawful political activities.

Check our latest news