Herzog Visit: Albanese Faces Calls to Rescind

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

A growing faction within Australia’s Labor party is demanding Prime Minister Albanese rescind the invitation extended to Israeli President Isaac Herzog, citing widespread concerns over the recent Gaza bombardment. The Labor Friends of Palestine, a grassroots group with over 1,000 members nationwide, said that the Herzog Visit, if allowed, would necessitate federal police intervention to investigate alleged incitement of genocide, though legal experts deem such action improbable. This internal pressure highlights a widening rift over Australia’s stance on Middle Eastern conflicts, and whether the federal government should reconsider its diplomatic approach.

Labor Friends of Palestine, which has long lobbied for formal recognition of a Palestinian state, insists the Herzog Visit threatens to inflame existing tensions and exacerbate both racism and antisemitism. Smaller Jewish organisations, including Jewish Voices of Inner Sydney, the Jewish Council of Australia, and Anti-Zionism Australia, echoed these concerns, sending a letter urging Albanese to cancel the presidential invitation. They emphasised that Herzog, as a head of state aligned with Israeli policy decisions, is far from a neutral or ceremonial figure, and his presence could provoke public unrest.

Yet the call for cancellation faces opposition from mainstream Jewish groups, who argue the Herzog Visit could strengthen communal healing and reaffirm bilateral ties. Alex Ryvchin, co-CEO of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, said the visit would provide “tremendous comfort to Bondi victims’ families” and offer a diplomatic reset. Albanese himself defended the invitation, noting that the governor-general formally extended it in late December, differentiating Herzog from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whose executive powers wield far greater international scrutiny.

Herzog accepted the invitation, announcing on social media that he will engage with Australia’s Jewish community while respecting his ceremonial obligations. Labor Friends of Palestine countered that Herzog has “actively supported and enabled serious violations of international law” during recent military actions in Gaza, arguing his cooperation with Netanyahu implicates him morally, if not legally, in alleged crimes. International courts, however, have not issued any warrant for Herzog, leaving legal recourse unlikely.

The group cited Herzog’s 2023 statement blaming Israel’s attack on an entire nation, alongside a September 2025 UN commission report accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza. Though the commission does not represent the United Nations formally, it implicated Herzog, Netanyahu, and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant in incitement to commit genocide. Israel’s foreign ministry rejected the findings, calling them “distorted and false,” and accused Hamas of propagating misinformation.

Herzog defended his remarks, describing the case against Israel in the International Court of Justice as a “form of blood libel” and maintaining that he has always advocated adherence to international law. Experts, including Donald Rothwell of the Australian National University, explained that as a sitting head of state, Herzog enjoys immunity, rendering investigation or prosecution under Australian law virtually impossible. Rothwell stressed that no formal ICC arrest warrant exists for Herzog, unlike Netanyahu, further limiting potential legal action.

Palestinian Australians directly impacted by the Gaza conflict voiced strong opposition. Shamikh Badra, who lost seven family members, formally petitioned the home affairs minister to assess the government’s obligations under the United Nations Genocide Convention. Badra’s letter highlighted the unresolved loss of his relatives and urged preventive measures, though academics like Monique Cormier of Monash University emphasised that Australia is not compelled under international law to act against Herzog during his visit.

Calls for law enforcement intervention are similarly constrained. The AFP would require attorney-general consent to pursue any investigation, and precedent clearly shields visiting heads of state from such scrutiny. The situation has sparked national debate over diplomatic protocol versus ethical responsibility, balancing Australia’s longstanding relations with Israel against concerns for human rights and international law compliance.

Jeremy Leibler of the Zionist Federation criticised the push to rescind Herzog’s visit, labelling it “a troubling escalation” that disregards Australia’s historical relationship with Israel. He maintained that hosting Herzog is both a humanitarian gesture and a reaffirmation of security commitments to the Jewish community after the tragic Bondi beach attacks. Critics, however, see the Herzog Visit as an affront, given Herzog’s association with controversial military campaigns and international allegations of complicity in serious human rights violations.

Amid these tensions, Albanese remains committed to the Herzog Visit, emphasising the ceremonial and diplomatic significance of the head of state’s presence. The debate continues to expose deep divides within the Labor party and the broader Australian public, reflecting complex considerations of law, ethics, and international diplomacy.

Check our latest news