Israel, Gaza and Australian politics:
Master lobbyist Mark Leibler reveals how power really works
by Jommy Tee and Michael West
Nov 15, 2023
Mark Leibler. Image AAP.
Keeping foreign minister Bob Carr in check, “watching” journalists at the ABC, lobbying prime ministers. Mark Leibler has a few tricks up his sleeve when it comes to power and influence. Jommy Tee and Michael West reveal the master lobbyist’s playbook in his own words.
Mark Leibler is the tax lawyer, Australian Jewish community leader and staunch Israel defender behind the initiative to get six former Australian prime ministers to sign a letter in favour of Israel in Gaza. Paul Keating, the notable living exception to this line of signatories, famously outed Leibler as the man behind the strategy.
Leibler has been an influential player in Australian politics for decades, a Zionist community leader with the ear of successive prime ministers and media chiefs.
On Monday night’s Q+A program on the ABC, Leibler – in his role as chairman of the Australia Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC) – was involved in a tense debate on Israel and Gaza, which has reverberated on social media since. Much of the criticism centred around what many viewers believed was preferential treatment given to Leibler by host Patricia Karvelas over the UN and Palestinian representatives on the show.
Anticipating a furious reaction, the ABC had even opted to close the Q+A show to a live audience.
The backlash on social media since the program ran on Monday night is in stark contrast to the treatment of the Gaza tragedy in Australia’s mainstream media which has mostly favoured the position of the Israeli government of Benjamin Netanyahu over that of the oppressed Palestinians.
It has been a vexing question for many, given the massive slaughter of Palestinian civilians and myriad human rights abuses in response to the October 7 attacks on Israel by Hamas, why the mainstream media in Australia – and indeed politicians of the two major parties – have been so partisan in favour of Israel.
Archived speeches made by Mark Leibler on lobbying and the media shed light on the power of the Israel lobby in Australia.
An aide-mémoire
An archived aide-mémoire from the Arnold Bloch Leibler (Leibler’s law firm) website provides a fascinating insight from the man himself on political lobbying.
The document (see below) outlines three lessons on lobbying.
Lesson 1 – Choose the style and the manner of lobbying that’s most appropriate to the situation
Lesson 2 – Get the timing right
Lesson 3 – When it comes Israel it’s important not to go about it as though we are Israel’s mouthpiece
The document appears to have been prepared for a talk at the Jewish Community Council of Western Australia (JCCWA) in Perth on July 24, 2018. Publicly identified engagements on that trip included a business breakfast where Leibler spoke about tax, an address to the Carmel School, and an address as a guest of the Friends of Israel WA. Access to these speeches are still available via the ABL website.
However, there is no mention of Leibler’s participation at the event held by the JCCWA. Mark Leibler was approached for comment for this story but was unavailable.
The speech provides a fascinating insight on the art of lobbying.
The document provides some extraordinary details on how Mark Leibler influenced Bill Hayden when Hayden was Minister of Foreign Affairs in the Hawke government.
“I came up with an example of this going back to the mid-1980s, when we learned that the then Foreign Minister Bill Hayden had agreed to open an exhibition of art for the PLO – some of the works were deeply offensive and I felt a responsibility to call him.
“While the Minister argued the toss with me, he finally conceded, after viewing the exhibition, that it was probably inappropriate and would pull out simply on the basis that he was not available.
“But he told me that if I ever indicated to anyone that his decision was a result of my lobbying, he would deny the conversation ever happened, and never speak to me again.
“I feel that enough time has elapsed to take you into my confidence today …”
[I would like to point out here that Leibler is not accurate. The exhibition he refers to was organised by me in mid-1987 in the exhibition hall at the Sydney Opera House and I invited the Minister of Immigration, Mick Young to open it. Mr Young accepted and told me in his reply dated 30 July 1987, “I am delighted to accept and very much look forward to the occasion.” When the Israeli lobby learned of the exhibition, they tried first to prevent the Opera House from hosting it and demanded the cancellation of the hall reservation. The director informed them that was not possible because a contract had been signed. When the director told me of this, he was extremely disgusted with their arrogance and bullying. But they were undeterred, so they pressured then-prime minister Bob Hawke to prevent Young from opening the exhibition.
Bill Hayden intervened at the time because of the good relations we had to save face for Young who was very embarrassed. Leibler’s claim that “some of the works were deeply offensive” are pictures of Palestinian refugees who were ethnically cleansed by Jewish terrorist organizations, refugee camps, victims of massacres they committed during the Nakba and the oppression practiced by the Israeli occupation army against the Palestinian people.
It was clear at the time that pressure from the Israel lobby on Bob Hawke was the reason for the minister's withdrawal. They could not ban the exhibition, so they resorted to the Prime Minister preventing the Minister from opening it; he unfortunately obeyed their invidious demands to appease them. However the exhibition went ahead and the opening reception was attended by more than 300 people, including Arab and foreign ambassadors and consuls, some members of the Federal Parliament, representatives of the Premier of the State, and the opposition Liberal Party, academics, clerics, leaders of the first nation, ethnic communities, journalists and others. In my speech, I criticised the government’s acquiescence to the demands of the Israel lobby and the withdrawal of Minister Young, which aroused resentment and condemnation.
More than 8,000 visited the exhibition, including a large number of tourists visiting the Opera House, especially from the United States. The lobby later failed to prevent the exhibition from being shown at major museums and political leaders from opening it such as Bob Carr in the Power House Museum and John Howard in Canberra Arts and Gallery. Ali Kazak]
Moderating ABC journalists
The document also details how the “advocacy” of the AIJAC extended to representations to the ABC – both publicly and privately – to seek to moderate Sophie McNeil’s coverage of the middle east when she was the ABC’s correspondent.
“She should never have been given this posting by the ABC because she was ideologically attached to the Palestinian cause.”
“I don’t believe the ABC would have sent her if they’d known but they weren’t going to create a controversy by pulling her out. That said, our representations, both public and private,
“undoubtedly moderated her behaviour because she knew she was being watched."
The document also details how Leibler lobbied some influential ALP power brokers ahead of the 2017 ALP National Conference to stymie “Bob Carr and his associates”.
“Bob Carr and his associates were making worrying in-roads on the diplomatic recognition of a Palestinian State, particularly in western Sydney electorates with a strong Muslim influence.
A great deal of sustained, behind-the-scenes lobbying was done – with the leader and with individual politicians whose voices carry weight – to ensure that the damage was limited. This kind of lobbying changes as circumstances change, but it’s never done, never finished”.
In terms of working a hierarchy of political influence, the speech notes that on some issues the lobbyist is better off avoiding politicians and going to their trusted minders.
In the case of John Howard, for example, I would often turn first to Josh Frydenberg over the period Josh served as one of the Prime Minister’s senior policy advisers.
It also reveals how Leibler worked closely and collaboratively with the Israeli ambassador.
“Israel has an embassy – I work closely and collaboratively with the Ambassador, often presenting a similar perspective on something but I won’t do it together with him. We have different constituencies.”
The document stresses the need for bipartisan political support and for shaping the narrative for supporting Israel by emphasising the commonalities of the major parties, rather than the differences.
"If we focus too much on the differences, we run the very real risk that this emphasis can become self-fulfilling."
“The final point on the issue of how best to promote and defend Israel, and it’s a point I often make to young lobbyists, is not to waste their time trying to justify settlements because they’re never going to win that battle. I tell them to focus instead on whether or not settlements are the cause of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Because the compelling truth is that eliminating settlements wouldn’t bring about peace.”
The latter point was reiterated during the Qanda debate, where Leibler appeared to trivialise the impact of the illegal Jewish settlements in the West Bank.
MWM contacted Mark Leibler for an interview. He was unavailable.
********************************************************************************
JCC WA meeting
24 July 2018
Mark Leibler AC
Aide Memoir
_______________________________________________________________
Introduction
Thank you Joan and members of the JCC for inviting me to come along this evening.
It’s a real pleasure to be here.
I’ve been humbled by the welcome I’ve received here in Perth.
I guess, over the course of my life, I’ve developed something of a reputation for my
networks of influence, and how I’ve used them to advance the causes I care about.
I came across a Facebook post a few months ago from the account of a person or
organisation that figures I have too much influence ...
It’s a graphic with an image of me in the centre, wearing a very grand crown on my
head. And all around me are logos of organisations over which I’m seen to have
some sway, ranging from the Referendum Council and the Zionist Federation of
Australia, through to the Australian Tax Office.
Far from feeling concerned or offended, I was actually tempted to share it because it reminds me how blessed I’ve been to be able focus my own skills, and the
professional firepower of Arnold Bloch Leibler, in the direction my conscience
dictates.
So, this evening, I thought I’d try to crystallise the main lessons I’ve learned about
successful lobbying.
I am fully aware that you are all well-versed in this yourselves. As I said last night,
the Jewish community here punches well and truly above its weight.
But in lobbying, it can be useful to compare experiences, so I’m going to very briefly cover what I believe to be the top three lessons, and examples of how I’ve seen
them applied.
2
None of it’s rocket science, but I’m regularly amazed that so many intelligent,
successful people across different sectors advocate their positions so ineptly.
Lesson no. 1
The first and most important lesson, which establishes the foundation for every
lobbying effort, is to: Choose the style and the manner of lobbying that’s most
appropriate to the situation.
The reality is that sometimes politicians make decisions that are fundamentally
wrong but it’s clear that there’s simply no value in lobbying them to change their
minds.
That’s not to say there’s no value in publicly distancing yourself from that decision by putting out a statement or giving an interview. But expending precious lobbying
capital to “flog a dead horse” will just come across as naïve.
An example of this was the government’s decision, last year, to reject the central
proposal of the Referendum Council on Constitutional Recognition of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander People, which I co-chaired.
I judged at the time that there was no point in picking up the phone to the Minister or the Prime Minister to try and convince them to revisit that decision.
The strident nature of the announcement and the political strategy that sits behind it
- namely to appeal to the ultra-conservatives Tony Abbott is trying to cultivate -
made it impossible that the government would reverse the decision without leaving
some time and space to make it politically tenable.
So, along with many other people, I have been doing a lot behind the scenes to
make it possible for the government to reverse its decision without losing too much
face.
I talked quite a bit about that this morning, and also to the students at Carmel
yesterday.
3
Of course, in situations where you judge there is genuine scope to change a
politician’s mind, there’s various ways of going about it. You need to assess all the
variables to maximise your chances of a win.
I came up with an example of this going back to the mid-1980s, when we learned
that the then Foreign Minister Bill Hayden had agreed to open an exhibition of art for
the PLO - some of the works were deeply offensive and I felt a responsibility to call
him.
While the Minister argued the toss with me, he finally conceded, after viewing the
exhibition, that it was probably inappropriate and would pull out simply on the basis
that he was not available.
But he told me that if I ever indicated to anyone that his decision was a result of my
lobbying, he would deny the conversation ever happened, and never speak to me
again.
I feel that enough time has elapsed to take you into my confidence today ...
In other situations, while you’re not going to be able to change someone’s mind on
an issue, it might still be necessary to intervene just to ensure the situation doesn’t
deteriorate.
A good example of this is the advocacy we undertook at AIJAC in relation to the
recently returned ABC correspondent Sophie McNeill’s coverage of the middle east.
She should never have been given this posting by the ABC because she was
ideologically attached to the Palestinian cause.
I don’t believe the ABC would have sent her if they’d known but they weren’t going to create a controversy by pulling her out. That said, our representations,
both public and private, undoubtedly moderated her behaviour because she knew she was being watched.
4
Another example is the style of lobbying undertaken ahead of the ALP’s national
conference last year.
Bob Carr and his associates were making worrying in-roads on the diplomatic
recognition of a Palestinian State, particularly in western Sydney electorates with a
strong Muslim influence.
A great deal of sustained, behind-the-scenes lobbying was done - with the leader
and with individual politicians whose voices carry weight - to ensure that the damage
was limited. This kind of lobbying changes as circumstances change, but it’s never
done, never finished.
To work effectively with the Government and the Opposition of the day, we are in the
business of making friends not enemies. That has a strong bearing on the language
we use, and deciding when the best approach is "softly softly" and when, on rare
occasions, to go in hard.
Apart from the US, Australia is the best friend Israel has.
When the Australian Government said that it would not, at this time, be following the
lead from the US and moving its embassy to Jerusalem, we at AIJAC publicly
disagreed with the decision and expressed our hope that, one day, the decision
would change. We did not, however, attack or condemn the Government.
The only extreme over-the-top criticism came from extreme right wing elements who
accused the Foreign Minister of being immoral.
Fortunately, Julie Bishop isn't stupid. She knows which groups and which
spokespeople represent mainstream Jewish community sentiment.
Accusing the Foreign Minister of adopting an immoral approach would have been
seriously counter-productive.
5
Keep in mind, very shortly after this announcement, the Australian Government
stuck its neck out in voting against the Human Rights Council resolution to establish
a biased, predetermined inquiry into Palestinian deaths on the border with Gaza.
In short, tone and approach is important.
If we knit pick every word, we cease to be taken seriously and we cease to be
effective.
Lesson no. 2
Lesson no. 2 is to Get the timing and the target right.
Timing is important. And leading up to an election is often a good time to lobby on
issues of deep concern to the Jewish community. Sometimes the outcome will
exceed expectations.
In terms of who to lobby, you need to understand that it isn’t always the most senior
person who carries the most weight on every issue.
And I’m going to cite another example involving Bill Hayden as Minister for Foreign
Affairs. Having Hayden on-side was crucial to the success of lobbying efforts I led
on behalf of the Zionist Federation to have Australia support the worldwide
campaign to rescind UN Resolution 3379.
It was one of the most complex and ultimately effective pieces of political advocacy
I’ve ever been involved in, and it centred on the Foreign Minister of the day, rather
than the Prime Minister.
Bob Hawke was seen to be a close friend of the Australian Jewish community and,
strange as it sounds, that lowered rather than heightened his influence in his own
party room on this issue.
Hayden was not closely associated with the Jewish community or Israel and,
moreover, he was a creature of the Left. His support, cultivated over several months,
was pivotal.
6
Not only did he deliver a keynote address to the ZFA Biennial Conference of that
year - 1986 - he committed to support a bi-partisan Parliamentary resolution which
was passed unanimously by both Houses of Parliament just prior to President Chaim
Herzog's State visit in October 1986.
In terms of working out the hierarchy of influence, on some issues you’re better off
avoiding the politicians altogether, particularly Ministers, because they have
notoriously short attention spans!
Often, it’s more effective to target a sensible adviser who the Minister trusts. In the
case of John Howard, for example, I would often turn first to Josh Frydenberg over
the period Josh served as one of the Prime Minister’s senior policy advisers.
Lesson no. 3
The third and final point I wanted to convey is that When it comes to lobbying on
issues that involve Israel, it’s important not to go about it as though we are Israel’s
mouthpiece.
Where we can make a real difference, is in representing the interests of the
Australian Jewish community.
Israel has an embassy - I work closely and collaboratively with the Ambassador,
often presenting a similar perspective on something, but I won’t do it together with
him. We have different constituencies.
I have even, from time to time, felt the need to distance myself from a stance Israel
takes that I don’t want the Jewish community here to be associated with.
For example, in February last year, I put my name to a statement issued by AIJAC
expressing concern over the controversial passage of the settlements regulation bill
through the Knesset.
I have also publically criticised the Israeli Government's decision to renege on the
plan for an egalitarian prayer section at the Western Wall.
7
This is an issue in Australia, but it’s a huge issue in the US, which has very sizeable
reform and conservative communities.
And speaking of issues in the US, maintaining bipartisan support for Israel is
becoming increasingly challenging, with the Democrats' hatred of Donald Trump
spilling over into the attitudes many of them express about Israel.
For us in Australia, we’ve enjoyed a long period of bipartisanship in this area, really
for as long as I can remember, apart from the Whitlam years.
But there is no doubt that this is also fracturing around the edges, particularly in
those western Sydney electorates I mentioned earlier.
In my view, and my experience, we are more likely to bolster bipartisan support for
Israel by emphasising the commonalities between the major parties, rather than the
differences.
If we focus too much on the differences, we run the very real risk that this emphasis
can become self-fulfilling.
The final point on the issue of how best to promote and defend Israel, and it’s a point
I often make to young lobbyists, is not to waste their time trying to justify settlements
because they’re never going to win that battle.
I tell them to focus instead on whether or not settlements are the cause of the
conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Because the compelling truth is that
eliminating settlements wouldn’t bring about peace.
Australian Jewish Community Survey
Which brings me to the Gen 17 Australian Jewish Community Survey that I know
you were keen for us to discuss this evening.
8
And, really, the only point I wanted to make before we move into that discussion is
this:
Notwithstanding all that’s happening in the region and around the world, Jewish
Australians continue to feel a very strong connection to Israel.
And the point I want to make is that, while our young people may be more
questioning about Israel’s policies and actions than previous generations - and I’m
sure social media has a lot to do with that - the Jewish leadership - subject to some
red lines - has to be accept this level of questioning and make space for it within the
Jewish community.
If young Jewish men and women, girls and boys, don’t feel that they have a safe
place within the community to express themselves and seek advice and
reassurance, ultimately everything we are doing is self-defeating.
*******************************************************************************
Jommy Tee is a long-time career public servant, having worked in the policy development field for 25+ years as well as an independent researcher interested in politics, current affairs, and Nordic noir.
Michael West established Michael West Media in 2016 to focus on journalism of high public interest, particularly the rising power of corporations over democracy. West was formerly a journalist and editor with Fairfax newspapers, a columnist for News Corp and even, once, a stockbroker.