Israel was expected to reap benefits from the Sydney attacks for its usual narratives. Benjamin Netanyahu’s government attempted to invest in a Jewish tragedy to reinforce its case and mend fractures in its narrative... but the outcome was quite the opposite.

Israel’s traditional discourse appeared outdated, and invoking historical victimhood and antisemitism as a weapon against critics of Israel or skeptics of its policies no longer proved effective. The incident highlighted the difficulty of marketing a narrative at a time when Western public sentiment toward the Palestinian cause is shifting, following a war in Gaza that has yet to end.

Israel presents its conflict with the world as a moral one, framed through historical arguments and emotional appeals rooted in Holocaust memory. Netanyahu linked the attack to anti-war protests over Gaza that took place in Australia. It was easy to infer that this linkage was intended to undermine an Australian decision misaligned with Israeli policy. Australia had recognized the State of Palestine and allowed large-scale demonstrations in support of Gaza. Netanyahu and his allies’ references to antisemitism in Australia appeared to serve as an opportunity to settle an old score.

Observers noted that the label of “antisemitism” has lost momentum in Israeli discourse and has become less effective in Western societies. Western media outlets, which historically rushed to condemn any attack on Jews as antisemitic, this time described the incident simply as a general terrorist attack, without adopting Israel’s narrative or linking it to the Palestinian cause.

Western capitals were displeased with Israel linking the operation to Australia's recognition of the State of Palestine, considering it an implicit criticism of other countries that had taken similar steps. Reports about Israeli preparations to respond to the attack raised concerns of interference in Australia's affairs, which alone is entitled to take measures to protect its citizens.

The Western press found no link between the Sydney operation and the war in Gaza, and investigations did not point to any responsibility of Palestine and its cause in an act that remained outside this context.

Israel knows this is not good news. The ambiguity of the attackers' motives and the absence of a connection with the Palestinian issue classified the operation as isolated terrorism. Even the supposed relationship of the perpetrators with "ISIS" drained the event of its Palestinian echo, which did not find priority in the terrorist organization's activities.

Israel’s attempted political investment collapsed entirely with the intervention of Australian Muslim citizen Ahmed Al-Ahmad, originally from Syria, specifically Idlib, who confronted one of the attackers.

The figure of Ahmed Al-Ahmad offered a counter-narrative to Israel’s account. What the Western media reported about this "hero" is not a solitary story isolated in the recent history of terrorism. Muslims had previously been victims of terrorism in Europe, and similar stories emerged in France, Britain, Germany, and elsewhere of Muslims standing up against that terrorism. Notably, Australia’s left-leaning government under Anthony Albanese shielded itself behind the image of this “hero” to counter opposition attacks, while the viral trend surrounding the young Muslim man embarrassed populist and far-right rhetoric worldwide that targets immigration and migrants.

Israel failed to use the Sydney incident to enrich its tools of perpetual victimhood. The attacks did not diminish public support for the Palestinian cause, nor did they boost solidarity with Israel, which has waned in recent months. This reflects shifts in Western public opinion following “Al-Aqsa Flood,” as Israel loses its monopoly on the status of victimhood.

UN reports on the war in Gaza have undermined the genocide anxiety historically tied to the Holocaust, and Jewish voices have expressed concern over the distortion of Holocaust memory through Israel’s excessive use of “antisemitism” claims.

Israel has lost its gamble in Gaza, signaling symptoms of a narrative in decline and a pressing need to invent a new one that aligns with a global audience it is steadily losing.  

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by the writers are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Annahar