This morning’s events in Australia did not merely expose the persistence of antisemitism in the diaspora. They exposed something uncomfortable and morally objectionable: the reflexive impulse within parts of the Israeli nonprofit ecosystem to convert tragedy abroad into an opportunity for organizational relevance, fundraising, and moral exhibitionism.
The Jewish community in Australia, particularly in Sydney, is neither fragile nor disorganized. It is one of the most mature, institutionally competent Jewish communities in the world. It has security infrastructure, emergency response capacity, communal leadership, and long-standing coordination with local authorities. It does not require parachuting “teams” from Israel in the aftermath of trauma to teach it how to grieve, defend itself, or survive.
That reality was stated plainly this morning by Aryeh Erlich in a public post directed at Israeli rescue and Hatzalah organizations. His words deserve to be read in full, without dilution:
“To the all rescue and Hatzalah organizations in the Israel, hello.
The Jewish community in Australia is large, strong, and well organized. They have good services, emergency response, and everything needed.
I regret that you are trying to raise funds at a time of pain, which is also private and difficult, and also comes at the expense of an increase in flights during a period when most airlines are not operating to Israel. This will also cause many families in Israel not to be reunited with their families in the U.S. as they should be.
At least ask the Australian Jewish community whether they are willing before you celebrate with fundraising campaigns using painful and distressing messages.
Thank you.”
This is not a rejection of solidarity. It is a rejection of instrumentalized solidarity.
There is a difference between support and intrusion. Between assistance and appropriation. Between genuine concern and the instinct to be seen as indispensable. Too many organizations in the Israeli nonprofit space have blurred that line beyond recognition. They have created a model in which visibility substitutes for necessity and delegations substitute for listening.
The sending of “teams” has become ritualistic. A delegation must arrive. A press release must be issued. A campaign must be launched. The tragedy must be framed, branded, and monetized. Rarely does the most basic question get asked first: Are we needed?
Speak privately to members of the Sydney Jewish community and the answer is consistent. They do not want nor need foreign nonprofits inserting themselves into their mourning. They want space, dignity, security cooperation, and respect for their autonomy. What they do not want is to see their pain repackaged into distress-driven fundraising copy half a world away.
There is an irony here that should trouble anyone who cares about Jewish unity. At a moment when flights are scarce, families separated, and Israel itself under strain, resources are being diverted not to necessity but to symbolic presence. The cost is real. The benefit is dubious.
Tragedy does not confer jurisdiction. Suffering does not grant a license to intrude. The moral test of the nonprofit world is not how quickly it can arrive, but how often it knows when to stay back.
If solidarity means anything, it begins with restraint.
So well said!
If this crime elicits greater support for Israel, the effective way to demonstrate that is to support established long-term projects, like funding Israeli universities, hospitals and students.
Leave the short-term response to those who have already prepared for events like these.
Daniel, I saw the fundraising ad somewhere today online in Israel (I am in the US) and was honestly baffled, not comprehending their message. I forgot about it. Thanks for your post explaining. Exploitation like this is unconscionable, particularly at such a moment, but there you go. I appreciate what they do in Israel, just couldn't figure out what it had to do with today's tragedy. No doubt we'll see it in America, too. But it is unfortunate.