Did the Iranian Regime Play a Role in Australia’s Chanukah Massacre?

Ideological Incitement and Diplomatic Proximity

Hours before the Bondi Beach attack, Ahmad Ghadiri Abyaneh—the son of Mohammad-Hassan Ghadiri Abyaneh, a former Iranian ambassador to Australia—posted a cryptic message on X condemning Jewish Chanukah celebrations as a “satanic ritual.”¹ His post framed Jewish religious observance as a threat requiring “societal defense,” explicitly citing Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s longstanding doctrine of “mobilized civil resistance” against perceived enemies of Islam.

This was not an abstract theological statement. It echoed the Iranian regime’s systematic use of religious language to legitimize violence against Jewish and Western targets. The proximity in timing, messaging, and ideological framing raises the possibility of foreknowledge or, at least, ideological grooming. While Abyaneh holds no official diplomatic post, his familial ties to Iran’s diplomatic corps and his invocation of Khamenei’s language raise red flags.

Iran’s Subversive Footprint and Antisemitic Violence in Australia

The December 14, 2025, Bondi Beach mass murder also may have been an IRGC-coordinated “payback” directed at Australia following the national government’s designation of the IRGC as a terrorist entity on November 27, 2025.²

The Australian terror proscription of the IRGC followed its “persona non grata” expulsion (PNG) of Ambassador Ahmad Sadeghi in August 2025. A highly embarrassing incident for Tehran, it marked the only time since World War II that Australia expelled a foreign ambassador, plummeting bilateral relations with Iran to a historic low. In total, four Iranian diplomats, including the ambassador, were declared persona non grata. For Tehran, the diplomatic humiliation was severe and, in the regime’s logic, may have demanded retaliation.

Australia’s expulsion of Iranian diplomats followed intelligence revelations that implicated Iranian embassy personnel in antisemitic violence. The Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) determined that Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) operatives embedded within the embassy were responsible for sponsoring or facilitating at least two violent incidents: the December 2024 firebombing of Melbourne’s Adass Israel Synagogue and earlier, vandalism of a Jewish business in Sydney.

Warnings Ignored: A Pattern of Strategic Neglect

Israeli and Australian intelligence and Jewish organizations had long warned Canberra of escalating antisemitism and jihadist radicalization. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accused Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s Labor government of ignoring intelligence warnings regarding a Sydney-based Islamic State cell believed to have carried out the Bondi attack.

These concerns were echoed by Ambassador Dani Dayan, Chairman of Yad Vashem, Israel’s Holocaust commemoration center, who warned Australian authorities in November that “the window is closing” for effective preventive action. In meetings with the premiers of Victoria and New South Wales, Dayan cautioned that failure to confront rising public antisemitism would normalize hatred and could culminate in “unspeakable atrocities.”³

The Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ) issued similar alerts. Chairman Alex Ryvchin told CNN that “the writing was on the wall,” suggesting the massacre was foreseeable given the unchecked surge in antisemitic incidents. Ryvchin further implied that political considerations—not lack of intelligence—delayed decisive government action.⁴

Iran and Sunni Jihadists: Tactical Cooperation, Strategic Purpose

At one time, cooperation between Shiite Iran and Sunni Islamic State operatives would have appeared counterintuitive. However, since, the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, Iranian cooperation with Sunni extremists has been documented. U.S. intelligence assessments have recorded Iran’s facilitation of safe passage for al-Qaeda operatives before and following 9/11. Tehran’s pragmatic calculus is that attacking shared enemies—Israel, the United States, and the West—overrides adversarial sectarian divides between Sunni and Shiite ideology.

In this context, the Bondi Beach massacre may be an IRGC-enabled or inspired operation designed to achieve multiple goals: punish Australia for designating the IRGC a terrorist organization, retaliate for the expulsion of Iranian diplomats, and project deterrence by demonstrating Iran’s reach far beyond the Middle East.

Strategic Context: Retaliation and Global Asymmetric Warfare

Iran currently faces mounting strategic pressure. Israel’s successful intelligence, cyber, and kinetic operations have significantly degraded elements of Iran’s nuclear and military infrastructure. Tehran’s response has increasingly relied on global asymmetric tactics—proxy attacks, ideological incitement, and plausible deniability operations abroad.

From Latin America to Europe and now Australia, Iran has demonstrated a pattern of weaponizing diaspora communities, diplomatic cover, and radical networks to strike soft targets. Jewish communities, in particular, serve as both symbolic and operationally accessible targets within Iran’s broader confrontation with Israel and the West.

Policy Implications and Recommendations

Failure to confront public antisemitism and foreign incitement—whether in Australia, Europe, or the United States—will invite further atrocities. The toleration of public antisemitic acts is certain to encourage more Bondi Beach scenarios, normalizing violence as a tool of geopolitical signaling.

While definitive attribution of operational control for the Bondi Beach massacre remains pending, the cumulative evidence strongly suggests a conducive environment shaped by Iranian ideology and strategic retaliation. The attack should be understood not merely as domestic terrorism, but as part of a global campaign of intimidation linked to state-sponsored extremist doctrine.

To fight and prevent these events in the future, Western states must integrate counter-antisemitism enforcement, foreign intelligence monitoring, and diplomatic accountability into a unified security doctrine. Iran’s global asymmetric warfare model depends on hesitation. Deterrence begins with clarity, exposure, and decisive action.

* * *

Notes