Abstract
Allegations that Israel’s intelligence agency, Mossad, uses financial leverage – metaphorically described as “donkeys loaded with gold” – to influence Western politicians have long circulated. This essay investigates these claims, focusing on Australia, the United States and Europe, while analysing the lobbying tactics employed by pro-Israel groups to shape policy. It further examines the 2025 “fake terror plot” involving an explosive-laden caravan in New South Wales, which led to the passage of controversial criminal offences, exploring its implications for influence and policy manipulation. Drawing on credible sources, the study assesses Mossad’s alleged financial strategies, lobbying mechanisms and the caravan incident’s role in shaping legislation, proposing reforms to enhance democratic transparency.
Introduction
Israel’s intelligence agency, Mossad, is renowned for its strategic operations, with narratives suggesting it secures influence over Western politicians through financial incentives. A guiding principle attributed to Mossad posits that “what cannot be bought for money can be bought for a lot of money,” and that any fortress can be breached with sufficient resources. This essay explores the extent to which Australian, American and European politicians have been recipients of such incentives, focusing on documented financial ties and the lobbying tactics employed by pro-Israel groups like the Australia Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC), the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and European counterparts. Additionally, it investigates the 2025 “fake terror plot” involving an explosive-laden caravan in Dural, New South Wales, which was initially labelled a terrorist threat but later revealed as a criminal hoax, yet catalysed the passage of new criminal offences in NSW. The central questions are: What evidence exists of financial influence? How do lobbying tactics amplify this influence? How did the caravan incident shape policy? And what are the implications for democratic governance? This analysis merges these themes, providing a comprehensive view of influence in Western politics.
Methodology
This study relies on open-source materials, including parliamentary registers, campaign finance records, investigative journalism, academic studies and reports from organisations like OpenSecrets and Transparency International. For the caravan incident, it draws on news reports, police statements and parliamentary inquiries, cross-referencing to ensure credibility. The analysis focuses on Australia, the U.S. and Europe, with pro-Israel lobbying as the primary lens, supplemented by examples from other sectors (e.g., pharmaceuticals, fossil fuels) and the Dural incident. Limitations include incomplete disclosure requirements, the covert nature of intelligence operations and evolving details about the caravan case. The essay integrates findings on financial influence, lobbying strategies and the caravan incident, incorporating historical and comparative perspectives.
Section 1: Allegations of Financial Influence
1.1 Australia
In Australia, allegations of financial influence often centre on sponsored travel to Israel, funded by pro-Israel organisations. Between 2010 and 2018, federal parliamentarians disclosed 102 trips to Israel, surpassing those to China (63) or the U.S. (49), according to the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. From June 2018 to April 2022, 25 trips were reported, comprising 18% of non-government-funded parliamentary travel. AIJAC sponsored 11 of these, with groups like the International Institute for Strategic Leadership Dialogue covering the rest. These trips, costing $10,000–$20,000 per MP, include curated itineraries showcasing Israel’s perspective on security and regional issues. Critics, including former Foreign Ministers Kevin Rudd and Bob Carr, argue that AIJAC exerts pressure to align Australian policy with Israeli interests, citing Canberra’s reluctance to criticise Israel’s human rights record. No direct evidence links these trips to Mossad and claims of cash payments or “gold” are absent from credible sources. The high volume of travel suggests a targeted effort, but its impact, such as Australia’s 2018 Jerusalem embassy consideration, remains debated.
1.2 United States
In the U.S., allegations of Mossad’s financial influence are overshadowed by AIPAC’s legal activities. The 1985 case of Jonathan Pollard, a U.S. Navy analyst paid by Israel to spy, confirms Mossad’s willingness to use financial incentives, though Pollard was not a politician. A 1976 CIA report noted Mossad’s “rapport with highly placed persons,” but evidence of direct bribes to politicians is scarce. AIPAC disbursed over $14 million in campaign contributions during the 2020 election cycle, per OpenSecrets, targeting pro-Israel candidates. It also sponsors congressional trips to Israel, with 40–60 lawmakers participating annually, costing $10,000–$15,000 per trip. These visits shape policy, as seen in consistent U.S. military aid to Israel ($3.8 billion annually). Speculative claims, such as those linking Jeffrey Epstein to Mossad blackmail, lack corroboration and are excluded. AIPAC’s legal financial clout drives influence, though Mossad’s historical operations suggest a capacity for discreet strategies.
1.3 Europe
In Europe, pro-Israel groups have funded parliamentary trips and donations, but Mossad’s direct role is rarely documented. A 2024 Declassified UK report revealed that 126 of 344 Conservative MPs accepted over £430,000 from Israel lobby groups, including 187 trips to Israel. Organisations like the European Leadership Network and Transatlantic Friends of Israel have hosted MEPs, sometimes breaching EU policies on Israeli settlements. A 2017 Morning Star article claimed Israel spent £1 million “bribing” British MPs, but the figure lacks verification. The 2017 case of Shai Masot, an Israeli diplomat filmed discussing covert influence over UK politicians, suggests strategic efforts, though not explicitly tied to Mossad. Allegations of cash payments are anecdotal, with trips and hospitality as primary mechanisms. The UK’s muted response to Israel’s settlement expansion raises questions about lobbying’s impact.
1.4 Analysis of Financial Influence
The metaphor of “donkeys loaded with gold” implies bribery, but evidence points to legal forms of influence. In Australia, 102 Israel trips from 2010–2018 suggest a deliberate strategy, though Mossad’s involvement is unconfirmed. In the U.S., AIPAC’s $14 million in contributions operates legally, while in Europe, £430,000 to UK MPs indicates influence. The lack of evidence for cash payments may reflect Mossad’s secrecy or the sufficiency of legal mechanisms. Historical cases like Pollard suggest Mossad’s capacity for covert payments, but contemporary influence relies on transparent, resource-intensive efforts, as seen in policy outcomes like U.S. anti-BDS laws and Australia’s embassy debate.
Section 2: The “Fake Terror Plot” and Its Policy Impact
2.1 The Dural Caravan Incident
In January 2025, a caravan containing Powergel explosives, antisemitic materials and a list of Jewish targets, including a Sydney synagogue, was discovered in Dural, a semi-rural suburb northwest of Sydney. Initially described as a potential “mass casualty event” by NSW Premier Chris Minns and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, the incident sparked fears of an antisemitic terrorist attack. Over 100 counter-terrorism police were deployed under Operation Kissinger, a joint effort involving the NSW Police, Australian Federal Police (AFP) and Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO). However, on March 10, 2025, AFP Deputy Commissioner Krissy Barrett revealed that investigators “almost immediately” believed the caravan was part of a “fabricated terrorist plot” orchestrated by organised criminals, not ideologically motivated terrorists. Key indicators included the absence of a detonator, the visibility of the explosives and the ease of discovery, suggesting a deliberate setup.
Police alleged that criminals, possibly led by a mastermind seeking reduced sentences, hired local actors to plant the caravan and tip off authorities, aiming to divert police resources and gain leverage in criminal prosecutions. The explosives, described as “degraded” and up to 40 years old, were stolen from mining operations over time, per counter-terrorism expert Neil Fergus. Despite early suspicions, police delayed public disclosure for two months, citing “an abundance of caution” and ongoing investigations into related tip-offs, which were also fabricated. The incident, while not a genuine threat, had a “chilling effect” on Sydney’s Jewish community, with Rabbi Mendel Kastel noting increased distress and medical consultations among residents.
2.2 Legislative Response and Controversy
The caravan incident, initially perceived as a terrorist threat, catalysed the passage of controversial criminal offences in NSW in February 2025. Amid a spate of antisemitic incidents, including arson and graffiti attacks, NSW Labor introduced reforms criminalising public racist remarks, displaying Nazi symbols and graffiti on places of worship, with penalties up to two years’ imprisonment. The laws also granted police broad powers to restrict protests near religious sites, a move criticised as “draconian” by former Labor MP Kim Carr and crossbenchers. Minns and Police Minister Yasmin Catley justified the legislation, citing over 700 antisemitic incidents in Sydney from July 2023 to January 2025, though they clarified it addressed broader hate crimes, not solely the caravan incident.
The revelation that the caravan was a hoax sparked accusations that the government misled parliament and the public. A NSW parliamentary inquiry, launched in April 2025, examined whether Minns and Catley knew the plot was fake before the laws passed on February 21, 2025. Deputy Commissioner David Hudson testified that police ruled out terrorism by February 21 and informed Catley on March 7, but Minns’ initial “terrorism” label fuelled public fear. Critics, including Greens MP Sue Higginson, argued that Minns’ rhetoric was “inflammatory,” rushing legislation under false pretences. Posts on social media echoed this sentiment, with users calling for the laws’ repeal, citing their impact on free speech. A senior NSW police officer’s non-disclosure agreement with the AFP, revealed during the inquiry, further raised concerns about transparency.
2.3 Connection to Influence and Lobbying
The caravan incident intersects with allegations of Mossad’s influence, as it heightened fears of antisemitism, potentially amplifying pro-Israel lobbying efforts. While no evidence directly links the incident to Mossad or pro-Israel groups, the political response – rushed legislation and heightened rhetoric – mirrors tactics like information campaigns and coalition building. The Jewish community’s fear, leveraged by politicians, aligned with AIJAC’s advocacy for stronger protections, as seen in their media reports framing Israel as a victim of terrorism. The incident’s exploitation by figures like Opposition Leader Peter Dutton, who faced accusations of stoking fear for political gain, parallels lobbying’s use of public sentiment to shape policy. Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke criticised Dutton for avoiding briefings, suggesting political motives over evidence-based governance, a dynamic that lobbying often exploits.
The lack of ideological motive in the caravan plot, confirmed by police, underscores how fabricated threats can serve external agendas, whether criminal or political. This raises questions about whether pro-Israel groups capitalised on the incident to push for policies aligning with Israeli interests, such as stricter hate crime laws that could curb criticism of Israel. The absence of foreign state involvement, per police, does not preclude indirect influence through heightened public and political pressure, a tactic consistent with lobbying’s information campaigns.
Section 3: Lobbying Tactics and Their Application
3.1 Direct Engagement
Direct engagement involves lobbyists meeting policymakers to advocate outcomes. AIJAC organises briefings for Australian MPs, inviting Israeli experts, while AIPAC’s policy conferences attract thousands of supporters and U.S. lawmakers. In Europe, the European Leadership Network hosts MEPs in Israel. Pharmaceutical companies engage regulators similarly, leveraging former officials. Studies have shown that lobbyists with government experience are significantly more likely to secure policy changes. The Masot case, where an Israeli official discussed influencing UK MPs, illustrates the risks of covert engagement, as Masot’s exposure led to his expulsion.
3.2 Financial Contributions and Incentives
Financial contributions, including donations and trips, are central to lobbying. AIPAC’s significant contributions during election cycles and AIJAC’s funding of Australian MP trips exemplify this. In Europe, substantial donations to UK MPs underscore the prevalence of financial influence. The ethical concerns arise when incentives distort priorities, as alleged in the caravan incident’s legislative push.
3.3 Grassroots Mobilisation
Grassroots mobilisation organises constituents to pressure politicians. AIPAC’s extensive network and AIJAC’s engagement of Australian Jewish groups illustrate this. Pro-Israel groups’ efforts have led to numerous anti-BDS laws in the U.S. The caravan incident’s public fear amplified calls for action, showing how perceived threats can bolster grassroots advocacy, even if fabricated.
3.4 Information Campaigns and Media Influence
Information campaigns shape narratives through think tanks and media. AIJAC’s media reports and AIPAC’s funding of research institutions are examples. The caravan incident’s initial media coverage, labelling it terrorism, fuelled public fear, aligning with lobbying’s use of narratives to drive policy.
3.5 Coalition Building
Coalition building aligns interest groups. AIPAC’s partnerships with various organisations leverage broad voter bases. The caravan incident’s political response, uniting leaders across parties, mirrors coalition tactics, amplifying calls for legislative action.
Section 4: Historical and Comparative Perspectives
4.1 Historical Context of Mossad’s Influence
Mossad’s alleged financial strategies have historical roots. In the past, Israel funded pro-Israel candidates in various regions and the Pollard case revealed the agency’s willingness to engage in covert operations. The shift to legal lobbying via AIPAC may reflect a pivot to avoid diplomatic fallout.
4.2 Comparative Lobbying by Other Nations
Pro-Israel lobbying’s tactics are not unique. Other nations engage in similar practices, highlighting global patterns. However, the scale and integration of pro-Israel lobbying stand out, particularly in how external actors can manipulate policy.
Section 5: Synthesis and Implications
5.1 Connecting Financial Influence, Lobbying and the Caravan Incident
The “donkeys loaded with gold” metaphor aligns with lobbying’s financial tactics, but evidence suggests legal mechanisms dominate. Pro-Israel groups integrate various strategies and the caravan incident amplified these dynamics by fuelling fear and catalysing controversial laws.
5.2 Ethical and Legal Considerations
Lobbying’s legal gray area, compounded by incidents like the caravan plot, highlights the need for reform. The lack of transparency in lobbying practices raises ethical concerns, particularly when fear distorts policy.
5.3 Policy Recommendations
To address influence and prevent manipulation, policymakers should:
1. Mandate Real-Time Disclosures: Require lobbying registries updated within 48 hours.
2. Cap Financial Incentives: Limit contributions and trip funding to $50,000 annually per politician.
3. Strengthen Foreign Agent Laws: Expand oversight to cover indirect funding.
4. Enhance Public Oversight: Fund independent watchdogs to monitor lobbying.
5. Review Rushed Legislation: Reassess laws passed under false pretences.
These reforms balance advocacy with accountability, mitigating risks from lobbying and fabricated threats.
Conclusion
The notion of Mossad buying politicians with “donkeys loaded with gold” is a metaphor, with evidence pointing to legal lobbying tactics. Pro-Israel groups leverage sophisticated strategies, achieving influence through trips, donations and campaigns. The 2025 Dural caravan “fake terror plot” amplified these dynamics, fuelling fear and catalysing controversial laws. This incident underscores how fabricated threats can serve political agendas, paralleling lobbying’s use of public sentiment. Reforms enhancing transparency and regulating incentives are essential to ensure democratic fairness. Future research should explore digital lobbying and global comparisons to address these challenges.
This comprehensive analysis aims to shed light on the complex interplay between financial influence, lobbying tactics and political outcomes, particularly in the context of pro-Israel advocacy and the implications of the Dural incident. Your thoughts and comments are welcome!
