Author: Professor Gideon Fisher

For generations, national security was defined by geography. Countries protected borders, guarded infrastructure and responded to physical threats. Intelligence agencies focused on what happened on the ground, while diplomacy sought to shape relations between states.

Today, that reality has fundamentally changed.

The battlefield no longer begins at the border. It begins on a mobile phone, in a university lecture hall, on a social media platform or in a television studio. Information spreads across continents in seconds. False narratives become accepted truths overnight. A single piece of disinformation can influence governments, financial markets and public opinion long before facts have a chance to catch up.

This transformation has created an entirely new security challenge.

The decision to establish eighteen international control centres dedicated to monitoring antisemitism reflects an important recognition: hatred has become organised, coordinated and global. It no longer operates through isolated incidents but through interconnected networks capable of amplifying misinformation and legitimising prejudice on an unprecedented scale.

Monitoring these developments is therefore an essential first step.

However, monitoring alone cannot be our final destination.

For decades, the Jewish world has become highly effective at documenting antisemitic incidents. Reports are published, statistics are collected and annual surveys demonstrate the worrying growth of hatred directed at Jewish communities and the State of Israel.

Yet documentation, valuable as it is, does not automatically produce change.

The real challenge lies in transforming information into action.

Every major advancement in public policy has followed the same progression: identify the problem, measure it, understand it and then create mechanisms capable of changing behaviour.

Road safety improved not because governments counted accidents, but because societies introduced enforcement, education and accountability.

Corporate governance improved not because misconduct was documented, but because institutions developed systems capable of responding effectively.

The fight against antisemitism deserves the same evolution.

The establishment of international monitoring centres should therefore be viewed not as the conclusion of a process but as the beginning of a broader strategy. Data must become the foundation for coordinated international cooperation among governments, civil society, legal professionals, educational institutions and responsible media organisations.

Technology can identify trends.

Artificial intelligence can recognise patterns.

Researchers can analyse developments.

But ultimately, people and institutions must decide how societies respond.

This is where civil leadership becomes indispensable.

Around the world there are legal experts, academics, business leaders and community organisations ready to contribute their expertise. Bringing these networks together around a shared framework of responsibility may become one of the most significant developments in the global response to contemporary antisemitism.

The United Kingdom has historically played an important role in defending democratic values, strengthening civil society and promoting the rule of law. British philanthropy has repeatedly demonstrated that meaningful change often begins with visionary partnerships between public institutions and private leadership.

The establishment of new monitoring centres offers an opportunity to build precisely that kind of partnership.

Not simply to observe the problem.

But to ensure that observation leads to action, cooperation and lasting impact.

History reminds us that hatred evolves.

Our response must evolve even faster.

Since October 7, the world has witnessed an alarming resurgence of antisemitism. Across university campuses, media outlets, social networks and public institutions, hostility towards Israel has too often evolved into hostility towards Jews themselves.

Governments have spoken out. Jewish organisations have documented incidents. Community leaders have shown remarkable resilience.

Yet one uncomfortable question remains:

Why do those who spread antisemitism so rarely face meaningful consequences?

The challenge before us is no longer one of awareness. The evidence is overwhelming. Reports are written. Statistics are published. Conferences are held.

But awareness alone has not been enough.

The time has come to complement education and advocacy with something equally important: accountability.

This conviction lies behind a new initiative currently being developed by the Fisher Foundation.

Our vision is straightforward yet ambitious: to establish an international civil platform capable of identifying, documenting and responding professionally to serious manifestations of antisemitism and delegitimisation of Israel through lawful, responsible and coordinated civic action.

This is not about policing opinions or restricting freedom of expression.

It is about ensuring that when public figures, institutions or influential organisations cross the line into incitement, antisemitism or deliberate disinformation, there exists a credible and professional mechanism capable of responding.

Such responses may include engagement with employers, professional bodies, universities, regulators, media organisations or legal experts, depending on the circumstances and within the framework of local law.

Our objective is not confrontation for its own sake.

Our objective is responsibility.

History teaches us that hatred flourishes where there are no consequences.

Professional accountability has transformed standards in business, finance, medicine and public life.

It can also strengthen the global fight against antisemitism.

To achieve this, we are seeking to build an international coalition of legal professionals, researchers, strategic partners, Jewish organisations and civil society leaders who share one belief:

That democratic societies must defend freedom of speech while refusing to normalise hatred.

The United Kingdom has long stood at the forefront of defending democratic values, the rule of law and civil society.

For that reason, we believe British philanthropy and British leadership can play a pivotal role in establishing this initiative.

This is not an Israeli project.

It is not a political project.

It is an international civic initiative dedicated to protecting democratic discourse and confronting one of the oldest forms of hatred through modern, responsible and lawful means.

Every generation is asked what it did when antisemitism evolved into something larger than isolated prejudice.

Our generation has an opportunity to answer differently.

Not only by speaking.

But by building institutions capable of making a lasting difference.

For decades, public diplomacy was largely considered the responsibility of governments. Diplomats represented nations. Ambassadors explained policy. Official spokespersons responded to crises.

That world no longer exists.

Today, public opinion is shaped less by ministries than by millions of individuals connected through digital platforms. A university student with a smartphone, a business leader on LinkedIn, a physician writing on X, or a lawyer participating in an international conference can influence perceptions far beyond the reach of traditional diplomacy.

The conversation about Israel has become decentralised.

So too must the response.

Recent initiatives encouraging members of the Jewish community to become advocates for Israel reflect an important shift in thinking. They recognise that defending democratic values, confronting antisemitism and challenging misinformation can no longer be delegated exclusively to governments or Jewish organisations.

Civil society has become an essential actor.

Yet advocacy alone is not enough.

The real objective should not be to create thousands of people repeating identical messages.

The objective should be to cultivate credible voices capable of engaging honestly, confidently and responsibly within their own professional communities.

People rarely change their minds because they hear another slogan.

They change when someone they trust explains a complex reality with integrity.

A scientist speaking to fellow scientists.

A physician addressing medical colleagues.

A lawyer discussing international law.

An entrepreneur engaging business leaders.

Authenticity is now more influential than authority.

That is why the future of public diplomacy lies not in centralised messaging but in empowering independent voices.

This approach also reflects one of the greatest strengths of democratic societies.

Unlike authoritarian regimes that rely on state-controlled narratives, democracies derive legitimacy from citizens willing to participate freely in public debate.

Every individual who chooses facts over misinformation, dialogue over hatred and responsibility over silence strengthens that democratic foundation.

This responsibility extends beyond moments of crisis.

Supporting Israel should not become a reactive exercise undertaken only during conflict.

It requires sustained investment in education, leadership development and international networks capable of building relationships long before difficult headlines emerge.

The Jewish people have always demonstrated remarkable resilience by investing in knowledge, institutions and community.

The digital age demands a similar investment in civic leadership.

Not everyone needs to become a public speaker.

Not everyone needs to appear on television.

But everyone possesses professional credibility, personal experience and trusted relationships that can contribute to a more informed public conversation.

The question is therefore no longer whether Israel needs ambassadors.

It does.

The real question is who those ambassadors will be.

Perhaps the answer is far broader than we once imagined.

Perhaps they are already among us—teachers, students, entrepreneurs, academics, artists, doctors and community leaders—waiting not for official appointments, but for the confidence to use their own authentic voices.

Because in today’s interconnected world, credibility is the most powerful form of diplomacy.

And every credible voice has the potential to make a difference.