RSS
Why Russia Has Skewed Its Population Against Israel
Russian President Vladimir Putin meets with Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas. Photo: Kremlin.ru
Vladimir Putin’s second presidential term (2004–2008) was marked by Moscow’s obvious desire to regain its status as a global superpower, which had been lost by the Soviet Union as a result of its defeat in the Cold War. The point of official departure from the former policy of open partnership with Western countries and close cooperation with NATO was the so-called 2007 Munich Speech of the Russian President and the invasion of Georgia that followed in August 2008. Moscow’s global claims gained momentum sharply after Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, and received an even more refined doctrinal formulation after February 24, 2022.
A critical element of the Kremlin’s new doctrine, which represented a peculiar synthesis of neoconservatism and formally leftist Soviet ideology, was its anti-colonial aspect: the movement of the unprivileged countries of the Global South against the world economic and political dominance of the Global North, usually identified with the US-led bloc of “old” and “old-new” Western democracies.
From the point of view of the Russian leadership, such ideological constructs were to become the common denominator of the geopolitical, diplomatic and economic strategy of the international organizations that Moscow is building as a tool to confront the “collective West.” Notable among them is BRICS — an informal association of initially four non-Western states with rapidly growing economies, established in 2006 at the initiative of the Russian Federation, which has gradually expanded to nine member states, together accounting for 46% of the world’s population and 37% of global GDP.
Moscow’s bid for leadership in the global South also had an obvious Middle East dimension. Already at the beginning of the shift in Russia’s foreign policy, it was made clear there that Moscow was no longer willing to settle for the rather formal status of “co-sponsor of the Middle East peace process,” but intended to set the tone in the region. It is clear that with such an “anti-imperialist” vision, which, incidentally, is shared by ultra-leftist and radical-progressive circles in Western countries, the emergence of the subject of “Israeli colonialism” allegedly oppressing the “freedom-loving people of Palestine” in the official rhetoric of the Kremlin was a matter of time.
As a result, in late 2010s Russia’s initial practice of balancing and mediating between almost all actors involved in the Middle East conflict began to gradually change, and its final reformatting took place after October 7, 2023. This time Moscow almost openly supported Hamas as a satellite of Iran, Russia’s current closest partner in the Middle East.
Russia’s support for the Palestinian National Authority in the West Bank, whose leaders from the very beginning of the Russian military invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 have taken the side of Moscow, where they continue to repeat the long-exhausted formula about the creation of an independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital as the only way to resolve the conflict in the Middle East. (In this context, the results of voting by PA residents with Russian citizenship in the March 2024 Russian presidential election are quite revealing. More than 90% of those who took part in the elections in the PA voted for Vladimir Putin, while Vladislav Davankov was the leading candidate among the Russian citizens who voted in Israel).
The appearance of the PNA/PLO and Hamas delegations at the next BRICS summit in Kazan in late October 2024 as honorary observer guests in the “BRICS plus/outreach” format was in line with this policy. The head of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) made the most of the arena graciously provided by the organizers and the sympathetic attention of the federal and local Russian press to accuse Israel of “genocide” of Palestinian Arabs, “ethnic cleansing in the Gaza Strip,” and other alleged “violations of international law.” He concluded by demanding that BRICS member states impose sanctions against Israel and expressed hope that “Palestine will be accepted as a member of BRICS” in the near future.
In fact, it is not so much the bilateral relations with the virtual “Palestinian state” that are important for Russia itself, but rather more significant things for Moscow – its attempts to intercept the status of the main sponsor of the “Palestinian cause” from the West in order to gain geopolitical regional and global advocacy perspectives. Apparently, it is within the framework of such a strategy that the Soviet rhetoric about the alleged “pivotal nature of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict for the entire situation in the Middle East” and its “key role in the major regional crises threatening the security and stability of the region” is being revitalized.
Russian society, which until recently was generally favorably disposed toward Israel, has embraced the revival of propaganda clichés that seemed to have been long gone: according to polls, the percentage of Russians sympathizing with the Palestinian Arabs today is many times higher than the percentage of those sympathizing with the Jewish state.
In fact, this was not a big surprise. Data collected over 26 years of sociological observations by the authoritative Moscow-based Levada Center showed that although the majority of Russians do not support either side in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, since 2011 there has been a gradual increase in the share of respondents whose sympathies are on the side of the Palestinian Arabs, while at the same time the number of respondents who support the Israelis has been decreasing. By October 2024, the level of support for Palestinian Arabs exceeded the level of support for Israelis by 4.5 times (28% and 6%, respectively), while 13 years ago the ratio was inverse.
However, also in 2011 there was an absolute maximum — more than 70% — of respondents who did not express sympathy for either side in the conflict. In October 2024, the share of such respondents in Russia amounted to 57% — almost identical (56%) to the share of Americans who chose the same answer option in a parallel survey by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. At the same time, while the share of those who found it difficult to answer was four times lower than among respondents in Russia, the share of Americans who supported Israel (31%) was five times higher than the share of Russians (6%), among whom the number of those who sympathized with the Palestinians was, on the contrary, 2.5 times higher than among those who sympathized with the Israelis (28% and 11%, respectively).
In light of these data, it is not surprising that the share of American respondents who believe that Israel is protecting its interests in the current conflict and its actions are justified is more than twice as high (32% and 14%) as the share of Russians who share this opinion. But among those who chose the statement “Israel has gone too far and its actions are not justified,” the split was the opposite: 59% of the Russians surveyed and 34% of the Americans thought so.
The fundamental question — What is going to be “the day after”? — eventually leads the debate to the problem of establishing a Palestinian state, which in the romantic period of the Norwegian Accords of 1993–1997 was considered by many to be the optimal solution to the Palestinian Arab problem and the trigger for ending the almost century-long Arab-Israeli confrontation and the Middle East conflict as a whole. While the idea of resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict according to the Oslo model (“two states for two peoples”) has clearly exhausted itself long ago, this formula is still too entrenched in international political and diplomatic discourse to be abandoned without severe consequences for the strategies based on it, the careers built on it, and the diplomatic, political and economic resources invested in it. And it is in this capacity that it remains a notable geopolitical and geostrategic factor.
It seems that public sentiments in the two countries quite accurately reflect the local media agenda: rather diversified in the United States, and relatively homogeneous, with the dominance of pro-government media, in Russia. At first glance, the opinions of Americans and Russians are completely identical on this point: 49% of respondents in both the American and Russian samples were in favor of the creation of an independent Palestinian state. At the same time, the number of those who were against the creation of such a state in the United States (41%) was slightly less than those who were in favor, while in Russia this number was three times less (14%).
However, if for the United States and its allies this subject, in one way or another, mistakenly or not, is still seen as one of the ways to solve the problem, for Russia and its allies it is hardly more than an active propaganda resource and a tool of geopolitical confrontation with the “global West” and competition with China, Turkey and the Saudi bloc for influence in the Middle East.
Prof. Vladimir (Ze’ev) Khanin lectures in Political Studies at Bar-Ilan University and is Academic Chairman of the Institute for Euro-Asian Jewish Studies in Herzliya, Israel. A version of this article was originally published by The BESA Center.
The post Why Russia Has Skewed Its Population Against Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Israeli Military Expert: Doha Strike Was Backed by US and Qatar Coup, Will Bring Hostage Deal Closer
A damaged building, following an Israeli attack on Hamas leaders, according to an Israeli official, in Doha, Qatar, Sept. 9, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ibraheem Abu Mustafa
Israel’s unprecedented strike on Hamas leaders in Doha this week was not a rogue act of military aggression, but rather the outcome of quiet coordination between Qatar and the US that could bring a hostage deal closer, Israeli intelligence expert Eyal Pinko said on Wednesday.
The strike, which officials have said was planned months ago, came a day after 10 Israelis were killed by Hamas in Gaza and Jerusalem. Four were soldiers who died in an attack on an Israeli tank in northern Gaza. The separate shooting attack in Jerusalem, in which six Israelis were killed and several more wounded, was the “straw that broke the camel’s back,” Pinko, a national security expert who served in Israeli intelligence for more than three decades, said in a press briefing.
Pinko contended that while Qatar publicly condemned the attacks, it also enabled them. “I am sure they were involved and the attack was coordinated with the [Qataris],” Pinko later told The Algemeiner.
The most recent round of negotiations to secure a Gaza ceasefire and hostage-release deal were nothing more than a “deception” by the US and Israel designed to gather Hamas leaders in one place “in order to set the timing to eliminate them,” he said.
Pinko said the strike should also be seen in light of US President Donald Trump’s impatience with the stalled hostage talks, arguing it showed Trump was on board with assassinations of Hamas leaders despite public declarations that he was “very unhappy” with the attack. He also pointed to Trump’s comments from last month, in which the US president predicted the Gaza conflict would reach a “conclusive ending” within two or three weeks.
Qatar, which has long hosted Hamas’s exiled leadership, benefits strategically from replacing the terrorist group’s leaders loyal to Iran with figures it can trust, Pinko maintained. Doha holds billions of dollars belonging to Hamas officials and has no interest in letting Ankara or Tehran displace it as the group’s patron. The timing of the attack is also significant, Pinko said, coming in the wake of Israel’s strikes against Iran’s nuclear program over the summer. “Iran is in a very bad situation. Qatar can easily overcome Iran,” he said.
Pinko further argued that the strike may serve to bring forward the release of the Israeli hostages still being held in Gaza since Hamas itself was no longer a coherent negotiating partner. The terrorist group operating in Gaza had become fragmented, “divided into five families that are fighting each other” and sometimes giving the impression that “they hate each other more than they hate Israel,” Pinko said. Recent talks proved “there was no longer a decisionmaker in Hamas,” and this disarray had allowed Hamas leaders to drag out the process with unrealistic demands. Removing those figures, he argued, would leave room for Qatar to install leaders who could cut a deal. “This will make the negotiation process much faster,” he said.
Pinko’s assessment stands in stark contrast to the fears of some of the families of the remaining 48 hostages held in Gaza, who said in a statement they had “grave fear” the Doha strike could sabotage the chances of bringing their loved ones home.
He placed the operation in a wider context, linking it to the revival of the Abraham Accords and US efforts to build a trade corridor from India through the Gulf to Israel and Europe as a counterweight to China’s trillion-dollar Belt and Road initiative, ending with Gaza as a key trade hub. “Trump is very serious in making the northern part of the Gaza Strip as [having] US autonomy. That will be the end of the American belt and road initiative to compete with the Chinese,” he said.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday called on Qatar, which “gives safe haven [and] harbors terrorists,” to expel them or bring them to justice, adding that if they don’t, “we will.”
Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, for his part said his country would retaliate over the strike, and accused Netanyahu of “wasting” Qatar’s time in negotiations and “leading the Middle East to chaos.”
Pinko called out Doha for its “duplicity” in pretending to be a peacemaker on the one hand, while “fueling Hamas and hatred” in the US and Europe, on the other.
“They are against Israel in their DNA. They don’t want Israel to exist,” he said. “So Gaza and Hamas are a very important asset for them.”
Some critics have denounced the Doha strike as a violation of international law, but international law experts note that Article 51 of the UN Charter recognizes a state’s inherent right to self-defense and that this right is not confined by geography if attacks are directed from outside its borders. The so-called “unwilling or unable” doctrine holds that if a host country does not act against militants on its soil, the victim state may use proportionate force.
The US relied on this doctrine when it killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan in a 2011 operation that was widely hailed by Western governments and the UN, whose then secretary-general Ban Ki-moon said at the time that he was “very much relieved by news that justice has been done” and called it “a watershed moment in our common global fight against terrorism.”
RSS
Germany Presses Main Mosque Network to Distance Itself From Erdogan Ally Over Antisemitism
Ali Erbas, president of Diyanet, speaks at a press conference following an August 2025 gathering in Istanbul, where 150 Islamic scholars called for armed resistance and a boycott against Israel. Photo: Screenshot
Amid a rising wave of anti-Jewish hate crimes, the German government is pressing the country’s main mosque association over its close ties to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, urging it to publicly distance itself from his antisemitic and anti-Israel rhetoric.
According to local reports, German authorities have told the Turkish-Islamic Union for Religious Affairs (DITIB) — the country’s largest mosque network — to formally break with Erdogan’s hateful statements or risk losing government support and cooperation.
“We expect the federal government’s cooperation partners to clearly distance themselves from organizations and individuals who spread antisemitic messages or promote Islamist agendas,” a spokesperson for Germany’s Federal Ministry of Interior said in a statement to German media.
For years, the German government has supported DITIB in training imams, as well as helping to foster community programs and religious initiatives.
In 2023, then-Interior Minister Nancy Faeser signed an agreement with the Turkish government’s Directorate of Religious Affairs (Diyanet) and DITIB for a new imam training program.
By sending imams from Turkey and paying their salaries, the Diyanet oversees DITIB and its hundreds of communities across Germany, shaping the ideological direction of more than 900 mosques and influencing the training of their imams.
Under a new program, however, the Diyanet no longer sends imams directly from Turkey. Instead, Turkish students are trained in Germany in cooperation with the German Islam Conference (IKD).
Since March 1 of this year, the Interior Ministry has designated €465,000 in support for the program, according to the German newspaper Die Welt.
With this new agreement, imams live permanently in German communities and have no formal ties to the Turkish government. Still, experts doubt that this alone would curb the Diyanet’s political influence.
In the past, DITIB has faced multiple controversies, with some members making antisemitic remarks and spreading hateful messages.
“The continuation of measures adopted for this purpose, such as the training initiative, will largely depend on DITIB’s conduct and the success of the process,” a spokesperson for the Ministry of Interior said in a statement.
The German government’s latest warning came after a conference in Istanbul last month, where 150 Islamic scholars called for armed resistance against Israel, a boycott against the country, and “global jihad.”
Among those attending was Ali Erbas, president of Diyanet, with whom the German government signed the new agreement in 2023.
Erbas has repeatedly made public antisemitic statements, defended the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct.7, 2023, and called for the mobilization of “all forms of jihad.”
“The Zionist regime is committing outright genocide in Gaza. We believe it is haram, or forbidden, to remain silent in the face of oppression. Therefore, everyone can take action. The boycott of Zionist occupiers’ goods must continue,” Erbas reportedly said during the conference.
“We firmly affirm that the Palestinian people have all legitimate forms of resistance against the Zionist occupation, including armed resistance. We also consider it necessary to mobilize the Ummah [Islamic community] for all forms of jihad in the way of Allah,” he continued.
“Bir avuç azgın topluluk, tüm dünyayı felakete sürüklüyor”https://t.co/ieip8gNvkt pic.twitter.com/jZn5Tgc1Ah
— Diyanet (@diyanetbasin) August 29, 2025
The German government strongly condemned Erbas’s comments, questioning DITIB’s relationship with a public figure whose statements and antisemitic ideology contradict their cooperation agreement.
“These events underscore, once again, the problematic structural and personal links between DITIB and the Turkish religious authority,” a spokesperson for the Ministry of Interior said in a statement.
“Cooperation with DITIB requires a clear commitment to the values of the Basic Law, to international understanding, to Israel’s right to exist, and to a firm opposition to both Islamism and antisemitism,” the statement read.
RSS
EU Targets Israel With Sanctions and Partial Trade Suspension, Von der Leyen Calls for Ceasefire Amid Gaza War
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen delivers the State of the European Union address to the European Parliament, in Strasbourg, France, Sept. 10, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Yves Herman
The executive body of the European Union will propose sanctions against certain Israeli ministers and partially suspend the EU’s association agreement with Israel, in one of its latest efforts to pressure Jerusalem over the war in Gaza.
On Wednesday, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen unveiled new measures targeting the 25-year-old pact governing the EU’s political and economic ties with Israel, in one of the latest attempts to curb the Jewish state’s defensive campaign against Hamas.
“What is happening in Gaza has shaken the conscience of the world,” von der Leyen said in a State of the Union speech to the European Parliament in France.
“People killed while begging for food. Mothers holding lifeless babies,” she continued. “Man-made famine can never be a weapon of war. For the sake of the children, for the sake of humanity. This must stop.”
This latest move is part of an increasingly hostile campaign by some European countries against the Jewish state, building on previous efforts to undermine Israel internationally.
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar denounced von der Leyen’s comments as “regrettable,” adding that some of her remarks were “tainted by echoing the false propaganda of Hamas and its partners.”
“Israel, the world’s only Jewish state and the only democracy in the Middle East, is fighting a war of existence against extremist enemies working to eliminate it. The international community must back Israel in this struggle,” the top Israeli diplomat wrote in a post on X.
“Once again, Europe conveys the wrong message that strengthens Hamas and the radical axis in the Middle East,” he continued. “Anyone who seeks an end to the war knows very well how to end it: the release of the hostages, the disarmament of Hamas, a new future for Gaza.”
Saar added, “Hurting Israel will not bring this about; on the contrary, it entrenches Hamas and Israel’s enemies in their refusal.”
The President of the European Commission’s comments this morning are regrettable. Some of them are also tainted by echoing the false propaganda of Hamas and its partners.
Once again, Europe conveys the wrong message that strengthens Hamas and the radical axis in the Middle East.…— Gideon Sa’ar | גדעון סער (@gidonsaar) September 10, 2025
Von der Leyen’s announcement came just a day after Jerusalem carried out strikes against Hamas’s political leadership in Qatar, which has supported the Palestinian terrorist group for years.
In her speech, von der Leyen denounced Israel’s actions, accusing the country of causing starvation in the war-torn enclave of Gaza and undermining ceasefire negotiations.
She also condemned the expansion of settlements in parts of the West Bank and denounced comments from some government ministers that she said incite violence.
“All of this points to a clear attempt to undermine the two-state solution, to undermine the vision of a viable Palestinian state. And we must not let this happen,” von der Leyen said.
Israel has vehemently denied any accusations of causing starvation in Gaza, noting that it has provided and facilitated significant humanitarian aid into the enclave throughout much of the war.
Israeli officials have also said much of the aid that flows into Gaza is stolen by Hamas, which uses it for terrorist operations and sells the rest at high prices to Gazan civilians. According to UN data, the vast majority of humanitarian aid entering Gaza is intercepted before reaching its intended civilian recipients.
Jerusalem has also argued it has gone to unprecedented lengths to try and avoid civilian casualties, despite Hamas’s widely acknowledged military strategy of embedding its terrorists within Gaza’s civilian population and commandeering civilian facilities like hospitals, schools, and mosques to run operations and direct attacks.
Under the new proposed measures, the EU would partially suspend its trade pact with Israel, removing preferential treatment for Israeli goods that make up nearly a third of the country’s total international trade.
Von der Leyen also announced that the EU will suspend its bilateral support for Israel, while maintaining engagement with Israeli civil society and Yad Vashem, the country’s main Holocaust memorial center.
In addition, the European Commission “will propose sanctions on the extremist ministers and on violent settlers” and plans to set up a “Palestine donor group” next month, with a dedicated mechanism to support Gaza’s reconstruction following the war.
At the end of her speech, von der Leyen called for the release of the Israeli hostages kidnapped by Hamas, the “unrestrained” entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza, and “an immediate ceasefire.”
“There can never be any place for Hamas, neither now nor in future because they are terrorists who want to destroy Israel,” the European Commission head said.
“They are also inflicting terror on their own people, keeping their future hostage.”