(JNS) Once again, Europe has fallen into its well-worn reflex: to mouth the populist word “peace” and recoil in horror at the specter of “occupation,” even when the term is no longer applicable, replaced by far more limited “territorial control.” For too many European leaders, facts are disposable when weighed against popular sentiment and the ever-fashionable demands of diplomatic “good form.”
The truth they ignore—or pretend to ignore—is stark: Israel is fighting a dangerous terrorist organization that threatens not only the Jewish state but the stability of the entire free world. Hamas’s alliances, its ideological drive to destroy the West, and its ongoing torture of Israeli hostages demand decisive action. This war is difficult and risky, but what alternative exists?
Yet in the salons of Brussels, Paris and Berlin, there is no discussion of substance, no debate on how a democracy can defeat Islamist terror while trying to save its kidnapped citizens. Instead, the prevailing European posture bolsters Hamas’s denial strategy, promising more terrorism, the likely death of hostages and a rising tide of antisemitism.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said it plainly: When Israel was on the verge of rescuing hostages, Hamas slammed the door on multiple offers—from US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, who proposed freeing 10 hostages, to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who sought the release of them all.
This came after French President Emmanuel Macron used the UN stage to push for a Palestinian state, granting Hamas exactly the international legitimacy it craves. Hamas seized the moment, demanding a state of its own and touting the Oct. 7, 2023, massacre as a victory in the court of public opinion.
In Europe, expanding Israel’s military front to Gaza City is condemned without serious consideration. Criticism of Netanyahu is treated as a political goldmine. Even JD Vance’s mild acknowledgment that “different views” exist is misrepresented as US opposition, when in fact the American vice president backs Israel’s goals.
Meanwhile, practical military plans are ignored: the IDF is preparing a phased entry into Gaza City, preceded by a month-long evacuation effort to separate civilians from Hamas control. The displaced population will be housed in 16 new humanitarian centers, funded and operated by the United States, working around the clock. Hamas will have two months to reconsider its rejectionism, knowing that territorial loss carries far greater symbolic weight in the Islamic world than loss of life.
Netanyahu has left the door open to renewed negotiations, but even this is weaponized against him by the European commentariat. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich—hardly a darling of the international press—voted against Netanyahu’s program last week, insisting the war should never be interrupted. Does Europe know this? Or care?
Perhaps the most telling omission from Europe’s moral sermonizing is silence on Netanyahu’s new proposal: to place Gaza’s future in the hands of a coalition of trusted Arab states. Why is this not welcomed as a constructive alternative to Hamas rule? Why is it rejected simply because it comes from Israel?
And then there is Germany. Twenty-two months after Oct. 7—the deadliest day for Jews since the Holocaust—German Chancellor Friedrich Merz announced an arms embargo against Israel. This is not merely misguided policy; it is a betrayal that emboldens antisemites and Hamas sympathizers in streets across the world.
Such actions make the already harrowing mission of rescuing starved, brutalized hostages in Gaza’s tunnels far harder than the war itself. The moral calculus is simple: Stand with Israel’s right to defend itself and free its citizens—or stand with Hamas’s strategy of denial, delay and destruction.
Want more news from Israel?
Click Here to sign up for our FREE daily email updates
