Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s planned speech to the United Nations General Assembly on Friday is being overshadowed by European moves to isolate Israel, with the U.K., as well as Canada and Australia recognizing a Palestinian state on Sunday and more to come, as well as an upcoming EU vote on sanctions against Israel.

Netanyahu released a statement, in which he said he has “a clear message to the leaders who recognize a Palestinian state after the terrible massacre of Oct. 7: You are giving a massive prize to terror. … It will not happen. There will not be a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River.”

The prime minister hinted that Israel will increase settlement activity in response: “For years I prevented the establishment of this terror state facing great pressures, domestic and foreign … Not only that, we doubled the Jewish settlement in Judea and Samaria. The response to the latest attempt to force a terror state on us in the heart of our land will be given after my return from the U.S. Wait.”

U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer said on Sunday that his country is “acting to keep alive the possibility of peace and a two-state solution. That means a safe and secure Israel alongside a viable Palestinian state. At the moment, we have neither.” 

He pushed back against the Israeli argument that recognition of a Palestinian state at this time acts as a reward for Hamas, arguing that “our call for a genuine two-state solution is the exact opposite of [Hamas’] hateful vision. … This solution is not a reward for Hamas, because it means Hamas can have no future.” 

Hamas, however, praised the recognition as an “important move” and called for it to be accompanied by ending the “Judaization of the West Bank and Jerusalem, Israel’s isolation and Israel’s leaders brought before international court,” as well as the recognition of the Palestinians’ “natural right to resistance.”

The High-Level Conference on Palestine Statehood, led by France and Saudi Arabia, is set to take place Monday, on the eve of Rosh Hashanah. Nearly a dozen countries have said they would recognize a Palestinian state as part of that effort, following the announcements of the U.K., Canada and Australia on Sunday.

French President Emmanuel Macron argued in an interview with Israel’s Channel 12 News that “recognition of a Palestinian state is the best way to isolate Hamas … What they want is to destroy [Israel], but if we consider that the Palestinian state will always have the objective to destroy Israel, how [do] they want to build a sustainable future? There is no way.” 

A recent poll commissioned by the French-Jewish umbrella organization CRIF found that 71% of French people reject the recognition of a Palestinian state before the hostages are freed and Hamas gives up power. In the U.K., a survey in The Telegraph showed 87% of Britons disagree with recognition of a Palestinian state without preconditions, including 89% of Labour voters. A YouGov poll, however, found that 44% of Britons supported the move, while 18% were opposed and 37% unsure.

U.S. Ambassador to France Charles Kushner noted that in conjunction with his announcement of Palestinian state recognition, Macron called for Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, the demilitarization of Hamas and the establishment of strong governance for the Palestinians as preconditions for any recognition of Palestinian statehood. “These were France’s own conditions for recognition of a Palestinian state. How can France move forward with next week’s vote when none of these have been met?” Kushner said.

Netanyahu, who was Israel’s ambassador to the U.N. from 1984-1988, is known to relish his addresses to the U.N. General Assembly, embracing theatrical props, puns and long pauses on a platform where he hopes to capture the world’s attention for Israel’s benefit. 

After his UNGA speeches, Netanyahu holds court, with other leaders visiting him in a conference room in Turtle Bay. This year, he is expected to meet with Argentinian President Javier Milei, the leaders of Paraguay and Serbia and New York Mayor Eric Adams, and there are reports that he will meet with Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa ahead of a possible security agreement between Damascus and Jerusalem. Then, Netanyahu is expected to fly to Washington to meet with President Donald Trump.

Meanwhile, Israel’s Foreign Ministry and Economy Ministry, which oversees foreign trade, have been pushing back against proposed European Union sanctions. The European Commission proposed the roll-back of relations between the bloc and Israel after it “found that actions taken by the Israeli government represent a breach of essential elements relating to respect for human rights” given “the rapidly deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza following the military intervention of Israel, the blockade of humanitarian aid, the intensifying of military operations and the decision of the Israeli authorities to advance the settlement plan in the so-called E1 area of the West Bank, which further undermines the two-state solution.” 

The proposal, if accepted, would suspend free trade between Israel and the European Union, its largest trade partner.

A source in Brussels estimated that the move would cost Israel 227 million Euros ($266 million) in customs duties per year. 

A date has not yet been set for voting on the suspension of free trade, which requires a qualified majority, also known as a “double majority,” meaning 55% of member states, and states representing 65% of the EU population, with at least four states opposed.

Hungary and the Czech Republic said they would oppose the proposal, following calls between their foreign ministers and Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar. 

Sa’ar called the proposal “morally and politically distorted.”

“Moves against Israel will harm Europe’s own interests,” Sa’ar warned. “Israel will continue to struggle, with the help of its friends in Europe, against attempts to harm it while it is in the midst of an existential war. Steps against Israel will be answered accordingly, and we hope we will not be required to take them.”

Economy Minister Nir Barkat sent letters to Germany, Hungary, Czechia, Italy, Bulgaria, Greece, Lithuania, Cyprus, Croatia and Latvia asking them to oppose the measure to suspend free trade.

The European Commission also suspended 20 million Euros ($23.5 million) in projects with Israel, dealing with civil service training and regional-EU cooperation related to the Abraham Accords, through 2027. The commission was able to end the cooperation without a vote and noted in repeated statements that it was exempting “civil society and Yad Vashem.” 

In addition, the European Commission proposed sanctions against Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, as well as “violent settlers” and 10 members of the Hamas politburo, which would require a unanimous vote by EU member states. The ban on Israelis is unlikely to be approved, especially not the cabinet ministers.

In another sign of Israel’s increased isolation in Europe, several countries’ public broadcasters said they would boycott the 2026 Eurovision Song Contest if Israel were to take part, as it usually does.

Spain, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Iceland and Ireland have said they will not participate in the contest along with Israel, and Belgium threatened to follow suit. 

Israeli public broadcaster Kan said that it will continue to be “a significant part in this cultural event, which cannot become political.”

“Israel is one of the most successful participants in the Eurovision contest — in the past seven years its songs and representatives have finished in 5th, 3rd, 2nd and 1st place,” Kan CEO Golan Yochpaz said. 

Austrian Foreign Minister Beate Meinl-Reisinger, whose country is due to host the Eurovision next year, posted on X that the contest “is a symbol of peace, unity, and cultural exchange — not an instrument for sanctions.” 

As nearly a dozen countries announced plans to recognize a Palestinian state in the last week, the European Union debated exerting an additional form of leverage on Israel, in the form of suspending its participation in Brussels’ flagship scientific research and innovation program.

Earlier last week, the European Commission proposed a partial suspension of Israel’s participation in Horizon Europe — a 95.5 billion Euro ($109.2 billion) program that covers all areas of science and technology and has contributed significantly to Israeli academia and its tech sector — in response to what Brussels called a “severe” humanitarian situation in Gaza, which it views as having been insufficiently addressed by the daily humanitarian pauses this week. 

The commission proposed to no longer allow Israeli entities to work with the European Innovation Council’s accelerator, which an Israeli diplomatic source estimated would lead to damages of about 10 million Euros ($11.4 mn.) to Israeli startups in the program, but none to research projects. 

The motion did not receive the qualified majority in the European Union Council, and therefore Israel remains a full partner in Horizon Europe. Germany and Italy reportedly blocked the suspension, and Tuesday’s meeting on the matter ended without a decision. The European Council presidency said after the meeting that it plans to continue talks about the matter. The Israeli diplomatic source said some countries wanted to continue monitoring the humanitarian situation in Gaza before reaching a decision.

The scare from Brussels came at a difficult time for Israeli academia, which has been facing overt and more subtle forms of boycotts, Emmanuel Nahshon, the coordinator for combatting academic boycotts on behalf of the Israeli Association of Universities, told Jewish Insider in an interview on Wednesday. 

Nahshon, a former ambassador and deputy director of Israel’s Foreign Ministry, who resigned last year in protest against the government, spoke about the challenges Israeli academia is facing in the shadow of the war in Gaza.

The interview has been condensed and edited for clarity.

Jewish Insider: What did you think about the outcome of the European Council’s discussion on partially suspending Israel from Horizon Europe?

Emmanuel Nahshon: They decided not to decide at the EU level, because we still have Germany and Italy blocking a possible majority against Israel, but even the Germans are telling us that this cannot go on. It’s an expression of the increasing isolation of Israel, given the unending war in Gaza, which has become more and more difficult to explain … It creates a bleak picture.

I’m very happy that sanctions on Israel in Horizon Europe did not work out this time, but unfortunately, it will happen next time.

JI: Can you explain why Horizon Europe is so important?

EN: It’s a fund budgeted by the EU and its member states, a multi-year fund for six to seven years, and its purpose is to fund joint research and development projects. Israel is one of the few non-EU countries that have been invited to participate … starting in the mid-1990s. It has been extremely successful.

European funds are extremely important because they create partnerships and networks and this is part of what has made Israel the innovation hub that it is.

Israel has one of the highest rates of return on investment and are welcome partners in top-level projects of the EU. By cutting us out of those projects, it will really punish Israeli innovation and the Israeli economy. 

It’s not only about academic cooperation — it goes way beyond that. These are projects that are translated into concrete innovations for the welfare of humanity. 

JI: What kinds of challenges is Israeli academia facing from anti-Israel elements abroad?

EN: Immediately after Oct. 7 [2023 Hamas attacks on Israel], there were mostly student protests, encampments, violent protests – those are almost non-existent now. It has shifted in the last year to something else, institutional boycotts.

Universities have decided to cut ties with Israel, as have professional associations – medical, psychology, historians, mathematicians. It’s much more dangerous. We now have countries in which the majority of universities have no contact with Israel. In Belgium and the Netherlands over 80% of universities have severed all contacts with Israeli universities, as have most in Spain and Italy. It’s beginning in Switzerland, in Geneva and Lausanne. 

It’s a slippery slope. The more it happens, the more it is bound to happen. Universities copy one another.

On top of that, we have the silent, covert boycott. It’s like Voldemort [from Harry Potter], no one is saying its name, but it is there and we feel it all the bloody time. Israeli lecturers are not invited to international events anymore; articles are rejected; Israelis are not invited to take part in science and research consortia, etc.

If it continues for a year or two, we may face dire consequences.

JI: What would those consequences be?

EN: It’s the slow strangling of the Israeli academic world. We cannot function without contact with the outside world. Israel is too small a country to be able to have its own, internal academic world. We need contact with …the Ivy League and Western European universities.

On top of it, there is a phenomenon that began before the war, because of the so-called judicial reform, and that is Israeli academics leaving Israel. This is a brain drain that is noticeable and catastrophic. We are talking about tens of thousands of Israeli academics choosing to make their lives elsewhere. It began in early 2023 and the war made it worse.

JI: The Israeli Association of Universities (known in Israel by the Hebrew acronym VERA) hired you about a year ago to combat the academic boycott. What have you been doing?

EN: We have been working very hard on two levels. The first was to create internal coordination between different Israeli universities so we can speak the same language in the fight together. We did one thing that has been extremely useful, which is to create a common database. Now, on a regular basis, we have information coming from all the Israeli universities regarding boycott attempts and events. This is super useful, because now we know how many took place.

JI: How many? 

EN: By last count there were over 800 boycott events since last summer. Some are smaller, some are bigger.

[Nahshon provided JI with a presentation given by VERA to the Knesset Education Committee in May, which said that this year they received an average of 50 boycott reports per month — double that of the previous year. Broken down by country, the number of reports about the U.S., Canada and Holland more than doubled, Spain went up 125% and England increased by 55%. A third of the complaints from North America were about the suspension of individual collaborations between Israeli scientists and their colleagues, while 18% were about difficulty in publishing, and 18% were about not being invited to lecture or participate in conferences. In Europe, nearly a third of the complaints were about institutions ending their cooperation with Israelis.]

Boycotts are complex. It’s a bit like sexual harassment. People do not always want to say they’ve been the victim, so we have to encourage people. Now, more and more [academics] are reporting and we have a fuller picture of the situation.

JI: What do you do after receiving the reports?

EN: We do work all over the world on the legal, political and public relations fronts. We emply the services of a law firm in Brussels that is helping us tremendously, because a lot of institutional boycott cases violate European laws.

For example, if universities want to kick Israeli researchers out of Horizon Europe [grantee] projects, that is against European law … We have had many successes in which they immediately stop the boycott.

Politically, we want to encourage our friends to pass legislation against boycotts, like the ones that exist in the U.S. 

There are so many lies directed at Israeli universities that have nothing to do with reality, such as calling them apartheid or saying that Israeli academia teaches the military how to occupy or how to kill.

This effort is very new, very young. We need more budgets to function; it’s challenging. I have addressed the government without much success. We are looking for partners and funds, and we do the best we can with the limited means we have.

JI: The Weizmann Institute, one of Israel’s leading scientific institutions, was hit by an Iranian missile last month, which destroyed 45 labs. Are they going to have a hard time recovering because of international boycotts?

EN: I don’t think it will be a problem [raising funds for the recovery] because so many have expressed solidarity with the Weizmann Institute. They have so many friends around the world.

The problem is that the government is not fulfilling its mission. It should be the role of the Israeli government to commit to financing it, instead of fundraising … Israeli academia is not a priority for this government because it is identified with the more liberal wing of Israeli politics. 

Weizmann will be fine, but the problem is of a more general nature. I quote the head of VERA Daniel Chamovitz, who said that “you can see that the Iranians put higher education and Israeli research at the center of their launch map” — apparently the Iranians understand better than the Israeli government that academia is a top priority. They aimed at Weizmann and the Soroka Hospital [in Beersheba, a teaching hospital] for exactly that reason.

Eleven countries declared their intention to recognize a Palestinian state in conjunction with Tuesday’s France and Saudi Arabia-sponsored conference at the United Nations on a two-state solution.

The Arab League, along with the entire European Union and seventeen additional countries, signed the “New York Declaration,” which details a plan starting with the immediate end of the war and concludes with an independent, demilitarized Palestinian state living peacefully next to Israel. The declaration calls for UNRWA — the U.N. agency for Palestinian refugees, some of whose employees participated in the Oct. 7 attacks — to take part in the transition, and for the Palestinian Authority to implement reforms and hold democratic elections within a year.

Notably, by signing the declaration, for the first time, the entire Arab League — including Hamas benefactor Qatar — condemned Hamas’ Oct. 7 attacks on Israel and called for the terrorist group to disarm, give up its rule over Gaza and release the hostages in order to end the war. 

A separate statement, the “New York Call,” was signed by 15 Western countries, six of whom already recognized a Palestinian state, and another nine who “expressed or express willingness … to recognize the state of Palestine as an essential step towards the two-state solution, and invite all countries that have not done so to join this call.”

Most U.N. member states — 145 out of 193 of them — recognize a Palestinian state, the vast majority of them having followed the Soviet Union in doing so in 1988. Nine of them took the step after the Oct. 7 attacks and the start of the war in Gaza. Eleven more announced the intention to do so this week.

The countries that joined the “New York Call” were Andorra, Australia, Canada, Finland, Luxembourg, Malta, New Zealand, Portugal and San Marino.

The declaration came hours after British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said that his country will recognize a Palestinian state by September if Israel does not reach a ceasefire with Hamas — though Hamas is the one who rejected such a deal last week — and commit to not annexing the West Bank and agree to reviving the idea of a two-state solution. 

Last week, ahead of the conference, French President Emmanuel Macron announced that Paris would also recognize a Palestinian state in September at the U.N. General Assembly.

The response from Jerusalem was overwhelmingly negative, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warning that recognizing a Palestinian state “rewards Hamas’s monstrous terrorism and punishes its victims … Appeasement towards jihadist terrorists always fails.” Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar called the statements “a reward for Hamas … at a time when Israel is still fighting in Gaza and there are still Israeli hostages there,” and “a rash and ill-considered decision, primarily driven by internal political considerations and pressures.” 

Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid wrote that “if Europe genuinely wants a Palestinian state to come into being one day, it needs to … demand that the Palestinians change … Declaring support for those who handed out candy in the streets of [the West Bank cities of] Nablus and Hebron on the morning of Oct. 7 does not advance a two-state solution. If anything, it pushes it further away.” 

The State Department also called the conference an “unproductive and ill-timed publicity stunt” that will “embolden Hamas and … undermine real-world efforts to achieve peace … It keeps hostages trapped in tunnels.”

Former hostage of Hamas Emily Damari, a British citizen, posted on X that Starmer’s recognition of Palestinian statehood “risks rewarding terror [and] sends a dangerous message: that violence earns legitimacy … Recognition under these conditions emboldens extremists and undermines any hope for genuine peace. Shame on you.” 

The Hostages Families Forum said that “recognizing a Palestinian state while 50 hostages remain trapped in Hamas tunnels amounts to rewarding terrorism … The abduction of men, women, and children, who are being held against their will in tunnels while subjected to starvation and physical and psychological abuse, cannot and should not serve as the foundation for establishing a state … The essential first step toward ensuring a better future for all peoples must be the release of all hostages through a single, comprehensive deal.”

Dan Diker, president of the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs, said in an interview with Jewish Insider that the move to recognize a Palestinian state emboldens Hamas, in that it convinces them that “they’re winning the long game. Hamas now says ‘The West is with us.’ This is exactly what they want, to pressure and corner Israel to succeed, and Hamas will say, ‘We’re not going to release the hostages.’ They’re just biding their time.” 

Emmanuel Nahshon, the Israeli Foreign Ministry’s former deputy director for public diplomacy and a former ambassador to Brussels who resigned in protest against the government last year, told JI that 11 countries saying they’ll recognize a Palestinian state in one week creates “a slippery slope” towards diplomatic isolation for Israel.

“This enables countries that were friendly with Israel to criticize us publicly, and strengthens extremely radical elements in those countries,” Nahshon said. “It’s a kind of perfect storm with the purpose of delegitimizing Israel.”

Among those countries, he said, are Canada, the Netherlands and France.

“These are countries that we always considered to be like-minded, in terms of a point of reference for the State of Israel. We don’t want to compare ourselves to African dictatorships; rather, we see ourselves like Western European democracies. Now, Western European democracies are growing more and more distant from Israel,” Nahshon said.

Diker said that 11 countries recognizing a Palestinian state is “very dangerous in the perception war.” 

“This is the greatest success for what was originally a Soviet plan, that the Palestinians under [PLO leader Yasser] Arafat and [Palestinian Authority President] Mahmoud Abbas and then Hamas inherited. The strategy is to divide … Western states from Israel, isolate Israel, and cause it to bleed to death,” he said.

Diker noted that France and the U.K.’s position is especially consequential because they are permanent members of the U.N. Security Council aligned with the U.S. If London and Paris follow through and recognize a Palestinian state, the U.S. will be the only permanent member of the UNSC not to do so.

Diker said that “what Starmer and Macron … [did] is an ill-advised move … The PA have not satisfied any of the requirements for statehood. They don’t have a functioning government; they don’t have control over the population or the ability to engage in international relations — they have 100 political warriors they call diplomats and all they do is subvert Israel.”

Nahshon added that the countries “are not stupid; they know that even if they recognize a Palestinian state it doesn’t mean there is a Palestinian state. You can trust the international community that they understand fully well that it won’t have practical, immediate implications, certainly not when Palestinians are unable to run their own state and possibly unwilling to have their own state, because if you ask most Palestinians, they would rather destroy Israel.” 

Rather, he said the move to recognize a Palestinian state “sends a message to Israel of criticism and disapproval,” Nahshon said. “It’s addressed first and foremost at Israel … It’s a vote of no confidence addressed at the Israeli government saying, ‘We are very unhappy with the way you run the war in Gaza and with the free hand given to extreme settlers.’ The message is addressed to Netanyahu and his government.”

Diker pointed out that Starmer is “a well-heeled international lawyer, a human rights lawyer,” and that he and Macron “see themselves as being the human rights conscience of the Europeans” but put pressure mainly on Israel, “ironically, while Hamas kills and tortures its own people while they’re seeking humanitarian aid.”

“Israel has had a very serious problem in leading the narrative,” Diker said. “This is narrative warfare … [that] brought us to where we are … Israel has got to pull itself together and prosecute a soft power war.”

Diker called for there to be widely-released images of “Israeli soldiers handing food and aid to the Gazans. That is political, cognitive warfare. We should be seen doing that.” 

Asked if that might be a domestic political risk to the current Israeli government, Diker said: “If we’re totally isolated internationally, it’s a fundamental threat to our existence. We can’t operate in a vacuum.”