Following a visit to Turkey on his inaugural international trip last week, Pope Leo XIV lauded Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on his peacemaking abilities and said Turkey has “an important role that it could play” in advancing peace in the Middle East and effectuating a two-state solution. 

“I spoke about this with President Erdogan,” Leo said, referring to a two-state solution, which he called the “only” solution to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, reaffirming the Holy See’s longstanding position on the issue. 

“Unfortunately we still haven’t seen a solution,” Leo told reporters upon departing from Istanbul. “We know that in this moment, Israel doesn’t accept [a two-state] solution, but we see it as the only one that can offer a solution to the conflict that they are living in.” 

Erdogan “is certainly in agreement with this proposal,” Leo said.

The pope’s comments and decision to share pleasantries with the Turkish leader have struck some in the pro-Israel community as out of touch and are part a pattern of recent remarks from the Vatican that have been critical of Israel, most notably in its handling of the war against Hamas in Gaza.  

In October, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Holy See’s secretary of state, described Israel’s conduct in Gaza as an “inhuman massacre” — language Leo later endorsed. In November 2024, the late Pope Francis called for an investigation into whether Israel’s actions in Gaza amounted to genocide.

Leo’s remarks came after the pope spent three days in Turkey, meeting with leaders of Catholic and Orthodox Christian churches to commemorate the 1,700th anniversary of a gathering of bishops in A.D. 325 in present-day Iznik, Turkey. He arrived in Beirut on Sunday for the second leg of his trip, and addressed politicians and religious leaders, including Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam at the presidential palace.

Steven Cook, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, called the pontiff’s comments on Turkey “odd,” adding that his intentions were likely to “flatter his hosts but have little connection to reality.”

“At the outset of the war in Gaza, the Turkish government could have used its good offices with Hamas and Israel to play a constructive role helping to bring hostages home and bringing about an end to hostilities.” said Cook. “Erdogan chose an entirely different approach that offered significant political and diplomatic support to Hamas, demonized Israel, and [Turkey] was the first country to impose an economic boycott on Israel over the war.”

Sinan Ciddi, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, echoed those sentiments, calling the pope’s comments “flawed” and “fantasy.” However, he noted that popes have a “record of being idealists.” 

“One thing that Leo is probably trying to do is he seems to be much more interested in promoting the potential to pursue any avenue towards establishing peace where he sees conflict,” said Ciddi. “[The pope has] probably been advised that the Turks have sort of demonstrated ability to be a mediator in the Ukraine-Russia conflict … and Turkey is a Muslim country that is able to speak to Hamas and is an ally of the United States … so why not essentially go after that, as opposed to labeling it as a supporter of terrorism.”

The Vatican has long advocated for a two-state framework, formally recognizing a Palestinian state in 2015. But the pope’s renewed push comes as the Israel-Hamas war intensified international pressure on Jerusalem to accept such a model. Earlier this year, several countries — including France, Saudi Arabia, the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada — formally recognized a Palestinian state at the United Nations General Assembly. 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has maintained his opposition to a Palestinian state, a position that’s shared by a significant majority of the Israeli public in the aftermath of Oct. 7.

The pontiff noted to reporters that the Vatican is “friends with Israel” and seeks to “be a mediating voice that can help bring them closer to a solution with justice for all.” 

Ciddi told Jewish Insider that while Erdogan has been “relentless” in calling upon the pope to condemn Israel, Leo “has ignored that.” 

After his inauguration in May, Leo said that dialogue with the Jewish community is “close to my heart.” 

“Because of the Jewish roots of Christianity, all Christians have a special relationship with Judaism,” the pope said in May. “Theological dialogue between Christians and Jews remains always important and is very close to my heart.”

During his recent trip, Leo indicated a willingness to commemorate the 2,000th anniversary of Christ’s crucifixion in Jerusalem in 2033. 

Two senior pro-Israel House Democrats, who are co-chairs of the House Abraham Accords Caucus, warned on Wednesday that any moves that would prevent the ultimate establishment of a two-state solution could endanger the survival of the Abraham Accords.

Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL) said at an American Jewish Committee event in Washington that his concerns about Israeli movements toward annexing the West Bank remain. Israel agreed to put those moves on hold five years ago when it sealed the Abraham Accords with the United Arab Emirates. Schneider said that any attempt at a one-state solution would create a permanent violence and conflict.

“Jump ahead five years, there are still folks in Israel who are again talking about annexation,” Schneider said. “The UAE has made clear that if Israel goes down that path it has the likelihood — not the possibility, but the likelihood — of cleaving the Abraham Accords to such a point that they may not be recoverable.”

At the same time, Schneider said he also opposes moves by European countries to unilaterally recognize a Palestinian state.

“Recognizing a Palestinian state before the elements necessary to be successful as a state — the institutions, having elections, having responsive government, having control of all security under one authority — it’s not there yet,” Schneider said. “To even be talking about recognizing a Palestinian state before other steps have been taken, giving the perception [to Israelis] of rewarding the actions of Hamas on Oct. 7, that creates a dynamic that is also a threat.”

He said that the U.S. should be offering “more robust leadership” to sideline “extremists” and “maximalists” on both sides.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) similarly said at the AJC event that “we are at a crossroads with the Abraham Accords” and warned that “progress could be squandered by any steps that permanently foreclose a two-state future.”

“We should seize diplomatic opportunities to expand the Abraham Accords and think carefully before taking any actions that would cause setbacks,” she continued.

She noted that a key threat to the Abraham Accords is that acceptance of those agreements has not filtered down from the government into the public in the Arab states that have normalized relations with Israel — which in many places continue to hate Israel and would not mourn the death of the Abraham Accords.

“Making sure that we are fostering those dialogues and being able to have that harmony and those relationships seep deeper down into society will make it easier and take the pressure off of those leaders to issue statements that some of them issued after Oct. 7 that were less than condemnation and that were even worse than that,” Wasserman Schultz said.

The Florida lawmaker also said that the U.S. and its partners should pursue “near-term openings with countries like Mauritania and with Azerbaijan,” countries that already have ties with Israel, to bring them into an “[Abraham] Accords Plus framework,” as well as continue “patient, serious tracks of engagement with Saudi Arabia, Indonesia and Oman.”

When Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-FL) won his first election to the House in 2022, Jewish leaders in his Orlando, Fla., district who had been encouraged by his personal outreach were optimistic he would follow through on a range of commitments he had made vowing to uphold support for Israel.

Despite some initial concerns about his history of involvement in pro-Palestinian demonstrations as well as relationships with anti-Israel activists, Frost had circulated a lengthy Middle East position paper in consultation, in part, with a top pro-Israel group that largely assuaged lingering reservations among Jewish community leaders over the sincerity of his views. 

In the paper as well as a candidate questionnaire solicited by Jewish Insider during his first primary, the young progressive organizer, describing himself as both “pro-Israel” and “pro-Palestinian,” voiced opposition to conditioning aid to Israel — arguing that the security threats facing the Jewish state are “far too grave” to enact such measures. In backing a two-state solution, he clarified that any agreement should require “the basic recognition that Israel has a right to exist” as well as “an end to the antisemitic rhetoric and positions of Hamas.” And if elected, he pledged to visit Israel — which he called “one of the United States’ most important allies and strategic partners.”

Now, almost midway into his second term, Jewish and pro-Israel leaders are expressing some buyer’s remorse as Frost, 28, has embraced positions that put him at odds with his past commitments, fueling frustration among those who had believed he would be a more dependable ally on key issues concerning Israel. 

Frost, for his part, insists that the humanitarian conditions in Israel’s war with Hamas in Gaza have deteriorated so drastically during his tenure that he had no choice but to change his views, though that has not quelled discontent among his former allies.

“He has broken a lot of promises,” said one Jewish leader, echoing others who expressed dismay with Frost’s turn in Congress.

The most recent move to draw scrutiny from Jewish and pro-Israel leaders is a letter Frost signed urging the Trump administration to recognize a Palestinian state over growing concerns with the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

The letter, signed by several prominent House progressives and led by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) — who plans to introduce a similar resolution — said such a state “will need to fully recognize Israel” and guarantee “the disarmament of and relinquishing of power by Hamas.” But pro-Israel activists broadly see the renewed effort as a misguided concession to Hamas amid the ongoing war — as the terror group seeks to leverage international outrage over Israel’s military conduct.

Democratic Majority for Israel, whose political arm had provided input on Frost’s position paper during his primary, took issue with his decision to join the letter. While the group felt sufficiently comfortable with Frost’s Middle East policy views when he first ran for Congress, opting not to intervene on behalf of a top primary rival who had won an endorsement from its super PAC, it has become dissatisfied with his approach as he has continued to stake out more adversarial stances toward Israel during his time in the House.

“We strongly support a two-state solution that ensures Israel’s future as a Jewish and democratic state with recognized borders and upholds the right of Palestinians to live in freedom and security in a viable state of their own,” Brian Romick, DMFI’s president, said in a statement to JI on Tuesday. “But unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state at this time — as the terrorist group Hamas still governs parts of Gaza and continues to hold Israeli hostages — would not advance peace. It will instead prolong the war by incentivizing Hamas to reject any ceasefire deal, and reward the terrorism we saw on Oct. 7 while making future acts of terror more likely.”

In addition to the letter — which followed a similar resolution he co-sponsored in 2023 during his first term — Frost in May joined legislation to place unprecedented new conditions on aid to Israel by withholding offensive weapons over its alleged violations of international law.

Last year, he also voted against a widely approved bill to provide supplemental aid to Israel six months after Hamas’ attacks. In a statement explaining his thinking at the time, Frost wrote that he was “only able to justify aid for defense, not offense, and this legislation did not allow me to separate the two,” as the war “has claimed the lives of countless innocent Palestinian civilians and brought us no closer to the return of innocent Israeli hostages held by Hamas.”

“For me, the North Star here is having a two-state solution, and everything, all the decisions we make, have to point to that,” Frost said, arguing that he has remained consistent in upholding his core beliefs on the conflict even as his positions on specific policies have changed since he launched his initial campaign for Congress. “The thing I have in mind is the safety and security of everybody, of Israel, of Palestinians — of everybody.”

Meanwhile, Frost has yet to fulfill his campaign vow to travel to Israel, and has declined invitations to do so while in Congress, according to a person familiar with the matter.

In an interview on Wednesday, Frost acknowledged that his approach has changed since he entered the House, attributing his new positions to his revulsion at Israel’s behavior in Gaza — which he described as “completely unacceptable” and “abhorrent” in light of the civilian death toll. “In terms of specific policy points, things have changed,” Frost told JI. “Things have changed a lot — and unfortunately, not for the better.”

“For me, the North Star here is having a two-state solution, and everything, all the decisions we make, have to point to that,” he added, arguing that he has remained consistent in upholding his core beliefs on the conflict even as his positions on specific policies have changed since he launched his initial campaign for Congress. “The thing I have in mind is the safety and security of everybody, of Israel, of Palestinians — of everybody.”

Even as he condemned Hamas and said the terror group should have no role in rebuilding postwar Gaza, Frost said the conflict has evolved into what he regards as a “war on innocent people,” resulting in “massive loss of innocent life” that has fueled his decision to speak up against the Israeli government and its ongoing military campaign.

In the Middle East position paper he wrote in his first primary, Frost had rejected placing additional conditions on aid to Israel because, he wrote at the time, it would “undermine Israel’s ability to defend itself against the very serious threats it faces.” But he explained on Wednesday he had also felt such measures were “already written into the law” and “we didn’t really need to go further” in enforcing it at the time. 

Now, however, “I do believe that the law is being violated,” he told JI, clarifying his recent support for legislation that seeks to withhold transfers of offensive weapons to Israel. “Because of that, we have to look at the way that we are both complicit but also encouraging the current behavior of the Netanyahu government,” he said.

Unlike a handful of his far-left House colleagues who have accused Israel of carrying out a genocide in Gaza, Frost hesitated to use the term himself, calling it a “difficult” word because of its historical connection to the Holocaust. Still, he said he would not seek to discourage others from such charges. “I’m not going to sit here and defend what is going on right now in any way, shape or form,” he said. “I understand why people use that word. But when we see what’s going on, it’s hard to find the words for it.”

“There’s a lot of things to hold, but the main thing is, yes, there are many things that have changed,” he reiterated. “But for me, what has not changed is the main goal, which is making sure that everyone’s safe and everyone’s secure.”

Frost is hardly alone among Democratic lawmakers who in recent months have become more critical of Israel’s behavior, with even some of the staunchest supporters of the Jewish state struggling to defend the Israeli government as the humanitarian situation in Gaza has continued to worsen nearly two years into the war.

“It’s a radical shift,” one community activist told JI, voicing frustration with Frost’s positions, even as he described their ongoing conversations as “very open and honest.” 

His vacillating stances also illustrate some of the cross-pressures facing progressive Democrats who are not completely aligned with the party’s far left on its hostility toward Israel. Pro-Israel Democrats have recently voiced their concerns that anti-Israel policies could become a litmus test for the left in the midterms, particularly amid Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu‘s moves to occupy the enclave.

But Jewish community leaders in Frost’s district, who spoke on condition of anonymity to address what they characterize as an increasingly delicate relationship with the congressman, explained they are particularly disappointed with his evolution on Middle East policy, given their initial hopes that he would be among a dwindling number of progressive allies committed to defending Israel in the House.

“It’s a radical shift,” one community activist told JI, voicing frustration with Frost’s positions, even as he described their ongoing conversations as “very open and honest.” 

The activist noted that Frost, who had been a prominent gun control advocate before he was elected to Congress, has “a good heart and doesn’t want to see people dying.” But “as a result,” he said, Frost has “a lot of blind spots” in his assessment of the conflict. The activist argued that Frost’s critique of Israel’s conduct in Gaza has ignored Hamas’ role in perpetuating the crisis as it refuses to surrender.

“At the end of the day, he very much comes from the ‘oppressor-oppressed’ worldview and sees Israel as the oppressor,” the activist said.

Frost, for his part, said his statements have been misconstrued by a wide range of critics across the spectrum, including pro-Palestinian activists who allege that he made separate commitments during his first primary bid that he has failed to uphold in Congress.

He stressed that he does not “do tit-for-tat stuff” while addressing the war. “Whenever I post about the hostages, I’ll have people sending me messages. ‘What about this?’ No,” he said. “Whenever I post about Palestinians, I’ll have people saying, ‘What about this?’ No, I will post about it all. I will talk about it all. I will say how I feel about everything.”

“I’m very firm in that, just coming from a place of, since I was 15 years old, being involved in the fight to end gun violence, and have grown up through a movement of death,” he told JI. “I just don’t think that’s the way to live as a human, quite frankly.”

“We’ve been disappointed that he has not met the commitments he gave to us,” one DMFI source told JI. “At the same time, we’re grateful that he has come to realize he made a mistake in at least one case, but members of Congress should think through their votes fully and discuss them with knowledgeable people before casting them.”

Even as Jewish and pro-Israel leaders say their relationships with Frost have worsened in recent months, frustration over his approach to Israel has been mounting since his first term, when he called for an “immediate ceasefire” in Gaza just days after Hamas’ terror attacks. As a freshman, he also voted against a resolution condemning rising antisemitic activity on college campuses, but he later said that vote had been a mistake after meeting with Jewish students in his district.

While Frost had shown contrition for his vote on the resolution in November 2023, DMFI still expressed dissatisfaction with his initial decision at the time — alleging he had not performed proper due diligence beforehand. “We’ve been disappointed that he has not met the commitments he gave to us,” one DMFI source told JI not long after the vote.

“At the same time, we’re grateful that he has come to realize he made a mistake in at least one case, but members of Congress should think through their votes fully and discuss them with knowledgeable people before casting them,” the source stated.

A spokesperson for Frost told JI at the time that the congressman “is trying to hold multiple truths all at once” as he receives input from constituents pushing opposing interests.

“I’m very comfortable with the decisions I’ve made,” Frost said of his approach to Israel. “As I walk the streets of my district, as I speak with the people in my district, this is where I find most people are at. They’re not really at the extremes that I’ve heard from.”

Speaking with JI on Wednesday, Frost said he has appreciated his ongoing discussions with pro-Israel leaders in his district — even if they have not been aligned on major policy questions in recent months. “Hearing their perspective is really important,” he confirmed. “What I always tell people is I might not always come to the conclusion that you agree with,” he said, “but I hope you’ll always feel I’ve engaged in good faith.”

He suggested that Jewish community activists who have been irked by his approach to the Middle East have not fully reckoned with his belief that Israel’s military actions have damaged its reputation in the United States. “It’s palpable across the country, and I think a lot of this has to do with the decisions that are being made by Netanyahu,” he argued.

“I’m very comfortable with the decisions I’ve made,” Frost said of his approach to Israel. “As I walk the streets of my district, as I speak with the people in my district, this is where I find most people are at. They’re not really at the extremes that I’ve heard from.”

When he assumed office in 2023, Frost had sought guidance from pro-Israel Democrats including Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY), who enthusiastically backed his campaign, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), one person familiar with the matter told JI. But the congressman has since drifted away from the two lawmakers on Israel while staking out positions that have put him more in line with the far left.

More recently, Frost has built closer relationships with such leading Israel critics as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), the source told JI, even if he has resisted identifying as an official member of the so-called Squad of progressive House Democrats. 

Owing in part to his network in Congress, Jewish community leaders are doubtful Frost will change his views on Israel. “It may be the best that we can hope is that he doesn’t become an actual member of the Squad,” said one activist, while noting that Frost is “totally safe” in his deeply blue district as he seeks a third term next year. 

Still, the activist said, “his refusal to actually go and see” Israel “first-hand is a problem,” particularly in light of his primary vow to visit the Jewish state as a congressman.

Frost, who acknowledged the commitment that he had made, said he hopes to see the region “at some point,” but added that it has “been difficult to figure out the timing.”

After the interview, Frost asked his spokesperson to clarify that he would “like to travel to the region at a point where he’d be able to visit both Israel and the Gaza Strip,” indicating a potential visit is unlikely to occur in the foreseeable future.

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.”