Netanyahu’s Europe Dilemma: ‘They Condemn Israel, Then Come Asking for Help’
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has accused European countries of adopting what he considers a contradictory approach toward Israel—publicly condemning the country at international forums while privately turning to Jerusalem for assistance on security and counter-terrorism matters.
According to remarks attributed to Netanyahu, he questioned the position of European governments that, in his view, repeatedly criticize Israel at the United Nations, accuse it of losing the “moral high ground” and argue that Israel took Palestinian land, yet still approach his government when they need help dealing with terrorism and security threats.
“These are the same countries smashing us at the UN, vilifying us, telling us: ‘You lost the moral high ground. You stole the land.’ Then they come to me and say: ‘Can you help us with this anti-terror effort? Can you help us with this or that?’” Netanyahu was quoted as saying.
The remarks reflect the increasingly complicated relationship between Israel and several European governments. While European countries have strongly condemned Hamas attacks and recognized Israel’s security concerns, many have also become increasingly critical of Israel’s military operations in Gaza, its policies in the occupied West Bank and the expansion of Israeli settlements.
Netanyahu has consistently rejected what he describes as international double standards against Israel. At the United Nations General Assembly in September 2026, he delivered another forceful defence of Israel while sharply attacking international critics. His speech came amid growing diplomatic tensions, with numerous delegates walking out during his address.
The disagreement has become particularly pronounced over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Several European governments have pushed for greater pressure on Israel over settlement policies and the humanitarian situation in Gaza. France, the United Kingdom and other European countries have also expressed concerns about developments in the West Bank.
At the same time, Israel remains an important security and intelligence actor in the Middle East. Its intelligence agencies and security institutions possess extensive experience in counter-terrorism, intelligence gathering, border security and dealing with armed groups. That expertise can make cooperation attractive to countries confronting terrorism and other security threats—even when those same governments strongly disagree with Israeli policies.
That contradiction is at the heart of Netanyahu’s argument.
Should Israel still help?
The answer, according to the position expressed in the original statement, is yes.
Israel should provide assistance where doing so can protect lives and combat terrorism. But if European governments genuinely depend on Israeli expertise, intelligence or cooperation, there is also an argument that such cooperation should be accompanied by greater diplomatic honesty.
Every meeting, therefore, should end with a public acknowledgement.
European leaders should openly thank Israel for the assistance they receive and acknowledge that the country they publicly condemn is also a country they turn to when they need help confronting terrorism.
Such an approach would not require European governments to abandon their criticism of Israel. Nor would it prevent them from raising legitimate concerns over Gaza, the West Bank, settlements, civilian casualties or international law.
Rather, it would expose the complicated reality of international diplomacy: countries can disagree profoundly on political and legal questions while simultaneously cooperating when their security interests overlap.
The irony becomes even more striking amid the current deterioration in relations. Just days ago, Israeli police arrested suspects following attacks by Israeli settlers against a U.S. journalist and European diplomats in the West Bank, incidents that have drawn condemnation from Israel’s own president and several European governments.
Ultimately, Netanyahu’s message is about reciprocity and consistency.
If European governments believe Israel is fundamentally wrong on matters of security, territory and international conduct, they should explain why they continue seeking Israeli assistance. And if they believe Israeli expertise can help protect their citizens from terrorism, they should be prepared to acknowledge that publicly.
In international politics, cooperation does not erase disagreement. But neither should disagreement erase recognition of where valuable expertise and assistance come from.
For Netanyahu, the question is simple: if Europe needs Israel when the stakes are high, Europe should be willing to say so publicly—even while continuing to challenge Israel politically.
0 Comments