For decades, political regimes across the Arab world have mastered the cynical art of using anti-Israel sentiment to divert public attention from pressing domestic issues. This is not a new phenomenon; it has served as a central political instrument for various governments, a convenient and effective way to unify the populace against an external enemy while internal problems fester.
From economic stagnation and institutional corruption to a lack of basic freedoms, the list of internal failings is long, and the scapegoat is always the same.
Prominent examples of this model are evident in the rhetoric of several key figures. Gamal Abdel Nasser used anti-Israel sentiment to divert attention from Egypt’s debt. Syria’s Hafez al-Assad disguised human rights violations and suppressed internal dissent through his regime’s hostility toward Israel. Iraq’s Saddam Hussein exploited the conflict with Israel to present himself as a pan-Arab hero.
Even King Hussein of Jordan adopted anti-Israel rhetoric while suppressing Palestinian organizations within his own country. In each case, the focus on Israel as a monolithic villain provided a powerful distraction – a simple narrative that glossed over complex political failures and prevented citizens from focusing on the failings of their own leadership.
Growing parallel between Europe and the Arab world
Today, a troubling parallel has emerged in Europe. As the continent grapples with its own internal crises, from economic woes and social tensions to a growing crisis of identity and governance, it appears to have adopted a similar model. Faced with a disillusioned and fractured populace, many European leaders and institutions have found a convenient, if morally dubious, parallel in the Arab playbook.
They have increasingly turned to anti-Israel rhetoric to divert attention from their own domestic failures, such as the cost-of-living crisis, social inequality, and failed economic and social integration policies.
This strong opposition to Israel allows struggling politicians to present themselves as “defenders of justice” and evade public criticism of their political conduct. The anti-Israel activism seen on European campuses and in political discourse, particularly in Spain, France, and Sweden, often mirrors the propaganda tactics long used in the Middle East, albeit with different nuances.
In France, for instance, widespread protests over pension reform and social inequality often morphed into anti-Israel demonstrations, allowing politicians to channel public anger away from domestic policy failures.
The double standard is a clear indicator that the issue is not purely a humanitarian concern, but rather a political one. European nations have the economic and diplomatic clout to exert pressure on various geopolitical players, yet most of the time their preferred method of engagement is to single out Israel for condemnation.
Pressuring Egypt to take in refugees
If European leaders were truly committed to ending the war and alleviating suffering, they would be using their leverage in a far more creative and effective manner. Their focus would not be solely on pressuring Israel, but on engaging with all parties involved, most notably Egypt. Cairo holds significant keys to a potential solution, both for the humanitarian crisis and for a path to ending the conflict.
Of course, the fastest way to end the war is one of two options: either Israel withdraws from Gaza, or Hamas is removed from the Strip. However, the facts on the ground have fundamentally shifted since Hamas’s October 7 attacks. The reality in Gaza is not what it was before the war.
The scale of destruction is immense, and the possibility of immediate reconstruction, the establishment of a viable government, and a return to a stable society in the short term is a distant dream. Given Israel’s commitment to retrieving the hostages and its refusal to share a border with a ruling Hamas, and given Hamas’s refusal to disarm, go into exile, or release the captives, a new approach is desperately needed.
Opening Egypt’s gates to the masses of Gazans seeking safe haven, even temporarily – a measure similar to what any country sharing a border with a war zone has done – could be the most realistic and immediate solution.
This would not only dramatically reduce the humanitarian crisis and ease the burden on war-displaced civilians, but also accelerate the defeat of Hamas, which uses the civilian population as the largest human shield in history and benefits from the international outcry over their suffering.
The argument that a mass exodus of refugees into Egypt would destabilize the Sisi government is often accepted without question by many in the international community. Yet, when Israel raises concerns about its own political stability being threatened by internal security challenges, the argument is often dismissed as illegitimate or a cynical justification for prolonged conflict. This suggests that while Egypt’s concerns are given immediate credence, Israel’s similar, or arguably more acute, challenges are not.
However, this risk to Sisi’s regime can be significantly mitigated. Western and regional support could create a robust safety net for the Egyptian government. Financial aid, logistical support, and political backing from Western nations, combined with endorsements from other key regional players, would create a comprehensive protective framework, making the decision to accept refugees far less perilous for Cairo.
If European leaders truly wanted a genuine solution to the Gaza conflict and to provide immediate relief, they would not be merely fixating on anti-Israel rhetoric as a political diversion. Instead, they would be directing their calls for action toward the one actor who can make an immediate and dramatic difference. They would be demanding that President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi act, and they would send a clear message to him:
President Sisi, if you seek peace, if you seek to alleviate the suffering in Gaza and the Middle East, if you seek to ease the humanitarian crisis: Come here to this gate! Mr. Sisi, open this gate! To borrow the cry of then-US president Ronald Reagan to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev: “Mr. Sisi, tear down this wall!”
The writer is a PhD candidate in the Department of Middle East Studies at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev and a member of the researchers forum of the Elyashar Center at the Ben-Zvi Institute.