Israel and Hamas at war | A gradient of reactions around the world

With few exceptions, the international community has unanimously condemned Hamas’s attack on Israel. But not with the same fervor. Overview.

The Western bloc: unwavering support for Israel

Unsurprisingly, Western countries strongly condemned Hamas’ attack on Israel. Even if they say they recognize the “legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people”, the United States, France, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom have notably presented themselves as “allies and friends of the State of Israel.” On Tuesday, the European Union nevertheless confirmed that it was maintaining its financial aid to the Palestinians, i.e. 1.2 billion euros until 2024.

Iran: unwavering support for Hamas

Iran was one of the first countries to welcome the “proud operation” launched by Hamas, a movement that Tehran has openly defended for many years even though their relations have had ups and downs. The country of the mullahs, however, denies having played a role in this attack, contrary to what was suggested this week by the Wall Street Journal.

Gulf countries: a diversity of points of view

The offensive launched by Hamas provoked a surge of solidarity in the Arab streets, with the hashtag “Al-Aqsa flood” (named after this unprecedented attack) igniting social networks.

But the official reactions are much more diverse.

Following the normalization of its relations with Israel (Abraham Accords, 2020), the United Arab Emirates said it was “dismayed” by the taking of Israeli hostages, a position with which Bahrain aligned itself. Caught between a rock and a hard place, the two countries, however, called for an intensification of diplomatic efforts to “avoid a wider confrontation”.

“It’s not easy to justify this normalization at a time when Arab TV is showing all the damage and victims in the Gaza Strip,” explains Francesco Cavatorta, professor of political science at Laval University. At the same time, we should not expect these countries to become pro-Palestinian. Their bet, I imagine, is to wait until this outbreak of violence ends so that we can return to the situation before. »

For its part, Saudi Arabia accuses “the Israeli occupying forces” of being at the origin of “an explosive situation”. This unambiguous statement comes as Riyadh and Tel Aviv had just begun a rapprochement. This normalization process is now “clearly called into question”, believes Benjamin Toubol, professor of political science at Laval University. According to the latter, it is even “possible” that the Hamas attack was intended to “derail” the negotiations and “perhaps scare the Gulf countries”.

Qatar also blames Israel, a predictable position considering that it has hosted Hamas leader in exile, Ismael Haniyeh, since 2016.

Moscow and Beijing: timely neutrality

They denounce the violence, advocate the two-state solution, but do not condemn Hamas. Behind their apparent neutrality, Moscow and Beijing above all hope to take advantage of the situation.

For Vladimir Putin, Saturday’s carnage is above all the result of “the failure of United States policy in the Middle East.” During a meeting in Moscow on Tuesday with Iraqi Prime Minister Mohamed Shia al-Soudani, the Russian president accused Washington of having “monopolized” the settlement of the conflict without worrying about “finding compromises acceptable to the two parts “.

For Maria Popova, professor of political science at McGill University, the situation is also a boon for Moscow, since it forces the United States to invest on a new front. “Russia did not take a clear side,” explains M.^me Popova. But for her, this new development is welcome, because it distracts global attention from her invasion of Ukraine. It also contributes to the Kremlin’s narrative of multipolarity and world destabilization, even if this destabilization is largely their fault. »

In China, we also avoid taking a position. We say we are “deeply concerned by the escalation of tension”, without targeting anyone responsible. While in China, American Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer said he was “very disappointed” that Beijing did not condemn the Hamas attack in a more affirmative manner.

For Jeremy Paltiel, China expert at Carleton University in Ottawa, this neutrality was nevertheless predictable. “I think China wants to position itself on the side of the Global South against Western hegemony,” he summarizes.

Beijing, which has just facilitated the restoration of diplomatic relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia, could also want to play a mediating role in the conflict, hence its restraint. An unrealistic ambition, believes Mr. Paltiel. “Israeli-Palestinian peace is far beyond their means and they will not be able to replace the United States in this area, even if they harbor this hope. »

With Agence France-Presse