A coalition of delusional leaders and moral distorters are coming after Israel at the General Assembly

The opening of the United Nations General Assembly this month will feature, aside from all the usual solemn pageantry, a celebration of the organization’s 80th year, under a banner of sonorous ambition: “Better Together: 80 years and more for peace, development and human rights.”

But attention will be focused not on all that pompous ceremony but instead on the call by several influential nations, led by France, to recognize a Palestinian state. Denunciations of Hamas will no doubt be issued, perfunctory condemnations that soothe consciences without altering the stalemate. The larger question is what practical impact this move might have, and how Israel will respond — if indeed it has room to respond at all.

“The General Assembly will be another grand circus,” Israel’s UN ambassador Danny Danon tells Mishpacha. “What we will likely see, is that instead of focusing on bringing the hostages back and getting rid of Hamas, we will see a conference led by France and Saudi Arabia about the recognition of a Palestinian state. We think it’s detached from reality. It’s not constructive, it’s not helpful, but it’s easier for some leaders to come and make speeches and declarations than to deal with the real problem.”

Ambassador Danon is no stranger to this terrain. He is Israel’s first UN ambassador to be appointed to a second term, his first stint spanning the years 2015 to 2020.

“You’re going to see heads of state coming to the UN a day before the opening of the General Assembly, making speeches blaming Israel for everything,” he says. “Some of them will say they don’t want Hamas in charge in Gaza, but they don’t have an answer as to how to achieve it. So, basically, all the responsibility is on our shoulders.”

Ambassador Danon padded his pointed criticism with diplomatic restraint. That restraint was less evident in the words of Arsen Ostrovsky, a human-rights lawyer and chief executive of the International Legal Forum, an organization devoted to combating anti-Semitism and defending Israel in a range of international arenas, including the UN itself.

“It will be a spectacle on steroids, with every conceivable blood libel you can imagine,” Ostrovsky says. “There will be charges of genocide and starvation. Expect pictures of a manufactured famine, notwithstanding that Israel has facilitated over two million tons of aid into Gaza, while Hamas continues to siphon and exploit it. Expect anti-Semitic rants dressed up as human rights speeches. And above all, expect leaders seeking a 15-second viral clip and playing to their domestic audience, instead of dealing with reality — that Hamas continues to hold hostages captive and refuses to surrender.”

To Dina Rovner, legal advisor for the nongovernmental organization UN Watch, the anticipated condemnations of Israel come as no surprise.

“The UN’s bias against Israel is longstanding,” Rovner says. “In 2024, it passed 18 resolutions targeting Israel, compared to just seven covering the rest of the world — and none against repeat offenders like China, Cuba, or Turkey. This year will be no different. Resolutions will disproportionately condemn Israel, and UN committees will again push false accusations, including reports from Francesca Albanese, now under US sanctions, and the Pillay Commission of Inquiry, whose commissioners, fearing sanctions themselves, have already announced they will resign after presenting their findings.”

The Betrayal

After October 7, one might have assumed that Western leaders would rally behind Israel and would support every measure to keep such a calamity from recurring. Instead, the sympathy for Jewish victims lasted only a matter of days. And then, defying rationality, several global powers seized the opportunity to resurrect a long-buried subject: the creation of a Palestinian state.

At the end of July, French president Emmanuel Macron fired the opening salvo. Through social media, he announced, “True to its historic commitment to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, I have decided that France will recognize the State of Palestine.”

He was quickly followed by leaders in Australia, Canada, and Belgium. In London, Prime Minister Keir Starmer adopted a more characteristically British posture — less direct, carefully hedged, but his meaning was unmistakable. The United Kingdom, he said, would recognize a Palestinian state by September unless Israel took “substantive steps” to end its war in Gaza and committed itself to a genuine peace process.

Then on August 2, Ghazi Hamad, a senior figure in Hamas’s political bureau, granted an interview to Al Jazeera. He delivered a line that ought to have set off alarms in foreign ministries across the West, but instead merely confirmed what Israel had been warning: “The fruits of October 7 are what caused the entire world to open its eyes to the Palestinian issue.” In other words, the terrorists themselves were reading these moves for what they were: a prize bestowed on the perpetrators of the slaughter. Recognition of a Palestinian state, long dormant, was now being resuscitated as a direct consequence of the killings. And it will be codified, in some form, within days.

“What’s happening now at the UN is disgraceful and undermines its core mission — to prevent war and maintain international peace and security,” Dina Rovner tells Mishpacha. “After Hamas carried out the deadliest single-day massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, major democracies — including France, the UK, Australia, and Canada — are clamoring to reward the terrorist group. At best, this is a misguided attempt to end the war in Gaza, which Hamas launched on October 7. Unfortunately, these countries have fallen for Hamas propaganda falsely accusing Israel of genocide and intentional starvation — lies amplified by UN ‘experts’ like Francesca Albanese and agencies like UNRWA, whose political mandate to preserve the so-called ‘right of return’ aligns with Hamas. Even UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who should be showing leadership, has played a role in spreading these falsehoods.”

“These recognitions are entirely symbolic stunts,” says the International Legal Forum’s Arsen Ostrovsky. You can say the earth is flat a hundred times, that will still not make it real. Same with recognition of Palestinian state.”

Symbolic Impact

Ostrovsky points out that the Palestinians fall short of the legal criteria for statehood spelled out under international law. Primarily according to the Montevideo Convention of 1933, statehood requires a permanent population, defined territory, effective governance, and the capacity to enter into relations with other states. The Palestinians meet none of these criteria. Hamas are still the de-facto rulers in Gaza, while the Palestinian Authority under Mahmoud Abbas has not held an election in two decades. Final borders remain unsettled, despite the commitments made under Oslo. And the PA persists in its so-called “commitment to peace” by continuing the Pay-for-Slay policy, disbursing salaries as rewards to Palestinian terrorists. Thus far, not a single Western leader can explain how recognition of a Palestinian state at this moment would not simply cement Hamas’s grip on Gaza.”

And as US Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently observed, the instant France announced its recognition of a Palestinian state, Hamas walked away from the negotiating table, escalated its demands, and ceased discussions altogether.

“What incentive is there for Hamas to release the hostages and agree to a real ceasefire,” Ostrovsky asked, “when they know they can effectively sit back, reject all offers on the table, and still be rewarded with a state by the West?”

For all the furor it’s generating, most experts agreed on one thing: the recognition being urged by France and its allies would have little immediate effect. The gestures, however dramatic in the headlines, would not alter the facts on the ground.

“The resolution is not going to pass in the Security Council, because the US will veto it, so it’s not going to lead anywhere,” Ambassador Danon says. “But for us, it shows that some of those countries are not in a position to understand what happened on October 7, today, when we still have 48 hostages in the tunnels of Gaza, when Hamas is still in control. But it is not going to change anything on the ground.”

Nevertheless, the symbolic impact alone will be significant, warns Dina Rovner. “While largely symbolic — since international law requires defined borders and a unified government for statehood — these recognitions are a diplomatic win for the Palestinians,” she says. “They increase pressure on Israel, threaten its national security, and put Jewish communities worldwide at greater risk. They also send Hamas a dangerous message: that violence and terror can translate into political leverage, which undermines any prospects for peace.”

And Arsen Ostrovsky cautions that although Israelis have grown cynical about UN General Assembly’s “political theater,” Israel cannot afford to ignore it entirely. “As tempting as it would be, Israel cannot afford to disregard these forums altogether. They shape global opinion, public narratives, and diplomatic courses of action. But nor can Israel ever allow them to dictate its security. Israel must continue standing up for its rights, for the release of the hostages, and for exposing the hypocrisy. It must keep speaking the truth and rallying allies who still believe in democracy, law, and real peace.”

Expect Reciprocity

Since the first hints emerged that various nations were preparing to recognize a Palestinian state, the Netanyahu government has sharpened its rhetoric around annexing parts of the West Bank. For certain segments of Israel’s right, such language is hardly new. What was unusual, however, was the intervention of Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

“What you’re seeing with the West Bank and the annexation — that’s not a final thing,” Rubio said recently. “That’s something being discussed among some elements of Israeli politics. What I am going to tell you is it was wholly predictable. We told all these countries before they went out and they did this… There wasn’t going to be a Palestinian state, because that’s not the way a Palestinian state is going to happen.”

Ambassador Danny Danon stops short of mentioning annexation directly, but his words carry a clear warning about reciprocity.

“We have to be thankful for the US, for their involvement and cooperation,” he says. “We talk with representatives of countries to explain to them the situation. But I will tell you that we will focus on the facts, telling the countries that this declaration is not going to change anything on the ground. And if they really want to be helpful, they should help us finish the war. Those unilateral actions are not accepted, and they should expect unilateral actions coming from our side as well.”

Arsen Ostrovsky could afford to be more forthright. “The government of Israel has been consistent in saying that no UN resolution in New York or foreign diktat will shake its commitment to bringing the hostages home and defeating Hamas, to ensure that the horrors of October 7 can never be repeated,” he says. “In addition to reciprocal diplomatic measures against countries recognizing a Palestinian state, Israel can also take punitive measures against the Palestinian Authority, which has been spearheading these initiatives — such as withholding their tax revenue and security collaborations. You will also likely see some elements of the Israeli government calling for application of sovereignty in Judea and Samaria, as a response.”

True Friends

One of Israel’s most reliable allies, as the international tide for recognition of Palestine swells, has been the United States under President Donald Trump. The current support, Ambassador Danon emphasizes, is not merely symbolic.

“We have the full support of the White House, full cooperation,” Ambassador Danon says. “We work very closely with President Trump, Secretary Rubio, and the US team here at the UN.”

He makes a point of thanking Washington for blocking Palestinian Authority leaders from attending the Assembly. “We are grateful for the steps they took regarding the visas to the PA delegation. The message is very clear. It exposes the real face of the Palestinian Authority, that President Abbas and the entire government were not able to condemn October 7, even today, two years after. It’s shameful, and there is no place for people who cannot condemn terrorism. If you don’t condemn Hamas, you actually support them.”

Ostrovsky stresses the importance of a continuing coordinated effort between Washington and Jerusalem. “It will also be imperative that Israel continues to consult with the Trump Administration, to ensure that, in as much as possible, any major steps are done in consultation with the US and that the Americans continue to leverage their diplomatic and political weight, as they have against countries unilaterally recognizing a Palestinian state, and in revoking the visas of Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian leadership from attending the UNGA.”

Although the Trump administration stands alone in openly declaring its strong support of Israel, there are subtler signs of sympathy from other quarters. Diplomats, bound by the cautious scripts of their governments, sometimes reveal their sympathies in private conversations. “Many times we have discussions with friendly ambassadors and they share with me what’s going on behind the scenes,” Ambassador Danon explains. “Many of them show me their support.”

Ostrovsky is more bothered by the gap between private candor and public silence. “There are many who understand the truth but still lack the courage to say it on the record,” he says. “In private, many diplomats and leaders — including in the Arab world — admit that Israel is fighting a war every democracy would wage if subjected to the same barbarism. They can see the difference between good and evil. They see that Iran is continuing to be the terror puppet master, pulling the strings of its proxies in the Middle East. Many of these countries acknowledge that Israel is indeed doing the dirty work, fighting their battle. It would behoove more countries in the West to acknowledge the same, rather than continuing to reflexively castigate the Jewish state.”

The coming weeks will bring an unrelenting wave of that kind of reflexive castigation. The effect is suffocating, but, as Israelis often remind one another, no podium in New York can determine the destiny of the Jewish People.

“At the end of the day, Israel’s legitimacy does not flow from a UN vote,” Ostrovsky said. “It flows from over 3,000 years of history, international law, and our right to live as a Jewish state in our ancestral homeland.”

Even those Israelis far removed from religious practice almost inevitably draw connections to Jewish history. Danon, asked about the coming Jewish new year, offers words of determination couched in the cadences of tradition.

“The days when Jews were attacked with no response are over,” he says. “We showed our capabilities last year when we dismantled threats in Lebanon, in Tehran, in Syria, in Gaza. We’re in pain, but we are not broken. We are determined to accomplish the goals of the war — to bring back all the hostages, to eliminate Hamas. Now it’s almost a new year, so I’m sure that this coming year we will be able to finish the job and start to rebuild our society and our country.”

(Originally featured in Mishpacha, Issue 1078)