The Israeli Minister of Diaspora Affairs and Fight against Anti-Semitism, Amichai Chikli, affirms that the President of the Government, Pedro Sánchez, is “one of the worst” political leaders in the world and even considers him “responsible” for there being “more victims” in the Gaza Strip and the release of the hostages is delayed, due to initiatives such as recognizing the Palestinian State in the short term, a “prize” for terrorism in his opinion.
Chikli, one of the international leaders invited this weekend to the ‘Europa Viva 24’ political event organized by Vox in Madrid, affirms in an interview with Europa Press that “leaders like Sánchez make the war (in the Gaza Strip) last. more”, because “it encourages Hamas to continue fighting and gives “hope” to other actors in the area such as Hezbollah or Iran.
The minister insists that the Spanish president has “a broken moral compass” and calls for greater solidarity with Israel in the face of “the worst massacres against Jews since the Holocaust,” in reference to the attacks perpetrated on October 7. Some 1,200 people were killed and 240 kidnapped in these attacks, which triggered a military operation in Gaza that totals more than 35,000, according to data from the Strip’s Ministry of Health, controlled by Hamas.
The list of reproaches includes an alleged lack of forcefulness in condemning the Iranian attack in April and the press conference offered by Sánchez on the Egyptian side of the Rafah crossing in November and which, according to Chikli, was “against Israel.” He aspired, in his opinion, to “take advantage” of the release of the hostages, to the point that he does not even consider that Sánchez has “visited” Israel, because “it is not enough to just be there physically.”
In fact, he considers that his “friend” Santiago Abascal was “the only leader of a (Spanish) party who visited the State of Israel after October 7” and provided a “clear message of support.” To the question of whether Abascal would in fact be a better president than Sánchez, he answers: ”That is very easy.”
The Israeli minister warns that talking about now recognizing Palestine implies that “a State can be born through terrorism and violence” – it goes against the potential Palestinian “moderate forces”, he points out – and urges Sánchez to “learn more “to, for example, be clear that the Islamist ideology of Hamas is equivalent to the “jihad” that the 3/11 terrorists also defended.
Likewise, he clarifies that it cannot be argued in this case that “one is not pro-Hamas but pro-Palestinian Authority,” because the leaders of this administration, which is politically responsible for the West Bank, have not condemned the attacks and have even gone so far as to describe it as “an “natural response” to occupation.
”We cannot have peace with an entity that glorifies jihad, the massacre of innocent people. We cannot sign peace with an entity that pays money for every terrorist “killed by Israeli forces,” he says, and then points out that “there must be a profound change” before any possible rapprochement. He recalls the lack of progress after the Oslo Accords: ”You can’t take the beast and turn it into a prince.”
He even believes that “there is already a two-state solution,” understanding as such the peace agreement signed between Israel and Jordan, where “more than 70 percent of the population is Palestinian” by virtue of colonial considerations derived from the British Mandate, and It calls into question the claim to the West Bank, because “Israelis are the aboriginals of Judea.”
“I’m not aware of any Palestinian archaeological enclave in Judea and Samaria,” he says ironically, using the biblical name of the West Bank.
Chikli openly defends the Israeli offensive in Gaza and assumes that there will be a large-scale assault on Rafah, where more than a million Gazans are gathered, most of them displaced from another area of ??the Strip. ”There are no big differences between Rafah and Khan Yunis. It is another city in which there are many terrorists,” he argues.
Thus, it emphasizes that attacks are also perpetrated against Israeli targets from Rafah and that the area has been an entry point for war material for Hamas for years. However, he does not believe that it is so relevant in terms of humanitarian aid, despite warnings from organizations such as the UN, because there are other entry points – all of them controlled by Israel.
The minister therefore does not understand mobilizations such as those called in recent weeks in universities around the world, including in Spain. He sees them “without a doubt” as an example of “anti-Semitism”, understanding as such the “demonization” of Israel and the use of terms such as “genocide”.
He alleges that, when talking about the Israeli offensive in the Strip, “a double standard” is applied, because he considers that Israel is applying in Gaza “the same practices” that the international coalitions against the Islamic State or Al-Qaeda once resorted to. Qaeda and acts in a “surgical” manner.
It is “the nature of the enemy” that leads him to take advantage of “operating in densely populated areas, of using schools” and hospitals,” he adds. The minister warns that a hospital in Gaza “is not a hospital like those in Madrid,” but can serve as a stronghold for Hamas, which also controls an extensive network of underground tunnels.
“It is very, very difficult for there to be a situation in which citizens are not affected, but not a single attack by Israel has targeted civilians from the beginning,” he says, defending in this area the work to “evacuate” the population of the areas where operations are going to be carried out, such as Rafah.
The future of the government coalition is beyond any doubt for the Israeli minister, since he considers that the bloc currently led by Benjamin Netanyahu is “solid” although at a certain moment it does not have the support of the opposition Benny Gantz, integrated into the war cabinet after the October attacks.
He rules out holding early elections, since “it would not be good for Israel to have elections in the middle of a war.” He hopes, however, that “the war ends as soon as possible,” without setting deadlines.
