• Emma Ashford

August 11, 2025, 6:00 AM View Comments ()

In July, French President Emmanuel Macron announced that France plans to recognize a Palestinian state—joining the ranks of more than 100 global states, mostly non-European, that have already done so. His decision was a clear shot across the bow to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over Israeli conduct in Gaza. The point was made even more blunt in the following days by the news that the United Kingdom also intends to recognize a Palestinian state if no progress is made toward a cease-fire before the United Nations General Assembly in September.

For France and the U.K., the choice to recognize a Palestinian state comes less from any sense that this mostly symbolic gesture will work, and more from the fact that it will increase the pressure on Netanyahu to change course. Yet these are only the headline developments of a period of several weeks in which it feels as if the tide of global public opinion and governmental action has swung from indecision and apathy toward Gaza, to a more open sense of popular disgust and a willingness to critique Israel. Even Bari Weiss’s Free Press, long a stalwart of pro-Israel journalism, published an article arguing that while there is no way to know if crimes against humanity are being committed in Gaza, the possibility exists.

In their own way, such efforts to preemptively absolve Israel’s citizens of things that are potentially being carried out in their name is an admission of how much the global debate has shifted: Even Israel’s most ardent Western supporters are increasingly worried about long-term damage to the country’s global image. It is clear that Israel’s reputation is suffering globally, even among the Western states that have long been its strongest supporters. In June, Israel’s net favorability in every major Western European state was more than 40 points underwater. In France, Germany, and the U.K., only about 15 percent of people polled believed that Israel’s campaign in Gaza was a proportional or reasonable response to Hamas’s attacks on Oct. 7, 2023. Even in the United States—the strongest bastion of unconditional support for Israel—new polls suggest that almost two-thirds of Americans disapprove of how Israel is handling the war in Gaza (albeit with a sizable partisan divide).

Whether this shift—and the ongoing decline of Israel’s reputation globally—will actually alter the Netanyahu government’s policy or do anything to improve the suffering in Gaza is unfortunately a much harder question to answer. But more significant than public opinion, which has been in decline for a very long time, may be the growing weight of governmental opprobrium. In addition to the U.K., France, and other states committing to recognizing a Palestinian state if a cease-fire is not achieved, there is the case of the German government. Just six months after declaring Israel’s existence to be an essential function of modern Germany, Chancellor Friedrich Merz announced that the country would halt arms exports to Israel. And the European Commission, though still resisting the full suspension of Israel’s association agreement with the European Union, has hardened its rhetoric and is discussing a partial suspension.

This all raises the question: Why now? After all, the carnage in Gaza has been going on for almost two years. There are a few factors we can point to that suggest why we are finally seeing this tipping point.

For one, the arguments against believing that atrocities are happening are becoming weaker. Hamas does still control some of the remaining civil society in the Gaza Strip, including the casualty figures produced by the Ministry of Health, but ample evidence now exists to support a high casualty rate in the territory. Some of these arguments increasingly bleed into semi-conspiracy theories about faked atrocities and photographers misleading the international press.

It would be ideal for international journalists to go into Gaza and find the facts for themselves; it is also an unavoidable truth that the Israeli government prevents this. Last week, it was reported that although Sky News was allowed to be present on a plane during aid drops into Gaza, it was forbidden from filming and told that future aid would be withheld if it did.

Even without this, however, it’s increasingly clear that the humanitarian situation in Gaza has become untenable. Doctors from international charities have reported children whose wounds suggest purposeful targeting and shortages of basic painkillers in hospitals. Humanitarian organizations like José Andrés’s World Central Kitchen have struggled to receive enough food due to Israeli blockades. It might be true that aid is being stolen and denied to the neediest—as some of Israel’s strongest backers argue—but this is not a reflection of some unique Palestinian inhumanity. It’s a reflection of desperation, now visible to the world.

Another reason for the shift in global opinion is that the Israeli government’s denials—along with ongoing violence from settlers against Palestinians in the West Bank and Jerusalem—have become increasingly brazen. Bezalel Smotrich, one of the Israeli government’s most extreme ministers, has repeatedly called for the annexation of Gaza and even the expulsion, through “voluntary migration,” of Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank. Another minister, Amichai Eliyahu, said that Israel has no responsibility to feed Palestinians, who he noted should be driven out from the territory. As respected international institutions such as the World Food Programme have shifted from talking about “suffering” to “starvation” and “acute famine,” such statements have only become harder to reconcile with reality.

A final component of this shift, though less important, is that the specter of campus protests and antisemitism has largely subsided in the United States. Many of the 2024 protests were well-intended, but the relatively extreme demands of many such movements—and visuals of disarray on campuses—were perceived negatively by many Americans. These protests dissipated partly because of the arrival of summer break, but they also withered further later on, under crackdowns from university administrations, police, and even direct pressure from the Trump administration.

The protests being gone has, ironically, made it easier for mainstream and conservative commentators in the United States to criticize Israel’s actions, because they no longer risk association with any views perceived to be extreme. It’s even allowing some people inside the Republican Party—including MAGA-associated figures like Tucker Carlson—the political space to openly question why the United States benefits from supporting Israel’s war.

The more important question is whether any of this really matters for ending the suffering in Gaza. There is certainly growing concern in Israel and among its supporters around the world about the decline of the country’s image. Israeli government officials and intellectuals increasingly oppose a full occupation of Gaza. In a recent poll, 74 percent of Israeli respondents said that they support a deal with Hamas that would free all the hostages in exchange for an end to the war. However, this has done little to change Netanyahu’s willingness to sustain the conflict and appease his extreme far-right coalition partners.

Netanyahu appears determined to proceed with a destructive occupation of Gaza that will do little to bring the hostages home or resolve Israel’s underlying security issues. Nor are the steps by the French and British toward political recognition of a Palestinian state likely to shift the needle in the absence of more substantial pressure on Israel.

The elephant in the room, of course, is the United States’ position—notably, that of Republicans. Democrats, though long conflicted about the Israel question, are increasingly open in their criticism, including a recent attempt in Congress to block further weapons sales to Israel. In contrast, conflict over Israel is only just emerging in the Republican Party. In early August, U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson visited the Western Wall in Jerusalem and said that his prayer was “that America will always stand with Israel.” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, meanwhile, decried the “genocide, humanitarian crisis, and starvation happening in Gaza.” The split within the GOP is difficult to categorize: Both Johnson and Greene have alluded to their evangelical faith while talking about Israel, for example, and both have been strong supporters of U.S. President Donald Trump. Thus far, it has been the most outspoken outsiders in the party who have shifted the most on Israel, but there is little order to this unruly reorganization.

Trump himself remains an enigma on Israel. He has openly mused about a U.S. role in rebuilding Gaza but has complained about Netanyahu’s willingness to drag the United States into Israeli messes. According to reports, Trump is not opposed to further Israeli occupation of Gaza, but he has also pushed Israel to permit more aid into the territory after photos of starving Palestinians were brought to his attention.

The biggest risk is the possibility that Trump will conclude that the United States must be involved in a concrete capacity to occupy and rebuild Gaza—potentially paying much of the cost for Israel’s destructive war in the process. Netanyahu has embraced this idea publicly in the past, though it isn’t clear if he currently supports it. Regardless, this would be a huge, unforced error for the United States—one that risks alienating half the world and embroiling the country in crimes against humanity.

A better approach would be to halt the supply of weapons and ammunition to Israel, place pressure on the Israeli government to permit more food and medical supplies into Gaza, and use U.S. influence to aggressively push for a peace deal. Right now, it seems like Trump is not willing to go that far. But as more of his MAGA base starts to question the U.S.-Israel relationship, the president may find that unlimited support for Israel is not as popular as he might have thought.