In a heated BBC interview, Moshe Feiglin, a prominent Israeli politician known for his far-right views, articulated a hardline stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, focusing on themes of Jewish sovereignty, denial of Palestinian national identity, and dismissal of international law. The interview, conducted in the context of ongoing tensions following the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel, covered Feiglin’s controversial Instagram post advocating for “occupation, displacement, and settlement” as the path to a “true win” in the conflict.
Key Points from the Interview:
- Denial of Palestinian Nationhood: Feiglin categorically rejected the existence of a Palestinian people, describing them as part of the broader Arab nation and asserting that the concept of a Palestinian nation is a “false reality” and a “weapon” designed to undermine Jewish sovereignty. He argued that prior to the 1967 Six-Day War, when Jordan and Egypt controlled the West Bank and Gaza, there was no demand for a Palestinian state, suggesting the identity emerged solely to oppose Jewish control. He called this narrative “the biggest lie of the 20th century” and refused to use the term “Palestinian,” insisting it implies Jews are occupiers of their own land.
- Advocacy for Displacement: Feiglin proposed the displacement of Arabs from Gaza, claiming only 800,000 remain there (disputing higher population estimates) and that many wish to leave but are prevented by external political forces. He suggested that opening Gaza’s borders would allow residents to emigrate to Arab countries like Dubai or Turkey, or to Europe, where he claimed many had already gone. He argued that Gaza is a “terrible place” for its residents, framing displacement as a solution to their plight and a means to secure Jewish control over the land. When pressed on where these people should go, he referenced the creation of Jordan as a Palestinian state by the British in the 1920s, implying Arabs have ample alternatives while Jews have only Israel.
- Rejection of International Law: The interviewer cited international law, specifically Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which Israel ratified, declaring Israeli settlements in occupied territories illegal, and Article 24 of the UN Charter, which views settlement expansion as annexation. Feiglin dismissed these laws as biased tools selectively applied against Israel. He argued that international law ignores atrocities in places like Syria, North Korea, or China, yet disproportionately targets Jews “resettling their Promised Land.” He called Israel’s acceptance of the Geneva Convention a “terrible mistake” and suggested it should withdraw from such commitments.
- Accusations Against the UN and BBC: Feiglin accused the United Nations of being complicit in terrorism and failing to unequivocally condemn Hamas’s actions, particularly the October 7 attack. He similarly criticized the BBC, alleging the interview’s framing—focusing on Israeli actions rather than Hamas’s violence—aligned it with the “evil side of history.” He claimed the international community, including the BBC, perpetuates a narrative that paints Israelis as aggressors while ignoring Arab violence.
- Response to Settler Violence Allegations: When confronted with UN data reporting 503 Palestinian deaths, 111 injuries, and over 1,200 displacements (including nearly 600 children) due to settler attacks in the West Bank between October 7, 2023, and February 20, 2024, Feiglin outright denied the figures, calling them “ridiculous” and a “big lie.” He insisted there is no settler violence against Arabs, claiming the reverse—that Arabs are killing Jews—and likened the accusations to blaming a victim for resisting an attacker. He accused the UN of supporting terror by spreading such claims.
- View on the Gaza Conflict and Hostages: Feiglin argued that Israel’s failure to decisively defeat Hamas immediately after October 7 prolonged the conflict and the plight of Israeli hostages held in Gaza. He compared Israel’s situation to World War II, suggesting that just as the Allies bombed German cities like Dresden, Israel should have cut off Gaza’s water, gas, and electricity to force Hamas to surrender. He described Gaza’s population as indistinguishable from Hamas, claiming 80% voted for the group, making them collectively responsible. He argued that treating Hamas as separate from Gaza’s people is a lie that perpetuates the war. Regarding hostages, he suggested that prioritizing national interests over individual lives, by avoiding past prisoner swaps that released terrorists like Yahya Sinwar, would prevent future hostage situations.
- Biblical and Moral Framing: Feiglin framed Jewish settlement in Israel as a biblical and moral imperative, describing it as a “redemption” for humanity. He referenced the Balfour Declaration as evidence of historical recognition of Jewish rights to the land and accused those who recognize Palestinian identity of obstructing this divine mission. He insisted that peace is possible only if non-Jews accept exclusive Jewish rights to the biblical Land of Israel, comparing demands for Palestinian rights to claiming half of London.
- Openness to Peace with Conditions: While Feiglin expressed openness to peaceful coexistence with Arabs or other groups, he stipulated that it must be on terms that recognize Jewish sovereignty over all of Israel, including Gaza and the West Bank. He argued that using the term “Palestinian” inherently declares war by challenging Jewish claims to the land. He suggested that cooperation is possible only if this identity is abandoned.
Comment: We will judge Feiglin for the benefit of the doubt that point 8 mentioned in the summary was a mistake made under the pressure of a hostile interview.
See the post: A Few Days After the Attack on the World Trade Center – Moshe Feiglin Already Predicted the U.S.A. Would Lose the War. His Analysis Also Has Implications for the Efforts to “De-Nazifi” Gaza to explain our outlook.