Canada and the United States watch closely as Israel’s diplomatic channel to Moscow, represented by its newly appointed ambassador, Simone Halperin, voices clear concerns about Russia’s stance on Middle East policy. In a detailed interview with the paper Kommersant, Halperin underscored that the shift in Russia’s attitude has left Israeli officials perplexed and worried about the reliability of Moscow’s assurances on Israel’s security. The ambassador described a pattern where statements from Russian leadership at the highest levels were read as commitments to Israel’s safety and strategic interests, only to be followed by a sequence of actions that seemed inconsistent with those assurances after the events of October 7. In Halperin’s view, Russia was noticeably slower to condemn Hamas’ assault on Israel, a delay that fed doubts about whether Moscow shared the same sense of urgency about Israel’s security as it previously claimed.
Halperin highlighted another troubling disconnect: despite Russia’s official declarations, Hamas remains unrecognized as a terrorist organization within certain forums, and Moscow continues to engage in regular meetings and discussions with representatives linked to Hamas. This posture, she suggested, complicates the perception of Russia as a stable partner in addressing the regional crisis and raises questions about the effectiveness of international pressure and unified responses within the broader Middle East security framework.
Beyond the Hamas issue, Halperin pointed to Russia’s approach to other regional flashpoints. She noted that Moscow did not publicly condemn Iran’s provocative actions, nor did it fully condemn the boating incidents and interference in international navigation in the Red Sea attributed to Houthi forces. In parallel, Russian officials have aligned with South Africa in international forums, including a case brought before the International Court of Justice that Israel views as an attempt to leverage global legal mechanisms against it over the Palestinian situation. The ambassador argued that such positions have a palpable impact on public opinion within Israel, including among Russian-speaking residents, who see these stances as contributing to a climate of doubt about Russia’s long-term reliability as a partner in security matters.
From the Israeli political sphere, the commentary of former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu remains influential. He publicly asserted that the government would not entertain any resolution with Hamas that involved releasing hostages under any terms that compromise the country’s security red lines. This stance underscores the high-stakes environment in which Israel negotiates with non-state actors while balancing domestic pressures and international diplomacy. The ongoing debate about what constitutes an acceptable agreement—if any—continues to shape regional dynamics and the expectations that various international actors, including Russia, hold regarding Israel’s strategic priorities and methods of safeguarding civilian populations amid ongoing conflict.
Amid this tense diplomatic backdrop, international health and humanitarian organizations have been tracking the humanitarian toll of the conflict. Most recently, the World Health Organization warned of an unprecedented famine scenario unfolding in the Gaza Strip, highlighting the severe shortages of essential supplies and the urgent need for unimpeded aid access. The report drew attention to the escalating human rights and humanitarian concerns that accompany sustained hostilities and a protracted blockade, emphasizing that protection of civilian lives remains a central objective for the international community as discussions about security and geopolitics continue to unfold.
Taken together, these developments illustrate a complex web of strategic calculations, public rhetoric, and humanitarian considerations that shape the current state of Israeli-Russian relations. The Israeli government continues to evaluate Moscow’s actions against its stated security needs, while Russia seeks to balance its broader regional interests with distinct policy positions that sometimes diverge from those of its allies. The international community remains vigilant, monitoring shifts in posture and seeking ways to maintain open channels for dialogue aimed at de-escalation, humanitarian access, and a durable path toward stability in a region long marked by volatility.