Hebrew media outlets have begun spotlighting what they describe as Israel’s ongoing failure to craft a coherent narrative about its war on Gaza, especially when compared to what they label a “successful” international response to Israeli aggression against Iran.
In an article published by the Hebrew-language outlet Walla News, Israeli analyst Shay Gal remarked that the recent military strikes on Iran allowed Israel to transform, “in just one week, from a deteriorating brand due to the drawn-out Gaza war, to a state waging a globally supported battle against a hostile regime.”
Gal noted that while the confrontation with Iran was presented as a strategic victory, it also cast a harsh light on the communication disaster surrounding Israel’s campaign in Gaza. The contrast, he argued, was not about military effectiveness or moral standing, but rather about public relations, messaging, and crisis communication.
“Within a matter of days,” Gal wrote, “Tel Aviv presented two contradictory faces: one bold and decisive in its strike on Iran, and the other hesitant and faltering in Gaza—despite Hamas carrying out the October 7 attack, which initially offered Israel a perfect narrative entry point for international media.”
But over a year and a half into the war, he noted, Israel’s Gaza narrative has collapsed. According to Gal, the government failed to manage the media crisis, never defined a clear or sustainable communication strategy, and continued to repeat the vague and unachievable slogan of “destroying Hamas.”
As graphic images of slain Palestinian children outside hospitals began circulating globally, Israel’s messaging evaporated. The language used in international broadcasts wavered between embarrassment, denial, and blaming Hamas, which only fueled skepticism. Global news agencies—CNN, BBC, Le Monde, Der Spiegel—increasingly portrayed Gaza as a war against civilians, casting Israel as the unrestrained aggressor.
One example highlighted by Gal was the BBC’s refusal to label Hamas as a “terrorist” group, indicating that Israel failed to impose its core narrative on global discourse. But he contends that the root of this failure runs deeper: Israel’s leaders, he says, were afraid to tell the world an uncomfortable truth—that there is no quick or clean solution to Gaza.
Instead of offering a strategic message, Tel Aviv opted for tactical stammering, and in the process, its moral credibility crumbled on the world stage.
Then came the turning point: the overnight attack on Iran. Gal recounted how 200 Israeli warplanes struck nuclear facilities and IRGC sites, and within hours, Israel seized control of the global narrative. The world, he said, was shocked—and Israel used that shock to gain sympathy.
This time, Gal claimed, Israel offered a “simple and powerful” story the world could accept: Iran’s nuclear ambitions pose an existential threat, and we acted because we had no other choice.
Even major Western media outlets, Gal noted, couldn’t ignore the clarity of Israel’s narrative. Criticism shifted away from Israeli aggression and toward the so-called “Iranian threat.” Even The Guardian, typically harsh in its reporting on Gaza, cautiously acknowledged the seriousness of Iran’s nuclear program.
By portraying Iran as a global danger, Israel temporarily secured favorable standing in international perception, Gal claimed.
But the Israeli analyst then posed a critical question: Why didn’t Tel Aviv achieve this same narrative dominance in Gaza? Why was it unwilling to say what needed to be said?
He suggested that admitting Gaza is a long-term strategic problem—not merely a militant nuisance—would require bold leadership ready to face a hard truth: that there is no ideal, moral, or fast solution, and that any decision to continue the war is a deeply political and internal one.
Gal concluded that Israel’s fear of confronting this reality turned Gaza into a public relations disaster. In contrast, the Iran operation became a model of strategic communication.
“The fear of telling the truth made Israel a liability in the global media,” he wrote.
“Gaza has become a symbol of moral failure, while Iran represents an exceptional strategic success. The world will judge Tel Aviv through these two lenses: In Iran, it was focused and bold. In Gaza, it was fearful and confused. And this is more than a lesson in crisis management—it’s a lesson in leadership. And we in Gaza paid the ultimate price for Israel’s refusal to tell an uncomfortable story.”
One Ummah. One platform. One mission.
Your support keeps it alive.
Click here to Donate & Fund your Islamic Independent Platform
