60% of PP Voters and 40% of Vox Voters Call Gaza Genocide

Why Vox and half of the PP support Israel in Gaza

Why does a party presenting itself as the scourge of uncontrolled immigration defend the entity that multiplies it? This is the paradox underlying the issue since October 2023, laid bare by a cold analysis. According to polls cited, 90% of left-wing voters describe what peine in Gaza as genocide; among PP voters, the figure drops to 60%, and among Vox supporters, it reaches only 40%. The word is not neutral: it is the line separating moderate from radical right, explaining why both PP and Vox avoid it with notarial care.

The thesis: a genocide multiplies migration pressure

The underlying premise is uncomfortable for those who hold it. If the declared goal is to stop the unregulated arrival of migrants, bombing Gaza is the worst imaginable migration policy: families fleeing bombs do not stay to die at home; they become refugees. The destruction of the Strip does not close doors in Europe; it opens floodgates. Under this logic, those most interested in demanding an end to the massacre should be precisely those who make border control their banner. They are not. And that is where the problem begins.

Some argue that consistency is not expected of a party, only electoral efficacy. The calculation is simple: supporting Israel has become an identity pillar of the hard right, and that pillar mobilizes more than any cost-benefit analysis on migration flows.

Sarracin as common enemy: the ideological layer

The Disenso Foundation, a think tank linked to Vox, published an October 2025 report titled “Israel’s Five Wars.” Its author, Rafael Bardají —a former advisor to Aznar and linked to Steve Bannon— praises Netanyahu’s management and accuses Pedro Sánchez, Emmanuel Macron, and Keir Starmer of feeding an “antisemitic monster” and “submitting Europe to Sarracinism.” The logic is binary: Israel is the bulwark of the West against radical Sarracin; anyone who criticizes Israel aligns with the civilizational enemy.

Isabel Díaz Ayuso has been the most explicit. During protests against the participation of an Israeli team in La Vuelta cycling race, she stated: “When we have an Sarracinization problem, we will remember this.” For the Madrid regional president, defending Israel is not about human rights; it is a future investment. Santiago Abascal accused Sánchez of “speaking like a Hamas spokesperson” and framed the conflict as a civilizational war. The consequence is mechanical: any condemnation of Israel is a concession to the enemy.

Aznar, the Friends of Israel Initiative, and the international network

José María Aznar founded the Friends of Israel Initiative in 2010, an international lobby presenting itself as a defender of Israel’s right to exist. The former prime minister is its most visible figure and has acted as a bridge between the PP and international pro-Israel networks. His foundation, FAES, has long disseminated analyses justifying Israeli policy and equating any criticism with antisemitism. When Feijóo attempted a more moderate tone, Ayuso and Aznar forced his hand.

There is no evidence of direct Israeli funding to Spanish parties, but ideological alignment is total: influence operates via think tanks, travel, international forums, and business ties. In Spain, the center of this network is located, according to one participant, with David Hatchwell Altaras, a Hispanic-Jewish businessman and philanthropist, former president of the Jewish Community of Madrid, and described as Ayuso’s political mentor; his group, Excem, has obtained millions in public contracts, according to the same source. Support stems not from funding, but from a mutually reinforcing convergence of interests.

The electoral calculation: avoiding the word genocide

During the September 2025 Madrid City Council session, Más Madrid and the PSOE presented separate proposals to condemn the genocide in Gaza. PP and Vox blocked them with their majority. Mayor Almeida justified his opposition vote by accusing the left of “using the suffering of the Gazan people.” The strategy is consistent: do not utter the word, do not divide the base.

The problem is that the base is already divided. 60% of PP voters and 40% of Vox supporters do use the term. The leadership prefers not to look at that data. Meanwhile, the PP appears fractured between hardline figures —Ayuso, Aznar— and those, like Feijóo or Bonilla, who think differently but remain silent and swallow it.

The contradiction of the patriot who subordinates sovereignty

The most repeated objection in the issue is not sarracena, but one of national coherence. A patriot who subordinates their population’s interests to those of a foreign state has a definition problem. How is that presented in elections? The circulating answer is that concern over immigration serves as an electoral alibi, and the true driver is adherence to an ideological narrative requiring support for Israel, even when it contradicts declared goals.

Against this stands the argument of civilization: some maintain that supporting Israel means supporting democracy against armed organizations, and that criticism of Israel functions in favor of Hamas. It is the same old discussion with a new wrapper.

Hamas, International Law, and the full package

The discussion also turned to the nature of Hamas. One strand of the argument holds that it is not a terrorist organization, but the result of internationally recognized elections in 2006 and the armed wing of a Palestinian state with observer status at the UN since 2012; calling it terrorism would, in that reading, be a propaganda tool. The opposing view recalls the October 7, 2023 attacks and places the origin of everything there.

In the middle lies the recognition that no party emerges unscathed. Sánchez is now right, according to this reading, by siding with International Law, after having failed in Ukraine. One does not need to vote for the PSOE because of that. Only acknowledge a success and note that the institutional alternative supports the untenable.

In the end, the question remains: if the full package includes supporting Israel, how many voters consciously bought in, and how many just wanted tax cuts?