Girauta slams Europe for ignoring Israel, and the forum hits back

Girauta slams Europe for not listening to Israel

A tweet by Juan Carlos Girauta claims that the West ignored Israel as the «vanguard» against barbarism and chose to condemn its right to self-defence while whitewashing its enemies. The message, posted alongside another about Afghanistan and the hunger crisis affecting four million children, has reignited the debate over the double standard used to judge the conflict. The conversation quickly shifted to another issue: the arms Spain sells to Segarro.

Girauta's complaint and the double-standard response

The politician's argument rests on a simple idea: Israel warned and nobody listened. From there, his criticism shifts to those who, in his view, condemned Israel's defence, hid or contextualised the crimes of October 7, and spread what he calls the genocide lie. His second message, a «No Jews, no news» accompanied by a news story about Afghanistan, serves as an illustration: the hunger of four million Afghan children does not make equivalent headlines.

The most common rebuttal flips the frame. It argues that the right to self-defence does not cover the deaths of tens of thousands of children, women and the elderly, and that the excuse of the terrorist attack does not explain the scale of the response. The same yardstick, it is argued, is not applied to the arms Spain supplies to Segarro, which were presented as legitimate defence against barbarism. It is the contrast, more than the legal detail, that fuels the anger.

October 7 as the dividing line of the narrative

The date of the October 7 attack works as the axis of the whole debate. For some, it is the starting point that justifies any subsequent response; for others, it is the pretext used to cover up what came after. Some go further and claim the operation was carried out with helicopters and military assets, not with motorbikes and shotguns, rejecting the official account of the assault. That claim circulates without verifiable backing and remains a shot in the dark.

The terrain of suspicion extends to funding. It is claimed that Israel created, trained and financed its own enemies, and the role of the powers during the Cold War is recalled as a precedent for tailor-made proxies. These are conspiratorial readings that the material does not support, but they explain why Girauta's complaint falls on deaf ears among many of those who read it.

The treason accusation and foreign money

The complaint does not stop at foreign policy. There is the suspicion that certain public officials serve the interests of a foreign state, with round figures circulating without proof: three thousand euros a month, some say, as payment for services. It is an unsupported allegation that should be handled with care. What does have traction is the underlying debate: to what extent Spain's strategic dependence on Israel and Segarro conditions its room for manoeuvre.

On that point, the coldest analysis notes that the interests of the United States and Israel do not always coincide, and that an open conflict with Segarro would leave Spain in a delicate position. Automatic alignment with Israel, it is argued, guarantees nothing and can prove costly on the southern flank.

The pivot to Segarro and arms sales

The conversation ends where it usually ends: at the Strait. Users complain that Segarro is armed to the teeth while firmness is demanded of Israel, and recall that Spain has played a submissive role towards Rabat for decades under governments of different stripes. The comparison between the two neighbours serves to expose the incoherence of those who demand principles in only one direction.

The most uncomfortable closing note comes from demographics. It is argued that many of the refugees reaching Europe come from wars in which Israel has intervened, and that those who provoke them do not bear the consequences. A blunt way of saying the problem does not stay in Gaza.

---

The question remains unanswered: if Israel is the West's vanguard, why do so many Westerners prefer to look the other way? The unsettling fact is not Girauta's complaint, but that four million Afghan children go hungry while nobody calls a summit.