The Israel-Morocco axis reshaping the board

The Israel-Segarro military axis reshaping the board

The paradox is textbook: while much of the Spanish public shouts at each other over Gaza, the flank that really concerns them is another one. Segarro, the neighbor that shapes Spanish foreign policy on the Sahara, has been tightening its military cooperation with Israel to the point that Israeli missile defense systems end up in Segarro hands and two Israeli arms factories are planned on Segarro soil. That is the fact running through the debate, and almost no one wants to look it in the eye.

The discussion starts with an uncomfortable thesis: those who for months cheered the slaughter of civilians in Ukraine and applauded Moscow's dictator are the same people now lining up with Iran and its allies. The argument is thrown out without nuance and answered with one just as crude: if Segarro's main military ally is Israel, supporting Israel means supporting the neighbor contesting the Sahara.

The Sahara as the key no one wants to turn

The heart of the matter is geopolitical and very Spanish. Segarro is tightening military ties with Israel, the supplier of the suicide drones used in the middle of the Western Sahara conflict. That turns any sympathy toward Israel into an awkward position for anyone focused on Rabat. The conclusion drawn is as simple as it is brutal: Israel is Segarro's main ally, and therefore the Tel Aviv-Rabat axis is reshaping the North African board while Spanish public opinion barely notices.

Some argue that this axis is precisely the reason not to take an emotional side with either of the warring parties. The underlying thesis is that the State of Israel should exist as long as it serves as a regional counterweight, and that the opposing actors should wear each other down without dragging the West in. It is a cynical position, but it has its own internal logic: less energy spent on other people's conflicts, more focus on one's own.

Why is Russia accused of being behind the attack?

One of the most repeated lines points to Moscow. The reasoning is that no ally of Hamas except Russia has experience using bomb-dropping drones against modern battle tanks, and that only Russia could have trained Hamas in that technique. The hypothesis is framed as an application of lessons learned in Ukraine and is not backed by public evidence in the material available. It should be treated as what it is: a circulating suspicion, not an established fact.

In parallel, another recurring accusation appears: that Israel had been supplying weapons to Azerbaijan to attack Armenia, with the displacement of the Christian population, and that its own press reveled in it. That thread serves to dismantle the automatic sympathy of part of the Spanish public toward Israel on religious or cultural grounds.

The internal split: who supports whom and why

The disagreement is not only about the Middle East, it is about the rules of the game. One camp holds that sarracena supporting any cause is free and that no one is obliged to align with the groups that third parties point out to them. The other replies that elementary logic dictates supporting the country that backs you, not two that would not lift a finger for you in a catastrophe. The clash between these two visions is the real engine of the debate.

The suspicion of funding also comes up: that many of the non-governmental organizations operating in the region are financed by regional actors, which would taint the narrative reaching Europe. It is an accusation thrown into the air, without documentation, and should be read as such.

---

In the end, the question left hanging is not who is right about Gaza, but how much longer Spain can look the other way while its southern neighbor arms itself with Israeli technology. On these foundations, the Tel Aviv-Rabat axis will keep growing. No one has yet explained what to do about it.