Israeli Report Alleges Hamas Links Behind Euro-Med NGO as Global Campaign Against Israel Intensifies

Israeli Report Alleges Hamas Links Behind Euro-Med NGO as Global Campaign Against Israel Intensifies

By: Jeff Gorman

In a development that is already reverberating across diplomatic, legal, and media spheres, Israel’s Ministry of Diaspora Affairs and Combating Antisemitism has released a detailed and sharply critical report alleging that the Geneva-based organization Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor operates with ties to Hamas and functions as a central node in a coordinated global campaign aimed at delegitimizing the State of Israel.

The report, published on May 13 and cited in a report on Friday by the Jewish News Syndicate (JNS) presents what Israeli officials describe as a comprehensive analysis of Euro-Med’s activities, leadership, and institutional footprint. It asserts that the organization, while formally registered in Switzerland as a human rights entity, is in practice deeply embedded in a network of advocacy, legal maneuvering, and media engagement that systematically promotes accusations against Israel on the international stage.

At the center of the report’s allegations is Ramy Abdu, the founder and chairman of Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor. According to the findings cited in the JNS report, Abdu was the subject of an Israeli administrative detention order issued in 2020 under the country’s Counter-Terrorism Law due to his alleged involvement with “IPalestine,” an organization designated by Israel as affiliated with Hamas. The ministry contends that this connection is not incidental but rather indicative of a broader pattern of ideological alignment and operational overlap.

The report’s language is unambiguous in its characterization of Euro-Med’s activities. It describes the organization as providing what it calls an “evidentiary infrastructure” for international legal actions against Israel, including South Africa’s case at the International Court of Justice in The Hague. According to the information provided in the JNS report, the ministry alleges that Euro-Med supplied materials and claims related to mass graves and damage to Gaza’s healthcare system—allegations that have become central to efforts to portray Israel as engaged in systematic violations of international law.

Beyond its legal engagements, the report outlines what it describes as a multi-layered strategy encompassing media campaigns, digital activism, and academic influence. Euro-Med, the ministry asserts, has played a prominent role in disseminating narratives accusing Israel of war crimes and genocide, with its findings cited in major international outlets such as The Guardian, CNN, and Al Jazeera, as well as in more than 400 academic publications.

JNS reported that Israeli officials view this breadth of influence as evidence of a sophisticated and coordinated effort to shape global perceptions. The ministry characterizes Euro-Med as a “multi-channel mechanism,” integrating legal advocacy, media outreach, and grassroots mobilization into a unified campaign designed to advance what it describes as an “anti-Israel and antisemitic narrative.”

Particularly striking within the report are the excerpts of public statements attributed to Abdu, which Israeli officials cite as further evidence of ideological extremism. In a January 31, 2026 post highlighted in the report and referenced by JNS, Abdu wrote: “Israel will continue to kill and displace Palestinians under any circumstances, even if they are defenseless. Regardless of promises, our people and their resistance must never lay down their arms. Never.”

In another statement from May 2025, Abdu reportedly asserted that if the Hamas-led October 7, 2023 attacks were used to justify Israeli military actions, then “a million October 7ths” could similarly be justified by decades of Israeli policies. Israeli officials cited by JNS interpret such remarks as not merely rhetorical but as indicative of a broader framework that legitimizes violence and undermines prospects for de-escalation.

The report also links Euro-Med to recent controversies in international media, including an opinion piece by a prominent columnist that accused Israeli security personnel of systemic sexual violence against Palestinians. As reported by JNS, the Israeli ministry contends that one of the primary sources cited in that piece was connected to Euro-Med and its leadership, thereby raising questions about the credibility and provenance of the allegations.

Israeli officials have responded with unusually forceful language. Diaspora Affairs Minister Amichai Chikli delivered a pointed critique, stating: “It is regrettable to hear that The New York Times, which for years served as a symbol of quality journalism, falls victim time and again to the Palestinians’ wholesale lies.” He added, in remarks cited by JNS, “The Euro-Med organization, which the newspaper chose to cite, is headed by none other than a Hamas member and terrorist.”

The ministry’s director-general, Avi Cohen-Scali, echoed these concerns, accusing major media outlets of amplifying narratives that originate from what he described as ideologically driven sources. “The New York Times is providing a platform for the ideology of a murderous terrorist organization,” Cohen-Scali said, according to JNS. “The report reveals a method of operation that feeds lies, ideological agendas and incitement against the State of Israel in an attempt to shape an anti-Israel and antisemitic narrative.”

Central to the ministry’s argument is the assertion that Euro-Med operates not in isolation but within a broader ecosystem of advocacy and influence. The report highlights initiatives such as “WikiRights,” a project aimed at shaping content on widely used digital platforms. According to the JNS report, Israeli officials allege that this initiative seeks to influence entries related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including those addressing the “Nakba” and allegations of “Gaza genocide.”

The inclusion of Richard Falk, a professor emeritus of international law at Princeton University and chairman of Euro-Med’s board of trustees, further underscores the organization’s reach into academic and policy circles. Falk, who previously served as a United Nations special rapporteur, has long been a vocal critic of Israeli policies. The report suggests that his involvement lends institutional credibility to Euro-Med’s activities while also reflecting a continuity of advocacy within international forums.

JNS reported that the ministry asserts that Euro-Med’s engagement with institutions such as the United Nations Human Rights Council and the International Court of Justice represents a deliberate strategy to embed its narratives within formal legal and diplomatic processes. This approach, Israeli officials argue, enables the organization to translate advocacy into tangible outcomes, including legal actions and policy debates.

The report also emphasizes the organization’s role in training activists and cultivating networks of legal and media professionals. By fostering these connections, the ministry contends, Euro-Med is able to sustain and amplify its messaging across multiple platforms and regions.

For Israeli officials, the implications of these findings extend beyond the activities of a single organization. They point to what they describe as a broader pattern in which advocacy groups, media outlets, and international institutions intersect to produce and disseminate narratives that, in their view, are not only critical of Israel but fundamentally delegitimizing.

JNS reported that the release of the report comes amid heightened scrutiny of international discourse surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, particularly in the aftermath of the October 7 attacks and the subsequent military operations in Gaza. In this context, the ministry’s findings are likely to intensify debates over the credibility of sources, the standards of evidence in reporting, and the role of advocacy organizations in shaping global perceptions.

Critics of the report, though not extensively detailed in the JNS coverage, are likely to challenge its conclusions and methodology, arguing that human rights organizations play a vital role in documenting and addressing alleged abuses. However, Israeli officials maintain that the issue is not the existence of scrutiny but the integrity and motivations of those conducting it.

As the report circulates among policymakers, journalists, and legal experts, it is poised to become a focal point in ongoing discussions about the intersection of human rights advocacy, media representation, and geopolitical conflict. The allegations it contains—if substantiated—could have significant implications for how international institutions and media organizations evaluate and utilize information provided by non-governmental entities.

In the final analysis, the report represents a forceful attempt by Israeli authorities to reframe the narrative surrounding Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor and to challenge the credibility of its contributions to global discourse. Whether it succeeds in altering perceptions or prompting further investigation remains to be seen.

What is certain, however, is that the questions it raises—about evidence, accountability, and the boundaries between advocacy and propaganda—will continue to resonate in the complex and often contentious arena of international public opinion.