Hundreds of Millions Spent, Support Lost: Israel’s Uphill Battle to Shape Global Opinion

The most impactful consequence of Israel’s genocide in Gaza, outside of the impacts on Palestinians themselves, is the rapid loss of public support across Western publics, particularly in the United States. This shift has not gone unnoticed, with the Israeli government surging record funding into its public diplomacy efforts to counter what may already be unstoppable: a massive, permanent and generational falloff of support for its apartheid system of occupation over Palestine.

In March, the Israeli Knesset approved $730 million for its public diplomacy and information efforts, or hasbara, even as Western public support — especially in the United States — continues to dwindle. That investment is historic, nearing five times as much as the 2025 budget allocation, which was already 20 times as much as Israel was spending before its genocide in Gaza. Yet the reasoning behind the increase is the same as last year: Israel is rapidly losing the public opinion battle as it clings to its colonial subjugation of Palestine.

In 2025, Israel’s hasbara program focused on U.S. college campuses, foreign press and social media; the primary arenas where Israel is losing the public relations fight. Campuses are particularly central to increased pushback against Israeli narratives in the West, illustrating systemic oppression not only against Palestinians but anyone opposing Israel’s genocide in Gaza. The 2024 chemical attack against pro-Palestine protesters at Columbia University by two former Israeli soldiers highlights the evolving thinking in the West around this issue, as well as how divisive it can be on the ground.

Western media complicity often does the work of Israeli hasbara efforts by inciting against pro-Palestinian stances and Palestine itself. This incitement often goes even further than the explicit calls made by Israeli officials supporting genocide. Even seemingly routine misinterpretations of Israel’s occupation of Palestine have a lasting effect that hasbara campaigns can and do amplify at the expense of Palestine.

Israeli leaders fear a loss of political support in the West far more than any physical threat to their country.

Social media, on the other hand, represented a greater dilemma for Israel. During a meeting in September 2025 with influencers in New York, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned, “We have to fight back … We have to use the weapons that apply to the battlefields in which we engage … and the most important ones are social media.” Indeed, such statements, paired with massive funding efforts focused on social media in recent years as a third area of focus for Israeli hasbara operations, highlight the prioritization of weaponizing social media platforms for Israeli state interests.

It is no surprise that Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar recently described the hasbara investment as spending “in a global battle for hearts and minds.” As Saar further stated in December, “It should be like investing in jets, bombs and missile interceptors. In the face of what’s arrayed against us and what’s invested against us, it’s far from enough. This is an existential issue.”

Of course, it is Palestinians that face an existential threat, as has been the case for decades. Yet it is exactly this asymmetry that matters: Israeli leaders fear a loss of political support in the West far more than any physical threat to their country. The reasoning is obvious, as Israel’s apartheid system arguably cannot sustain itself without such support.

The latest Pew Research Center poll on U.S. perceptions of Israel indicates that a substantial increase in the American public’s negative views of both Israel and Netanyahu continues, with both Democratic and Republican adults under 50 holding a negative view of both. American adults also expressed little or no confidence in Netanyahu on foreign affairs, while 60% view Israel unfavorably — an increase of 7% from last year.

While Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents expressed higher dissatisfaction with Israel, 57% of Republicans expressed a negative view of Israel, compared to 41% in 2025. Republican adults aged 50 and over still hold positive views of Israel and Netanyahu, however, although 30% of Republican-leaning adults over 50 expressed little or no confidence in Netanyahu. Among Jewish Americans, 56% also expressed little or no confidence in Netanyahu on foreign policy.

This statistical detail ties back into Israel’s preoccupation with strengthening its hasbara operations. How can Israel maintain the conflation of Jewish and Zionist identities if Jewish Americans are increasingly distancing themselves from Israel and Zionism altogether?

There is an undeniable shift in American political leanings underway, constituting the primary reason for Israel’s scaled hasbara investment.

As American public sentiment veers away from Israel, U.S. lawmakers are increasingly faced with a different way of doing politics. The choice is clear: Continue appeasing Israel or align with their voters. In two May votes in the U.S. Senate, 40 out of 47 Democratic senators voted to block a $295 million sale of bulldozers for Israel, while 36 Democrats voted in favor of a resolution to block $152 million in 1,000-pound bombs to the Israeli military. While the deals still went through, owing to Republican and some lingering Democratic support for Israel, the vote was unprecedented, reflecting the rapid shifts underway in the people’s house.

Democrats running in the upcoming midterm elections are also publicly and aggressively rejecting special interest donations from pro-Israel lobbying firms like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Such a move was unheard of just a few years ago. Israel’s genocide in Gaza and the U.S.-Israel war on Iran ultimately drive those decisions, but it is a shift in public support for Israel that sits at the root of the dynamic.

Some have acknowledged AIPAC’s role in funding their campaigns and their decision to stop accepting money from the group, while others who are supportive of the two-state solution have expressed disagreement with Israel’s genocide in Gaza and U.S. military sales to Israel. AIPAC has pushed back against these decisions, calling the stances “alarming and fundamentally undemocratic.” It is undeterred in reaching out to other Democrats: “We’re going to remind everybody about the millions of pro-Israel Democratic voters who are part of the political process in federal elections,” AIPAC’s spokesperson Patrick Dorton asserted.

That thinking appears to be antiquated. There is an undeniable shift in American political leanings underway, constituting the primary reason for Israel’s scaled hasbara investment. When Israel began its genocide in Gaza, bolstered by the fact that its violations since the Nakba became mere reference points for diplomacy, it failed to consider a parallel that was increasing with each violation. Now it is on the back foot.

Public sentiment can be influenced by governments and media, but public opinion contains a strength that is not always derived from politics. Rather, public opinion is human opinion. When it is organic, it is much harder to sway. Throwing dollars at the problem will not necessarily change that reality, especially with billions of people around the world having watched the genocide of Gaza and its people on their phones and televisions for over two years.

Israel is struggling to maintain its support base within public opinion because it chose genocide. As a result, it is losing the American public. The $730 million hasbara investment will likely fail to alter U.S. sentiment, let alone influence global public opinion in favor of Israel’s inhumane position. While many world leaders may have normalized genocide, regular people around the globe increasingly understand that their values do not align with such a raw acceptance of brutality in the name of power. It’s long past time for their leaders to act accordingly or step aside.

Hundreds of Millions Spent, Support Lost: Israel’s Uphill Battle to Shape Global Opinion