It was a scene that few in diplomatic circles could recall witnessing before: as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu approached the podium at the 80th United Nations General Assembly in New York City on September 26, 2025, nearly half of the delegates present rose from their seats and walked out. The moment, described by many as the largest boycott of a speaker in the history of the U.N. General Assembly, sent shockwaves through the international community and set the tone for a week of contentious debate about Israel, Palestine, and the future of the Middle East.
According to Fox News Digital, Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Danny Danon was quick to dismiss the walkout as a "staged" event, downplaying its significance by claiming, "Most of the people were not diplomats. They were staffers from hostile missions." Danon further remarked, "I told them, ‘get out and don't come back,’ and I meant it. If they cannot listen to the words of the prime minister representing Israel and the Jewish people, I don't think they have a place in this hall." Still, the optics of the event were hard to ignore. As Netanyahu began his address, the hall emptied out, leaving behind a smattering of delegates and a sense of isolation that has become familiar to Israel at the U.N.
Netanyahu, for his part, appeared undeterred. His speech, broadcast not only to those remaining in the hall but also on speakers in Gaza and on Gazans’ cell phones, was both defiant and combative. He painted Israel as a solitary guardian of law and civilization, fighting what he called a "terror axis" led by Iran. "Last year I stood at this podium and I showed this map. It shows the curse of Iran’s terror axis," Netanyahu declared, according to Counterpunch. He claimed that this axis "threatened the peace of the entire world. It threatened the stability of our region and the very existence of my country, Israel. They were meant also to threaten the United States and blackmail nations everywhere."
The prime minister went on to boast of Israel’s military successes over the past year. He claimed that Hezbollah had been "cowed," the Houthis "hammered," and the "bulk of Hamas’s terror machine" had been "crushed." Netanyahu also celebrated what he described as the devastation of Iran’s atomic weapons and ballistic missile programs, as well as Israel's campaign of targeted assassinations against Iranian nuclear scientists and leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah. "The final remnants of Hamas are holed up in Gaza City. They vow to repeat the atrocities of 7 October again and again. That is why Israel must finish the job," he said, making clear his intention to continue military operations in Gaza until Hamas was eliminated.
Netanyahu’s speech, however, was not just a military accounting. It was also a rhetorical broadside against the legitimacy of the Palestinian cause. He linked Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, Syria, and the Houthis as part of a monolithic bloc of radical Islamists, all allegedly shouting "Death to America" and seeking to "drag the modern world back to the past… to a dark age of violence, fanaticism, and terror." He portrayed Israel as a bulwark defending Western civilization, a sentiment echoed by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, whom Netanyahu quoted as saying Israel was "doing the dirty work for all of us."
Reactions to the speech and the walkout were swift and polarized. As reported by Counterpunch, many observers saw the boycott as a symbolic act meant to shun and isolate Israel, a "vile act" intended to inflict maximum insult. Yet, as the article pointed out, the U.N. has a long history of welcoming speakers from countries with far worse human rights records, including leaders responsible for genocides in Cambodia, Rwanda, Nigeria, Sudan, and Iraq. In none of those cases did U.N. delegates stage a walkout. The only comparable event was in 2011, when about a dozen Western countries boycotted a speech by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad—a fraction of the scale seen during Netanyahu’s address.
This contrast did not go unnoticed by Israeli officials and their supporters. As one commentator put it, "Partial isolation in the United Nations is a prize, not a humiliation. In fact, U.N. member nations have never staged a walkout on any actual genocidal country or its leader." The implication was clear: Israel is held to a different standard, and its perceived isolation is less a reflection of its actions than of international hypocrisy.
Yet, the walkout was not the only source of tension during the General Assembly. According to Fox News Digital, the U.N. scheduled key Middle East talks on the Jewish holiday of Rosh Hashanah, effectively excluding Israel from participating in discussions about its own future. Ambassador Danon lamented, "They had a discussion about the Middle East, about Israel, without Israel. I think it shows the hypocrisy of the United Nations." Danon said he had appealed to the head of the U.N. Security Council to reschedule the talks, but his request was denied.
Meanwhile, Israel faced growing diplomatic pressure as several countries—including France, Australia, the United Kingdom, and Canada—announced their recognition of Palestinian statehood. Danon dismissed these moves as "empty declarations," saying, "We spoke with many delegations. Without naming names, we had successes that a few countries did not join this circus, those empty declarations, and we are grateful for that." He suggested that such gestures were motivated more by domestic politics than by a genuine desire to resolve the conflict. "I think they have domestic interests. Take, for example, President Macron. He has so many domestic problems and issues with the economy, with immigration, with the parliament. So, it’s easier for him to come to the U.N. and to pretend that he’s actually leading something. He knows better than that," Danon argued.
Despite the diplomatic drama, there were signs of potential progress. On September 29, after a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump at the White House, Netanyahu accepted a U.S.-backed Gaza deal aimed at ending the nearly two-year-long war. French President Emmanuel Macron welcomed the agreement, stating that he expected Israel to "engage resolutely on this basis" and calling for Hamas to "immediately release all hostages and follow this plan." Whether Hamas will accept the deal, and whether it will hold, remains to be seen.
The events at the 80th U.N. General Assembly laid bare the deep divisions and enduring frustrations that define the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on the world stage. While Netanyahu’s speech and the unprecedented walkout underscored Israel’s sense of isolation, they also highlighted the complexities—and the hypocrisies—of international diplomacy. As the dust settles, the world watches to see whether the latest peace initiative will bring real change, or whether the cycle of conflict and recrimination will continue.
