Why has the EU condemned Ben-Gvir’s call for nightly killings in Gaza?
The EU has condemned Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir’s call to kill 30 to 40 people in Gaza every night, saying Israel’s government must restrain such incitement. Belgium had already declared the far-right minister persona non grata.
In 30 seconds
- Ben-Gvir called for 30 to 40 people to be killed in Gaza each night during a podcast with former hostage Rom Braslavski.
- The EU condemned his language on 21 August 2026 and told Israel’s government to rein it in.
- Ben-Gvir controls Israel’s police and prison system but cannot order military strikes.
- Belgium declared Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich personae non gratae in September 2025.
The has condemned Israeli National Security Minister ’s call for 30 to 40 people to be killed in every night, directly connecting an inflammatory intervention in Israeli politics to decisions facing EU governments in Brussels. In a statement issued on 21 August, the European External Action Service called his language “egregious and inciteful” and said ’s government had a responsibility to rein it in. Belgium had already declared Ben-Gvir persona non grata under a federal package adopted in September 2025.
For people following the conflict from Belgium, the immediate issue is therefore larger than another provocative quotation. Ben-Gvir is a serving minister in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition, while Belgium and the other EU member states must decide how political condemnation relates to visas, sanctions, trade and the Union’s wider relationship with Israel. No separate public response to these particular remarks from Belgian Foreign Minister was located by the time of publication, but the federal government’s existing position already identifies Ben-Gvir as an extremist minister who undermines peace and international law.
Ben-Gvir made the remarks during an interview with Rom Braslavski, a former hostage held in Gaza, which aired on 15 August and circulated more widely the following day. The Associated Press and the Israeli newspaper The Times of Israel both reported that he advocated “targeted assassinations” taking down 30 to 40 people nightly. He then extended the category beyond those posing an immediate danger, saying some people were “not worthy of life” and were “not even people”. He also argued for renewed Israeli settlement throughout Gaza and encouraged Palestinian emigration.
The distinction between rhetoric and operational authority matters. Ben-Gvir oversees Israel’s police and prison system and sits in the security cabinet, but he cannot order the Israeli military to conduct air strikes. His words nevertheless carry institutional weight because they come from inside the government rather than from a marginal activist. The Times of Israel reported that he was objecting to reduced military operations in Gaza and to efforts to advance a ceasefire plan. Netanyahu’s position remains that must be disarmed before Israel withdraws from its remaining positions.
Ben-Gvir’s supporters frame harsher action through the trauma of Hamas’s 7 October 2023 attack, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 taken hostage, according to Israeli figures cited by AP. Braslavski’s participation underscores that trauma. Yet neither hostage suffering nor the pursuit of Hamas removes the legal requirement to distinguish combatants from civilians. Language denying people’s humanity also alarms diplomats because statements by senior officials can be examined as evidence of intent in international proceedings.
That does not itself settle the legal question of genocide. Allegations that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza remain contested in proceedings before the International Court of Justice; Israel rejects them. Describing Ben-Gvir’s words accurately is therefore different from presenting a final judicial finding that has not been made. The careful conclusion is that the remarks advocate killings beyond immediate threats and intensify concerns already raised about forcible displacement and dehumanising official rhetoric.
Belgium’s position is more interventionist than a simple call for restraint. The federal agreement published by FPS Foreign Affairs declares Ben-Gvir and fellow far-right minister personae non gratae, while also targeting Hamas leaders, supporting a two-state solution and insisting that all hostages be released. It commits Belgium to settlement-import restrictions, stronger controls on military-related trade and further European measures. This dual framing—pressure on Israeli extremists alongside action against Hamas—is central to the Belgian approach and differs from accounts that reduce the dispute to personalities in Netanyahu’s coalition.
Where this is happening
View on map Gaza →The next test will be whether the EU’s condemnation produces any collective measure against Ben-Gvir or remains diplomatic language. Unanimity requirements and divisions among member states have repeatedly constrained EU action on Israel and Palestine. What remains unknown is whether Netanyahu will publicly reprimand his minister, whether Israeli prosecutors or other authorities will examine the remarks, and whether Belgium will press for Ben-Gvir’s national exclusion to become a coordinated Schengen or EU measure.
What to do
For Belgium-based readers, there is no new personal action, cost or legal obligation arising from the EU statement. Belgium’s September 2025 designation already sets its national political position toward Ben-Gvir and Smotrich. The next concrete development to watch is whether other European governments support coordinated restrictions or sanctions. Until such a decision is formally announced, the 21 August 2026 EU response remains a condemnation rather than a new EU-wide measure. Travellers and residents should not interpret it as confirmation of a Schengen-wide entry ban.
Impact
Regional — Belgium has already barred Ben-Gvir politically by declaring him persona non grata and has said it will seek wider European support for measures against extremists obstructing peace. The remarks may strengthen pressure for coordinated Schengen or EU action.
EvidenceWell established · 1 primary source + 2 official documents + 2 independent reporting sourcesExplore evidence →Hide evidence ↑
- Publication date unavailable
- Retrieved by ODIN:
- 25 Aug 2026
- Published:
- 16 Aug 2026, 02:00
- Retrieved by ODIN:
- 25 Aug 2026
- Published:
- 17 Aug 2026, 02:00
- Retrieved by ODIN:
- 25 Aug 2026
- Published:
- 21 Aug 2026, 02:00
- Retrieved by ODIN:
- 25 Aug 2026
- Published:
- 5 Sept 2025, 02:00
- Retrieved by ODIN:
- 25 Aug 2026
Voices & reactions
What the main actors are doing
Reported positions, summarised — not direct quotationsEuropean Union diplomatic position
The European External Action Service called Ben-Gvir’s language “egregious and inciteful”, said it was unacceptable and insisted that Israel’s government must rein it in. This framing treats the remarks as a governmental responsibility, not merely domestic campaign rhetoric.
Ben-Gvir and Israel’s far-right constituency
Ben-Gvir presented intensified killings, Palestinian emigration and renewed settlement as security measures following the 7 October attack. His position goes beyond Netanyahu’s stated insistence on disarming Hamas and rejects the reduced pace of Israeli strikes.
Belgian federal government position
Belgium combines pressure on Ben-Gvir and violent settlers with measures against Hamas leaders, demands for hostage releases and support for Israel’s recognition by Arab states. Its policy therefore rejects both far-right Israeli obstruction and Hamas’s role in future Palestinian governance.
The story, connected
Explore the people, places and ideas in this story
Go beyond the headline. Open a card for sourced context, maps, official links and the other subjects connected to this report.
Continue reading
This story was assembled from verified evidence, with its sources and reasoning recorded as it was written.