Aleš Gaube: Janša in the arms of the Israeli far right

In July 2026, Janez Janša, the newly elected Prime Minister of Slovenia, made headlines for his abrupt shift in foreign policy toward Israel. This change marked a significant departure from Slovenia’s previous stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which had been characterized by support for Palestinian statehood and adherence to international law. According to reports, Janša's new approach aligns him more closely with far-right elements in Israel, drawing comparisons to leaders such as Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, Serbia’s Aleksandar Vučić, and Bosnia’s Milorad Dodik, who have also aligned themselves with nationalist and right-wing movements in their respective countries.

The transformation began with symbolic gestures, including renaming the West Bank region to "Judea and Samaria," a move that reflects a deeper ideological alignment with Israeli policies. These actions were followed by concrete steps aimed at strengthening ties with Israel, culminating in a decision to fully recognize Israel’s sovereignty over territories between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River. This includes supporting expansion plans for settlements in the West Bank and the creation of a ring around Jerusalem through the E1 settlement bloc, which would effectively divide the West Bank into two parts.

Aleš Gaube, a prominent political analyst, criticized these developments, noting that Janša’s policies diverge sharply from the previous Slovenian government’s approach. Under the prior administration, Slovenia had built a reputation for advocating international law and supporting a two-state solution. The recognition of Palestine was seen as one of the country’s most strategic decisions, enhancing its standing among nations in the Global South. Gaube expressed concern that Janša’s current trajectory could undermine this carefully cultivated image and potentially harm Slovenia’s diplomatic relations with other countries.

The shift in policy has raised questions about the motivations behind Janša’s actions. Some analysts suggest that he might be seeking closer ties with Israel for personal reasons, possibly even considering relocation to the country. This speculation is based on his apparent enthusiasm for Israeli policies and his willingness to adopt terminology associated with Jewish identity and nationalism. Such moves have sparked debate within Slovenia about the implications of aligning with a nation known for its controversial policies in the Middle East.

Israeli officials have welcomed the changes in Slovenian policy. Bezalel Smotrič, a senior Israeli minister, praised the efforts to create historical realities through practical actions rather than mere declarations. He emphasized that recognizing Palestine through statements alone would not achieve the desired outcomes, and instead, tangible measures—such as expanding settlements—are necessary to ensure Israel’s security and territorial integrity. His comments highlight the growing influence of hardline factions within Israel, whose policies have increasingly shaped the country’s domestic and foreign affairs.

Reactions from within Slovenia have been mixed. While some supporters of Janša applaud his decisive approach and view it as a step towards stronger bilateral relations with Israel, others remain critical of the potential consequences. Concerns include the impact on Slovenia’s relationships with Arab and Muslim countries, as well as the possible repercussions on its role within the European Union. Critics argue that aligning too closely with Israel could alienate Slovenia from its neighbors and complicate its participation in regional initiatives aimed at promoting peace and stability.

Looking ahead, the situation remains fluid. With Israeli parliamentary elections approaching, the timing of Janša’s policy shifts suggests a strategic effort to bolster relations before a pivotal moment in Israeli politics. Whether this will translate into lasting alliances or further isolation for Slovenia depends largely on how these policies are received both domestically and internationally. As the dust settles on these developments, all eyes will be on how Slovenia navigates its evolving position in the complex geopolitical landscape surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.