British attorney Natasha Hausdorff has emerged as one of the most articulate voices defending Israel's position on the international stage, particularly in the United Kingdom. Since October 7, Hausdorff has been tirelessly advocating for Israel in British media outlets and academic forums, challenging prevailing narratives and offering legal expertise on complex issues surrounding the conflict.
"People's memories are quite short," she responds with a smile. "As a student of history, I know that in Israel's 76 years, there have been previous occasions where it felt utterly isolated and alone and where it felt that it was acting entirely against the odds. These are absolutely dark times and the reaction of the international community is unsurprising. It is certainly one that has made the situation even darker and has made Israel's mission against Hamas even harder, and yet the country has come together in a way that I have personally never previously experienced. If we think about the divisions before the 7 of October, that, in and of itself, is remarkable. Even in the political discussions that are happening at the moment between various political parties, at its core, I think you know, Israel remains united in the war effort. So that glimmer of hope, I think needs to be recognized as more than a glimmer – it is a shining beacon."
Hausdorff, an expert in international law volunteering with the organization "UK Lawyers for Israel," may not be a household name for Israeli readers, but many around the world consider her one of the most eloquent voices in explaining the Israeli position, certainly in Britain. Since October 7, her schedule has been quite busy; immediately after our conversation, she has an interview lined up with the British YouTube channel TalkTV. But it's also important for her to reach the Israeli audience.
"I'm here in London on a 'mission' for Israel," she says in Hebrew, in an interview conducted mostly in English. "Israel is fighting the West's war for it."
Hausdorff grew up in London to an Israeli father and a German-Christian mother. Her parents met at a horse farm while her mother was staying in Israel, and after they married, they immigrated to Britain. Young Natasha thought the Hausdorff family was practically the only Zionist family in the kingdom. The family frequently traveled to Israel for visits. She studied law at Oxford and Tel Aviv University and interned at the Supreme Court during the presidency of Justice Miriam Naor. On several occasions, she has spoken in the British media about the insecurity Jews feel on London's streets since the war began, partly due to the massive anti-Israel demonstrations across the city.
It's hard to imitate the style of the young attorney (34) living in London: in an elegant British accent, she manages to combine measured and intelligent discourse with sharp arguments and an unapologetic tone. In a BBC interview with Katya Adler at the outbreak of the war, she repeatedly corrected the host who claimed that Israel was allegedly delaying the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza.
"These interviews are frustrating. The interviewers at the BBC, for example, don't really want to listen to arguments, but rather to argue at all costs. The goal is not to search for the truth, but blatant interference and an attempt to create a scandal at best. In the worse case, they are simply biased from the start," she says.
Q: Do you ever think that in light of this attitude, perhaps it's simply not worth it to appear on these shows?
"I think it's worth the effort. I don't see other voices on the BBC who approach what's happening in Israel the way I do. The process isn't easy, and can even be frustrating at times, but the opportunity to tell the truth in the face of distortions on the internet is worth it. I receive supportive responses from all over the world, and not just from Jews. People have told me that I really changed their minds, or that I made them think differently about what's happening in Gaza."
Q: Do media outlets like the BBC shape British consciousness towards Israel, or do they simply reflect the prevailing public opinion?
"I think it has a huge role in shaping not just British public opinion; the BBC is viewed around the world and has an incredibly long reputation of being a credible source of news. I mean there are some very well-known examples of this, such as the al Al-Ahli Hospital strike, the ruling of the ICJ in January, where it was saying, along with everyone else, that Israel was plausibly guilty of genocide, and more recently, with respect to the ongoing operation in Rafah. Especially with the BBC, this agenda is not a new one. It has been the subject of debate in the United Kingdom. But what we have seen over the last seven months is the whole thing on our television screens every single day."
About five years ago, Hausdorff participated in a public debate on the popular debate program "Intelligence Squared," where, alongside former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, she represented the position supporting international recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital. About a year ago, she spoke at the University of Cambridge, arguing against Israeli anti-Zionist historian Avi Shlaim in a discussion on whether Israel should be pressured to give up territory for peace. After the war broke out, she stood in the hostile arena of Trinity College Dublin to represent Israel's position.
"I will not forget that occasion, because the first question that I was asked by the audience was: Where is your evidence for the 7 of October? They even laughed when I talked about the evidence. Unfortunately, this was the quality of the students who were attending in Dublin."
In such debates, she sometimes encounters violent attempts at silencing. Just before a debate at Durham University in Britain, anti-Israel protesters blocked the entrance to the debate hall, trapping a dozen students who were preparing the hall for the debate inside for about two hours. Following the demonstration, Dr. Shahid Mahmood, the university's vice-chancellor for equality, diversity, and inclusion, ordered the debate canceled.
Asked about the phenomenon in which Israeli left-wingers join the pro-Palestinian camp, she says it is unfortunate.
A: "It's true and it's not just individuals, but it's also groups called 'human rights organizations.' I think the only thing that can be done is to prove them wrong with the facts. It's extremely harmful and one has to question what the motivation of these individuals could possibly be, because, unlike certain unsuspecting Western enthusiasts for human rights and international law, they should know better. They do know better, and yet they pursue a false narrative, perhaps because it makes them popular in the international community that they focus on the world's punching bag – the Jewish state. I think from the position of those that seek to uphold the reality and proper application of the law and that push back against a rewriting of history simply means that those efforts need to be redoubled."
Israel's relations with the international courts in The Hague have never flourished, but now they are on the verge of a historic crisis. On May 21, Karim Khan, the prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC), announced that he would seek arrest warrants against Hamas leaders and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Gaza Strip. This is compounded by South Africa's lawsuit in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) alleging that Israel is committing genocide. Libya, Mexico, and Spain have asked to join South Africa's lawsuit.
Q: Can you break down the legal threat posed by the courts?
"The threats that we're seeing from what is a legal organization are largely politically motivated. Despite the absence of jurisdiction – and this is key because a 'state of Palestine' doesn't exist – there are recognized criteria in international law, they come from the Montevideo Convention and they set out that a state must have defined borders, a permanent population government, and the capacity to enter into international relations. Despite this, the so-called 'state of Palestine' reported to join the court by signing onto the Rome Statute and there was in 2021 already an application by the previous prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, to the court for a ruling on jurisdiction. The chamber was engaging in the legal acrobatics that the prosecutor had put forward in order to establish jurisdiction in this case, and because Israel is not a signatory to the court, that ruling has formed the basis of the previous prosecutor's investigation, and now the current prosecutor, Karim Khan, and his application for arrest warrants."
Q: Did we err in our conduct towards the court? Should we have foreseen this?
"It's predicated on the basis that the 'state of Palestine' has the ability to join the Rome Statute and therefore the court says it has jurisdiction over the territory of that state. The decision by the prosecutor to present himself as acting in some sort of even-handed situation, by issuing arrest warrants both against the leaders of Hamas and the democratically elected leadership in Israel is monstrous. It is preposterous, but it is not surprising and unfortunately, I think it has been born out of a naive desire. Especially on the part of victims of the 7 of October and their families to engage with the court, I think it's extremely problematic, because the court doesn't have jurisdiction."
Q: How do you deal specifically with the claim that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza?
A: "We know the origins of the term of genocide. It was coined by Raphael Lemkin to provide a legal lexicon to what had been perpetrated against the Jews in the Holocaust that there simply wasn't legal language around to describe the mass slaughter, the concerted effort to eradicate a race from the face of the earth. We, of course, see a repeat of acts of genocide by Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist groups that crossed Israel's border on the 7 of October. The fact that the real victims of genocide here are being blamed for the crimes that were perpetrated against them is mind-boggling."
Q: Why has South Africa deployed this false allegation?
"It provides a legal hook to bring Israel to the ICJ, whereas the ICC does not have jurisdiction to investigate. Because of Israel's obligations under the Genocide Convention, Israel has allowed the court that authority unlike at the ICC."
Q: Perhaps Israel shouldn't have participated in the proceedings in the ICJ in the first place?
"I think that's an extremely difficult decision for a country that considers itself to be a law-abiding state. While it recognizes real international law and, in fact, has a long and substantial track record of applying international law even domestically in the courts, what we are witnessing at the ICJ is not the proper application of international law. So I imagine that Israel will inevitably keep its involvement at the court under review."
Q: In recent interviews with British media, you've highlighted the growing insecurity Jews feel on London's streets since the outbreak of the war, partly due to massive anti-Israel demonstrations across the city. What future do you envision for British Jews?
"Since the Israeli military entered Rafah, we've witnessed an escalation in the violence accompanying these protests. Recent days have seen about forty violent arrests of so-called 'pro-Palestinian' demonstrators – though to call a spade a spade, we should really label them 'pro-Hamas.' It's evident that law enforcement has failed to address blatant legal violations since October 7, including breaches of public order laws when we consider the calls for Jewish genocide that feature in almost every demonstration. The police consistently claim they lack the resources to properly enforce the law. If they were to arrest everyone chanting 'from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free' or calling for an 'intifada,' they simply couldn't manage the numbers. The thousands of protesters, in turn, exploit this shortage of officers and often resort to violence. Unfortunately, the situation shows no signs of improving anytime soon. Central London has become a 'no-go' area for Jews, as these protests continue on a weekly and even daily basis."
Q: Do you anticipate British Jews emigrating to Israel due to the current climate?
"With elections looming in early July, polls currently predict a decisive victory for the Labour Party. Given this outlook, we could very well see a large-scale exodus of Jews from Britain. From conversations with friends in the Jewish community, I know this is a hot topic around Sabbath dinner tables. It's a sobering reflection of the reality here."
Q: How detrimental do you expect a Labour government to be for Israel?
"You can still vacation here in England until the July 4 elections. After that, I'm not sure it would be advisable," Hausdorff says with a smile, though her tone remains serious. "The implications spell bad news for Israel. Britain's population is increasingly polarized, but despite the cost of living crisis, immigration concerns, and numerous other issues troubling the British – such as the decline of our elite universities – one of the central issues Labour wants to spotlight in the elections is Gaza.
"Even before the elections were announced, David Lammy, Labour's shadow Foreign Secretary, endorsed Karim Khan's request for arrest warrants and declared that the International Criminal Court is an independent body that should have Britain's support. We've also heard promises from prominent Labour politicians to recognize a Palestinian state. So when it comes to Labour's stance, the cards are clearly on the table."
Q: That sounds rather alarming
"I can offer a glimmer of hope, though. I believe there's a silent majority in Britain that's currently keeping quiet in the face of pro-Palestinian incitement but understands Israel's predicament. They recognize that these threats extend beyond Israel; Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist groups pose a tangible threat to liberal-democratic Western values worldwide. From this perspective, the more voices that speak truth about the situation in Israel, the more this majority will be emboldened to voice its concerns and challenge the prevailing media narrative."
Q: Let's discuss Ireland, which appears to be uniformly opposed to Israel. Is there any audience there receptive to pro-Israel arguments, or is the country a lost cause?
"I've spoken in Ireland on several occasions, and it's crucial to emphasize that media portrayals don't necessarily reflect the entire Irish population. Clearly, this issue resonates strongly in Irish politics, and there are historical reasons for this. The Irish see Palestinians struggling against 'occupation' and identify with them due to their own historical conflict with England. Regrettably, there's potential for relations with Israel to deteriorate further. Ultimately, I believe it boils down to the messages Irish media convey to their citizens. The anti-Israel narrative in Irish media is even more pronounced than the prevalent discourse in Britain. This manifests in academia, street protests, and increasingly in official statements by politicians."
Q: After months of conflict, it seems Israel's public diplomacy efforts are falling short, and some have already thrown in the towel. What would you advise?
"I'd encourage Israel to be more 'tachles,'" Hausdorff says, using the Hebrew term for 'straightforward.' "It's crucial that we don't sugarcoat reality. We need to be unequivocal in our message: Israel is fighting the West's war. For decades, Israeli public diplomacy has tended to apologize for defending itself against Arab terrorism. I hope to see a shift in this stance. If we apologize for self-defense, we can hardly expect the international community to go out of its way to support Israel in its ongoing struggle against Palestinian terrorism.
"We need to invest far more in bringing the truth to light, and I mean presenting facts in real-time. One of Israel's challenges stems from being a responsible country with institutions operating under the rule of law and accountability – which means government ministries are hesitant to disseminate unverified information. Hamas and other terrorist organizations spread blatantly false propaganda, but they're the first to provide information, and that's what gets broadcast worldwide. I'm aware of efforts to expedite Israel's media response processes. We're already seeing improvements in prioritizing the dissemination of accurate information to the world, and I hope this trend continues to gain momentum. Take heart: I, and many others like me, are in London fighting for you in Britain and around the globe."
