Oxford Union to debate whether Israel poses greater threat than Iran to stability in the Middle East

Speaking against the motion are Hillel Neuer, an international human rights lawyer and the executive director of the UN Watch watchdog; and Sir Dominick Chilcott, a former British ambassador to Iran and Turkey.

Sir Malcolm Rifkind, who served as a defence secretary and foreign secretary under John Major will attend as a guest speaker.

“Since Iran’s 1979 Revolution, tensions with Israel have grown, culminating in June 2025 with an Israeli aerial assault on Iran,” promotional material for the debate states.

“Supporters of the motion see Israel as an occupying power with undeclared nuclear weapons, systemic rights abuses, and disproportionate force – destabilising Gaza, Lebanon, and beyond.

“Opponents argue Iran funds instability through proxy militias, nuclear ambitions and revolutionary ideology, making Israeli strikes defensive rather than provocative…Which state is the greater threat to Middle Eastern peace?”

Commenting on the debate, Stafford told the JC: “[It is] disappointing, if not surprising, to see the Oxford Union giving a platform to a motion that so badly misrepresents the realities of the Middle East.

“They are, of course, free to debate what they wish, but it is deeply troubling that a former Palestinian prime minister is acting as a cheerleader for Iran at a time when the region desperately needs moderate Palestinian voices willing to lead the way toward a more peaceful and united future for Palestinians and Israelis.

“There is a pattern emerging here, and it isn't one the union should be proud of.”

Last year, Stafford urged the government to write to the Oxford Union following a debate on the Israel-Hamas war that he labelled a “mess of antisemitism”.

During that debate, speakers discussed a whether “Israel is an apartheid state responsible for genocide”. The event descended into chaos with shouting matches, heckling from the audience, and one speaker reportedly being removed from the chamber.

Following his participation in the debate last November, journalist Jonathan Sacerdoti, who spoke against that motion, condemned the “once-proud” Oxford Union as an institution that has been “breached by forces of bigotry, hated and mob rule”.

Sacerdoti, a JC contributor, described the event as “deeply and worryingly dishonest, aggressive and one-sided”, in a piece for The Spectator.

Earlier this year, the society’s president-elect George Abaraonye – who has since been ousted – appeared to celebrate the fatal shooting of US conservative commentator Charlie Kirk, with whom he had debated in the past.