Journalist Néstor Prieto: The flotilla is a failure of the international community
Suzan Şönger
In the wake of ongoing violence in Gaza and renewed waves of international solidarity, we spoke with Néstor Prieto, a Spanish journalist writing for the Público and academic on political sciences who participated in the recent flotilla to Gaza. Known for his outspoken advocacy for Palestine and his analysis of global power shifts, we discussed the outcome of the flotilla, the media’s portrayal of the conflict, and the growing grassroots mobilization across Europe—particularly in Spain. In this interview, he shared the contradictions of Western responses, the history of Spain’s position toward Palestine, and how the changing global order and the rise of new alliances are reshaping the struggle for justice and peace in the Middle East.
We heard your name frequently in the media regarding the last Flotilla. How did the experiences of European citizens find their way into European media? How do you see its impact on European society?
Well, as a journalist — because I was on the flotilla as a journalist — it was really interesting to see how Western and European media reflect the reality of the flotilla and the reality of Gaza. Luckily, I think that we are winning the communication war about the genocide, because this is the first genocide ever that is being broadcast by its own victims. So, luckily, we have thousands and thousands of proofs showing that the genocide is currently going on.
It was easy to demand that governments act. But unfortunately, the flotilla is a failure — it’s a failure of the international community. We, the organized civil society, are doing with limited resources and limited capacities what governments should be doing.
Anyway, during all the sailing we felt the support of European people. I think that despite Europe’s official position, most of the peoples of the European Union massively support Palestine. Unfortunately, because we were Western people, we were able to provoke major mobilization.
What we suffered there — violence, low-intensity torture, being hit, being deprived of sleep — is still just the surface of what 11,000 Palestinian prisoners are suffering. We assume the contradiction of being Western, and that’s an excuse to keep going and keep talking about Palestine.
So, I think that the impact was positive. Our main objective — arriving as an open humanitarian corridor — was not achieved, but despite that, we were able to show the contradictions of the international community and the hypocrisy of Western media and governments. Because of that, we achieved some tactical objectives. So, we are happy with the result.
We are following the Palestine movement in Spain with great interest. How has the Spanish state approached Palestine in recent years? What have you achieved so far?
Well, I think for the Spanish people, solidarity is massive. We were one of the last European countries to recognize the state of Israel. Unfortunately, it happened during the 1980s, when Spain needed to be recognized by the international community after the dictatorship. It was part of the process of joining NATO and recognizing Israel.
But we were one of the last European states to do so, because we have a strong link with Muslim culture. We are brothers — we are just in front of our Muslim brothers, so we have strong roots together. I think because of that, we have historically been quite supportive of the Palestinian people. We understand Palestinian suffering, and we have been able to organize that solidarity in an effective way.
Now, the solidarity movement in Spain is pushing the government. The government is acting only because there is huge, massive mobilization. That’s what we want and what we theorize: social movements going beyond governments and forcing them to take decisions.
Right now, there is a coalition government in Spain, and the minority part — progressive, left-wing parties — are pushing. But their force is not enough. The Spanish government is moving only because of popular pressure.
We have been able to achieve an embargo on Israeli weapons, a full recognition of the Palestinian state, and to change our law to punish those who have commercial agreements related to arms with Israel. So we are making some progress — but for us, it is not enough.
If we compare Spain with other European countries like Germany or Great Britain, we may look vanguardist. But indeed, we are not. The Spanish government is moving late and only because of massive mobilization. We believe it is necessary to completely break economic, diplomatic, and cultural ties with Israel — just like what happened with apartheid South Africa.
Unfortunately, Spain is at the vanguard of Europe only because Europe is really, really far from what international law and international solidarity should be.
We see major differences between Spain and other European countries on the issue of Palestine. Where do you think this contrast comes from?
Well, it’s really difficult to understand — even as an academic. You don’t have one key point to explain it. But despite being a plural people and a plural society, Spain is still facing and refusing far-right speeches.
We know that our history is very linked to Muslim people and the Muslim world. We are a people who suffered a civil war 80 years ago, a dictatorship 40 years ago, an economic crisis 10 years ago. We are the periphery of the North — not the global South, but still the periphery of the North.
So I think that as a peripheral country in the global capitalist system, most of the working class can easily understand what is going on in Palestine.
Historically, Spain was one of the last states to recognize Israel, and one of the first to recognize Palestine. We have been historically well linked to the Muslim world. Mainly, this is because we have a strong solidarity movement that has managed to organize and maintain itself from the base — from grassroots, horizontal organization.
That’s the most important point. Right now, solidarity in Spain is not spontaneous — it’s organized, through different organizations with strong links and roots in society.
With what’s happening in Gaza and Syria in recent years, the Middle East is being dragged into a new chaos. Considering your identity as a journalist, academic, and activist, how do you assess the situation? What is Europe’s role in this chaos, and what should Europe do to take responsibility for peace?
Right now, the unipolar order based on U.S. imperialist vision is no longer hegemonic. We are facing a change of global order. The U.S. is an injured monster that doesn’t want to abandon its key role, but we are not in a unipolar world anymore. We are going toward a multipolar world, though its configuration is still uncertain.
As Gramsci said, “When the new isn’t born and the old isn’t dead, monsters appear.” I think we are in that moment. The situation in Gaza and the Middle East is a test of how this new order will consider violence. If we are not able to stop the genocide in Gaza, the use of strong violence will be seen as a legitimate tool to shape the new world.
Netanyahu can use it against the Kurdish people. Morocco can use it against Western Sahara. The violence in the Middle East shows how revisionist states want to use force to shape the new order.
The Middle East plays an important role in the global order because of its natural resources and geoeconomic position. Now, many countries in the region are no longer passive actors — they can play new roles. But this also makes the problem more complex.
Today, the Middle East has contradictory alliances — BRICS Plus, OPEC, U.S. military support, and China’s New Silk Road — all at the same time. The region is a mirror of how international relations are changing, showing both new alliances and the use of violence to determine global power.
We need to keep our eyes on the Middle East and understand it from a colonial perspective, listening to the peoples of the region and supporting progressive and leftist forces. They are the true alternative — and our hope for peace.
