The Joodse Canon: The History and Jewish Contributions to the Netherlands Over More Than 700 Years

The Joodse Canon (Dutch Jewish Canon) traces the rich and continuous history of Jews in the Netherlands from the Middle Ages to the present day. This project highlights their cultural, economic, and social contributions as well as their resilience in the face of persecution. Discover in this article the key periods, emblematic figures, and recurring themes of this remarkable history.

What is the Joodse Canon?

The Joodse Canon is a historical and educational project that documents over seven centuries of Jewish presence in the Netherlands. Initiated by organisations such as the Joods Maatschappelijk Werk (Jewish Social Service, founded in 1946) and the educational centre Crescas, it aims to celebrate the contributions of the Sephardic and Ashkenazi communities to Dutch society.

Organised chronologically by century, this “canon” emphasises the gradual integration of Jews, their role in the Dutch Golden Age, and their reconstruction after the Shoah. It reminds us that Jews, though always a small minority, have profoundly shaped Dutch history in the areas of tolerance, innovation, and culture.

Majestic interior of the Portuguese Synagogue in Amsterdam, symbol of the Dutch Jewish Golden Age

The Major Periods of Dutch Jewish History

The Middle Ages and the 17th Century: The Arrival of the “New Jews” and the Golden Age

Jewish presence dates back to 1295 with the Jodenstraat (Jews’ Street) in Maastricht. The 17th century marked a turning point with the massive arrival of Portuguese Jews fleeing the Inquisition and Ashkenazi Jews from Eastern Europe.

Key moments include:

• 1615 → Founding of the Santa Companhia de Dotar Orphas e Donzellas (aid for orphan girls).
• 1616 → Establishment of the Talmud Torah.
• 1656 → Excommunication (herem) of Baruch Spinoza, the philosopher who laid the foundations of modern rationalism.
• 1675 → Inauguration of the magnificent Portuguese Synagogue in Amsterdam, a symbol of tolerance.

This period also saw the development of the silk industry (1644), the diamond trade, and international philanthropy.

Portrait of Baruch Spinoza, an emblematic figure of the 17th-century Netherlands

18th and 19th Centuries: Expansion, Stability, and Emancipation

The 18th century was characterised by community expansion (synagogues in Rotterdam, luxurious residences along the Amstel). The 19th century brought full integration:

• 1796 → Emancipation decree.
• 1817 → Obligation to learn Dutch.
• 1860 → Michel Henri Godefroi, the first Jewish minister.
• 1894 → Founding of the General Dutch Diamond Workers’ Union, an economic pillar.

The arrival of Eastern European Jews (Ostjuden) further enriched the community.

20th Century: A Century of Extremes and Reconstruction

The 20th century alternated between immigration, persecution, and rebirth:

• 1933–1939 → Influx of German refugees.
• 1941–1945 → Shoah, with the Westerbork camp, the Jewish Council, and the tragedy of Anne Frank.
• Post-1945 → Return of survivors, creation of Joods Maatschappelijk Werk, and celebration of the State of Israel (1948).

Anne Frank’s room in Amsterdam, a universal symbol of the Shoah

The Portuguese Beth Haim Cemetery in Ouderkerk aan de Amstel, one of the oldest in Western Europe

Today, the community remains vibrant with modern institutions such as the Jewish Cultural Quarter in Amsterdam.

Emblematic Figures and Recurring Themes

Among the most prominent figures:

• Spinoza
• Saul Levi Morteira
• Isaac de Pinto
• Anne Frank
• Jacob Soetendorp

The dominant themes include:

• Cultural contributions → Synagogues, Hebrew printing, music.
• Economic contributions → Diamond, industry, finance.
• Social resilience → Philanthropy, education, political integration.
• Survival through trials → Emancipation, Shoah, contemporary renaissance.

Why the Joodse Canon Remains Relevant Today

This canon reminds us that Jewish history is inseparable from Dutch identity: tolerance, innovation, and human rights are its direct fruits. In a global context of rising antisemitism, it calls for the preservation of this collective memory.

For more information, visit the official website: https://joodsecanon.nl.

The history of Jews in the Netherlands, their contributions, and the Joodse Canon together form a timeless source of inspiration.

Barcelona Launches EMET – Truth Foundation to Address Rise in Antisemitism

Former French Prime Minister Manuel Valls and senior Spanish political and civic figures attend the foundation’s inaugural event in Barcelona.

PRESS CALL

Barcelona will host the official launch of EMET – Truth Foundation, a new initiative dedicated to addressing antisemitism and promoting democratic values, at an event bringing together political leaders, historians, and representatives of Jewish institutions.

Among the participants are Manuel Valls, former Prime Minister of France; Xavier Trias, former Mayor of Barcelona; Gabriel Colomé, Senator in the Spanish Parliament; and historian Adrià Fortet.

The event is organized in collaboration with the Federation of Jewish Communities of Spain and the Jewish Community of Barcelona.

Event Details

• Date: Monday, February 2, 2026
• Time: 19:00
• Venue: Saló del Tinell, Plaça del Rei s/n
• City: Barcelona
• Media check-in: From 18:45

Press contact:

Ofer Laszewicki Rubin

📞 +34 634 427 125

📧 Press@fundacionemetverdad.com

Background

The launch takes place amid a reported increase in antisemitic incidents in Catalonia and other parts of Spain following the Hamas attacks against Israel on October 7, 2023. Jewish communities and civil society organizations have raised concerns regarding public discourse, security, and the protection of cultural and historical sites.

Recent incidents — including harassment directed at individuals and businesses identified as Jewish, the circulation of a mapping initiative by GoGo Carto, and the desecration of the Jewish cemetery of Les Corts in Barcelona — have intensified discussion around antisemitism, hate speech, and social cohesion.

About EMET – Truth Foundation

EMET – Truth Foundation is a pluralistic and independent initiative focused on combating antisemitism and fostering coexistence. Its activities will include:

• educational and awareness programs,
• cultural and civic dialogue initiatives,
• documentation and research,
• and cooperation with public and private institutions.

The foundation aims to contribute to the strengthening of democratic values and to the prevention of discrimination in all its forms.

Program

The inaugural event will feature:

• presentations by the foundation’s trustees outlining its objectives and strategic priorities,
• contributions from partner institutions,
• and testimonies addressing the impact of antisemitism on individuals and communities

---

🔴 Update — European Union decision

Israel’s Foreign Minister, Gideon Sa’ar, welcomed the decision by European Union foreign ministers to designate Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organization, calling it a historic decision.

According to Sa’ar, the move will criminalize and significantly hinder IRGC activities in Europe, deliver a major economic blow to a structure that controls a substantial share of the Iranian regime’s economy, and send a clear message of support to Iranian men and women fighting for their freedom.

---

Paris – Brussels – Madrid – Rome.

After months of European hesitation, a decisive shift is underway. France, followed by Spain and Italy, has signaled support for classifying Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organization at the European Union level — a move widely seen as a clear diplomatic victory for Israel.

Israel sets the diplomatic pace

This shift did not happen by chance. It is the result of a deliberate and highly visible Israeli diplomatic strategy, led by Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar.

Through repeated public statements and direct appeals to European capitals and EU institutions, Israel pushed to convert long-standing moral condemnations of Tehran into concrete legal and political action.

Israel’s message has been consistent: the IRGC is not merely a regional military actor, but the core instrument of Iran’s internal repression and external terror operations.

France breaks the logjam

The turning point came when French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot stated that France would support adding the IRGC to the EU’s terrorist list.

For Paris — long regarded as cautious on the issue — this marked a strategic shift, instantly altering the balance inside the EU.

France’s move acted as a political catalyst, making continued European inaction far more difficult to sustain.

Spain and Italy follow

Soon after France’s announcement, Spain and Italy indicated that they, too, were openly aligned with this position.

Their support is particularly significant: both Madrid and Rome had previously been among the more reserved capitals, wary of diplomatic fallout with Tehran.

Together, France, Spain and Italy now form a core group of major EU member states, reshaping the internal dynamics of the debate.

Brussels under growing pressure

Israel’s diplomatic push did not stop at national capitals. Gideon Sa’ar also directly challenged the European Commission, including its president Ursula von der Leyen, urging Brussels to move beyond rhetoric and adopt binding EU-level measures.

With several of the EU’s largest states now aligned, the pressure on European institutions is mounting.

A strategic precedent for Israel

Listing the IRGC as a terrorist organization still requires unanimous approval by all EU member states.

However, the alignment of France, Spain and Italy has dramatically narrowed the space for opposition.

For Israel, the significance goes beyond Iran:

this episode demonstrates its ability to shape Europe’s security agenda, linking human-rights abuses, regional terrorism and global security — and transforming political pressure into tangible diplomatic momentum.

Despite a fractured shoulder and medical leave, elite police officer Ran Gvili rushed into combat on October 7, 2023. At the entrance to Kibbutz Alumim, he helped stop dozens of Hamas terrorists and saved an entire community.

A wounded officer who ran toward the fire

On the morning of October 7, 2023, as rocket sirens echoed across southern Israel, Staff Sergeant Ran Gvili was supposed to be recovering.

He was 24 years old, on medical leave at his parents’ home in Meitar, suffering from a fractured shoulder after a motorcycle accident. Surgery had already been scheduled. Doctors had told him to rest.

Instead, when the first red alerts sounded, Ran put on his uniform, took his personal weapon, and headed straight toward the fighting.

From medical leave to the front line

Ran’s initial goal was to reach the Nova music festival area to help civilians under attack. On the way, he encountered fellow members of his elite Yasam unit (Border Police special forces operating in the Negev) and joined them.

The group was small—six to seven Yasam fighters and one officer in civilian clothes—but they moved quickly toward the attacked kibbutzim.

At the entrance to Kibbutz Alumim, they came face to face with a large Hamas force: dozens of heavily armed terrorists carrying AK-47s, RPGs, and grenades, attempting to breach the community.

The stand at the gate of Alumim

According to testimonies from his comrades, Ran Gvili took the initiative.

He led the engagement, opening fire first and drawing his team into combat. The clash was intense and chaotic. Despite being outnumbered, the group managed to neutralize at least 14 terrorists—bodies later found just hundreds of meters from the kibbutz gate.

During the fighting, Ran was wounded in the hand and leg. Yet he remained composed. Over the radio, he calmly called for assistance, without panic, while continuing to block the entrance.

By physically holding the line at the gate, Ran and his team prevented the terrorists from entering the kibbutz.

Why Alumim was saved

Thanks to this resistance—combined with the kibbutz’s internal emergency response team—no Israeli residents of Alumim were killed that day.

(Some foreign workers were tragically murdered elsewhere in the area.)

The terrorists were ultimately pushed back.

Ran Gvili was mortally wounded during these exchanges. His body was later taken to Gaza by the attackers.

“Alone against dozens”: myth and reality

Ran Gvili is often described as having fought “alone against dozens.” The reality is more precise—and no less extraordinary.

• He was part of a very small team, fewer than ten fighters.
• They faced an overwhelming force, estimated at around forty terrorists.
• At certain moments, the team was split, and Ran operated at the most exposed positions.
• His leadership and personal risk-taking were decisive in stopping the assault.

For the residents of Alumim, the conclusion is simple: without Ran and his team, the kibbutz would likely have been overrun.

A hero remembered at Alumim

Today, the residents of Kibbutz Alumim consider Ran Gvili their savior.

A memorial stands at the entrance to the community. A sign reads:

“Rani, hero of Israel, we are waiting for you at home.”

A Portuguese citizen and a Sephardic legacy

Ran Gvili was not only an Israeli hero. He was also a Portuguese citizen, through his Sephardic ancestry and Portugal’s 2015 law recognizing descendants of Jews expelled from the Iberian Peninsula.

His family history reflects the broader Sephardic diaspora: centuries in Iberia, expulsion and persecution, migration through the Mediterranean world, and eventual rebuilding in Israel.

This citizenship was not symbolic. Ran embodied the positive meaning of historical reparation: public service, responsibility, and sacrifice. He served as an elite police officer, worked tirelessly, and ultimately gave his life protecting civilians.

A return after 843 days

On January 26, 2026—843 days after his death—Ran Gvili was finally brought home.

His return closed a long and painful chapter for his family, his comrades, and the residents of Alumim. He was laid to rest in Israel, honored as the hero he was.

A legacy that endures

Ran Gvili’s story is not only about a battle.

It is about responsibility in moments of collapse, about choosing action despite fear and pain, and about standing between civilians and violence when it matters most.

He did not retreat.

He held the line.

And because of that, an entire community lived.

Rest in peace, Rani. Israel will not forget you.

Geopolitical analysis

As tensions with Iran persist and the global order continues to fragment, Israel is quietly but deliberately strengthening its strategic presence in the Caspian Sea region. The diplomatic tour of Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar to Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, accompanied by a high-level economic delegation, marks a significant step in this long-term strategy.

In Baku, the message is unmistakable: Israel is consolidating stable, forward-looking alliances well beyond its immediate regional environment.

🇦🇿 Baku, a Strategic Partner for Israel in a Volatile Region

In Azerbaijan, Gideon Sa’ar met with President Ilham Aliyev, whom he publicly described as “a visionary leader who has guided his nation toward impressive achievements.”

The Israeli foreign minister emphasized the exceptional level of trust between the two countries, highlighting Azerbaijan’s consistent support for Jewish life and religious freedom — a politically meaningful reality in a region often marked by hostility toward Israel.

“I arrived in Baku with a high-level business and economic delegation. Our shared goal is to deepen cooperation in energy, defense, water, agriculture, tourism, and more. We are strengthening our strategic relations,” Sa’ar stated.

🇮🇷 Azerbaijan as a Quiet Strategic Lever vis-à-vis Iran

Azerbaijan occupies a unique geopolitical position: it shares a direct border with Iran, enjoys political stability, and maintains pragmatic relations with Israel.

Without provoking open confrontation, this partnership allows Israel to:

• expand its strategic depth vis-à-vis Tehran;
• rely on a sovereign, pragmatic Muslim-majority state;
• reinforce regional deterrence through indirect but credible means.

The Caspian Sea: Energy, Routes, and Strategic Autonomy

The Caspian region has become a central arena in global energy and resource geopolitics.

• Azerbaijan is a key oil and gas producer.
• Kazakhstan holds critical resources, including hydrocarbons, uranium, and strategic metals.

For Israel, the objectives are clear:

1. diversify energy partnerships beyond Russian and Iranian influence;
2. secure long-term cooperation and supply routes;
3. position Israeli companies in large-scale strategic projects.

Israeli Technology at the Core of Economic Diplomacy

The presence of a senior Israeli business delegation underscores a diplomacy built on innovation. Israel brings concrete solutions in high-impact sectors:

• water management and desalination;
• smart agriculture and food security;
• defense and cybersecurity;
• engineering, healthcare, and tourism.

This approach creates strategic interdependence: Israel exports not only technology, but resilience and long-term partnership.

Kazakhstan: Opening a New Diplomatic Horizon

The Kazakh leg of the visit fits into a broader trend: the gradual extension of the spirit of the Abraham Accords beyond the Middle East.

As a moderate Muslim state with international credibility, Kazakhstan positions itself as:

• a bridge between Israel, Central Asia, and the West;
• a stable partner in an increasingly multipolar world;
• a political signal countering efforts to isolate Israel diplomatically.

Jewish Communities and Strategic Soft Power

In both Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, Jewish communities live in safety, with officially recognized religious freedom. For Israel, these communities represent:

• a historical and human bridge;
• a foundation of diplomatic trust;
• a tangible counterweight to regional antisemitic narratives.

The tour of Gideon Sa’ar in Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan highlights a strategic reality often underestimated: Israel is not reacting to global change — it is anticipating it.

By anchoring itself in the Caspian geopolitical core, Jerusalem:

• strengthens indirect strategic pressure on Iran;
• secures access to energy and critical partnerships;
• expands its alliance network beyond traditional frameworks.

A quiet move — but a decisive one.

Elya News

Barcelona, January 25, 2026

Another disgusting antisemitic assault on Jewish memory: filthy vandals desecrated multiple graves in the Jewish section of Barcelona’s Les Corts cemetery, discovered Saturday. This sickening act of pure Jew-hatred has ignited rightful rage across the local Jewish community and the entire global diaspora.

The Jewish Community of Barcelona immediately shut down all Jewish cemetery sections citywide until Monday and told members to stay away this weekend. They are now compiling evidence, preparing criminal charges, and arranging proper Halakhic repairs with rabbinic leaders and the Hevra Kadisha.

Key Points from the Official Statement

Jewish sections remain closed until Monday.

We are gathering evidence to assess the damage and file formal complaints.

Rabbinic authorities and the Hevra Kadisha are racing to repair the desecration in full accordance with tradition and Halakha.

Updates will come only through official channels.

We demand swift, decisive action against these outrages that spit on the dignity of our dead and on civilized coexistence.

As the Talmud states: “Whoever honors the dead also honors the living” (Berakhot 18a).

Jewish Community of Barcelona

Reactions and the Pathetic “Investigation”

Authorities don’t yet call this what it obviously is: antisemitism. But let’s be real — in today’s Europe, where Jew-hatred is exploding unchecked, pretending this is just “random vandalism” would be willful blindness or cowardice. Synagogues firebombed, Jewish students terrorized, cemeteries defiled — the pattern is unmistakable. This isn’t isolated; it’s part of the same poisonous wave that never really went away. The Jewish community demands real justice, not empty statements, and the diaspora is done waiting for Europe to grow a spine.

This repulsive antisemitic attack on Barcelona’s Jewish cemetery is a direct assault on Jewish dead, on human decency, and on the very idea of civilization. In a continent rotting from resurgent Jew-hatred — often excused, minimized, or ignored by spineless leaders and complicit media — these acts are not anomalies; they are symptoms of a disease that history warns us never truly dies.

Updates will follow the moment new facts emerge. Elya News will not look away.

Sources: Official statement from the Jewish Community of Barcelona, El Periódico (January 25, 2026).

Muslim Brotherhood: France’s Right Pushes the EU Toward Terrorist Designation — and the Same Question Now Looms Over Iran’s Revolutionary Guards

Paris / Strasbourg —

On January 22, 2026, France’s National Assembly adopted a European resolution calling for the Muslim Brotherhood movement to be added to the European Union’s list of terrorist organizations. The initiative, driven by France’s right-wing parties and supported by several parliamentary groups, is intended to exert political pressure on EU institutions, even though the legal authority to designate terrorist organizations rests exclusively at the European level.

At the same time, tensions have risen in the European Parliament, where several Members have publicly challenged the European Commission and the EU’s High Representative, Kaja Kallas, during the plenary session in Strasbourg. Among them, French MEP Matthieu Valet accused the EU of complacency toward political Islam and denounced what he described as a failure to confront Islamist networks and their sponsors.

What the French Resolution Does — and Does Not — Do

Contrary to claims circulating on social media, the French Parliament has not legally designated the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization at the EU level.

Instead, it adopted a non-binding political resolution urging the European Union to take action.

The legal framework governing such listings is the Council Common Position 2001/931/CFSP of 27 December 2001, which regulates the inclusion of individuals and entities on the EU terrorist list. Under this mechanism, only the Council of the European Union, representing the Member States, can decide on a designation, and only on the basis of prior decisions taken by a “competent authority” — such as judicial proceedings, investigations, or convictions — at national or third-country level.

As a result, national parliaments no longer hold direct competence in this area. Their role is political rather than legal: to shape debate, build momentum, and influence decision-making within the Council.

A Highly Charged Political Moment in Europe

Matthieu Valet’s intervention targeting Kaja Kallas fits squarely within this strategy. In a brief but widely circulated speech, the MEP accused the EU of avoiding a clear stance on Turkey and cited figures of approximately €10 billion in EU funding allocated over the 2021–2027 period, which he argued were incompatible with a firm stance against Islamist movements.

Beyond the rhetoric, the episode illustrates a broader political tactic: turning a national debate into a European confrontation, placing the Commission and the European External Action Service under public and parliamentary pressure.

Gideon Sa’ar’s Diplomatic Campaign on Iran’s Revolutionary Guards

Alongside these parliamentary initiatives in Europe, Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar has been conducting a sustained diplomatic campaign aimed at securing the designation of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organization by a growing number of countries.

This strategy follows a clear legal logic: multiplying national designations in order to establish precedents that could later be invoked at the European level. In this context, Israel has intensified bilateral outreach to partners in Latin America and Central America, notably Argentina and Honduras, both of which have taken steps that several European states have so far hesitated to pursue.

Sa’ar has also directly engaged with European counterparts, including France’s foreign minister, arguing that the legal criteria set out in the 2001/931/CFSP framework could be met through converging national decisions. In parallel, he has sent a clear political message to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, urging the EU executive to end its inaction toward a military organization accused of systematic internal repression, indirect terrorist operations, and regional destabilization.

From Jerusalem’s perspective, the objective is explicit: to break the political deadlock within the Council of the European Union and pave the way for the IRGC’s formal inclusion on the EU terrorist list.

The Question Now Asked Openly in Brussels

The French debate on the Muslim Brotherhood and the parallel diplomatic battle over Iran’s Revolutionary Guards converge on a question that is now being asked increasingly bluntly in Brussels:

When will Iran’s Revolutionary Guards — accused of violently repressing their own population and fueling armed networks across the region — be designated as a terrorist organization by national parliaments, and ultimately by the Council of the European Union itself?

As long as this decision remains blocked at Council level, national resolutions will continue to play an important political role — without producing direct legal consequences. It is precisely this institutional bottleneck that several governments and political actors are now seeking to overcome.

References

• French National Assembly — Adopted Text TA No. 215 (22 January 2026), European resolution on the Muslim Brotherhood
  https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/17/textes/l17t0215_texte-adopte-seance
• French National Assembly — Official record of the plenary sitting of 22 January 2026
  https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/17/comptes-rendus/seance/session-ordinaire-de-2025-2026/deuxieme-seance-du-jeudi-22-janvier-2026
• Le Monde — Report on the adoption of the resolution targeting the Muslim Brotherhood
  https://www.lemonde.fr/politique/article/2026/01/22/une-resolution-contre-les-freres-musulmans-adoptee-a-l-assemblee
• Council of the European Union (Consilium) — EU counter-terrorism sanctions framework
  https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/sanctions-against-terrorism/
• European Parliament — Resolutions calling for the designation of the IRGC
  https://www.europarl.europa.eu
• Slice42.com https://slice42.com/pourquoi-largentine-a-ose-ce-que-leurope-hesite-encore-a-faire-face-au-terrorisme-iranien/

What Davos and the “Board of Peace” Mean for Israel’s Diplomatic Position

Luis Tavora,
EL-YA News — reporting from Davos

Dateline: Davos / Jerusalem —
January XX, 2026

The World Economic Forum in Davos has long served as a platform for informal diplomacy alongside its economic agenda. This year, the introduction of the “Board of Peace” has drawn particular attention regarding its implications for Israel’s diplomatic strategy.

According to multiple sources, Israel received a formal invitation from the United States to join the Board of Peace, a new initiative launched by President Donald Trump during the 56th annual WEF meeting. The board was presented as a framework to support conflict resolution efforts and post-war reconstruction processes, initially focused on the Gaza ceasefire context.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is reported to have accepted the invitation to participate in the Board of Peace, although Israel did not send representatives to sign the founding charter at the Davos ceremony itself.

Israeli officials have expressed nuanced positions: while diplomatic engagement opportunities in forums like Davos remain valuable, there is concern among some in Jerusalem about the political framing of the Board of Peace and its broader implications for established multilateral mechanisms such as the United Nations.

Observers note that several countries have signed the charter under conditions that are not yet fully transparent, and the initiative’s exact operational mandate remains debated among international figures.

For Israel, the decision to engage with or distance itself from such informal initiatives reflects a broader diplomatic balancing act between maintaining open channels of dialogue and protecting national strategic interests in global forums.

 

WHO HAS SIGNED OR CONFIRMED PARTICIPATION

According to reporting and diplomatic statements:

Founding Members (signed at Davos)
• United States — President Donald Trump signed the founding charter. 

Countries Reportedly Confirmed as Members

Early member states (reported via multiple sources) include:
• Israel — confirmed participation after an invitation from the U.S.; Prime Minister Netanyahu approved joining. 
• Saudi Arabia
• Qatar
• Egypt
• United Arab Emirates
• Turkey
• Pakistan
Other nations from Asia, Eastern Europe and South America have signaled acceptance of invitations. 

Executive Appointees and Key Figures

Trump has appointed key personnel within the Board structure:
• Jared Kushner — senior adviser and peace plan coordinator 
• Marco Rubio — U.S. Secretary of State and senior board figure 
• Tony Blair — former U.K. Prime Minister, named to the executive board by the White House. 
• Steve Witkoff — special envoy for peace missions 
• Ajay Banga (World Bank President) and Marc Rowan (investment CEO) were also named as part of the founder group. 

Wider List of Early Member States (Reported)

Multiple sources have listed additional countries that have accepted invitations so far:
• Morocco
• Indonesia
• Hungary
• Kosovo
• Uzbekistan
• Kazakhstan
• Paraguay
• Vietnam
…among others who reportedly agreed to join from the initial list of around 35 invitees. 

WHO HAS DECLINED OR REMAINED AMBIGUOUS

Declined or Withdrawn Invitations
• Canada — invitation rescinded by Trump after public criticism. 
• Belgium — declared it did not sign the charter and has reservations. 
• France — declined participation and voiced concerns. 
• Germany — negative response due to governance structure concerns. 
• Norway, Sweden, Spain, Italy, UK — among Western nations that reportedly declined to participate or expressed significant reservations. 

Uncertain or Noncommittal

Major powers like China, Russia and India have been invited but have not publicly committed to signing or joining yet. 

Israel Withdraws from Open Government Partnership, Citing Politicization and Hostility

Jerusalem —
January 24, 2026
•

EL-YA News Desk

•
Updated: January 24, 2026, 14:20 UTC

UPDATE (Jerusalem — 14:20 UTC)

The Open Government Partnership (OGP) acknowledged Israel’s decision to withdraw and confirmed that the move takes
immediate effect under the organization’s rules. In a brief response, the OGP said it “regrets Israel’s departure”
while reiterating its commitment to its principles and procedures. No timeline for further discussion or mediation
was announced.

Israeli officials said the decision is final and emphasized that Israel will not participate in any OGP forums,
reviews, or conferences going forward. The Foreign Ministry reiterated that Israel remains committed to
transparency and good governance, but will pursue those principles within frameworks it considers neutral and
non-politicized.

Israel announced on Wednesday that it is withdrawing with immediate effect from the Open Government Partnership
(OGP), an international initiative originally created to promote government transparency, accountability, and civic
participation.

The decision was taken by Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar following an internal review
conducted by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and will be implemented in coordination with Economy Minister
Nir Barkat, according to an official statement.

Founded in 2011 at the initiative of former U.S. President Barack Obama, the Open Government
Partnership was designed to encourage participating states to strengthen transparency, fight corruption, and expand
access to government data. Israel joined the organization in 2012 as part of broader efforts to modernize public
administration and engage in international cooperation.

Israeli officials now say that the organization’s original mission has been progressively undermined. According to
the Foreign Ministry, the OGP has in recent months evolved into a political platform used to advance initiatives
described as explicitly hostile to Israel, in contradiction with the principles of neutrality and good governance
that initially justified Israel’s participation.

Several developments were cited in support of the decision. In September 2025, Israel was
prevented from participating in an official OGP conference held in Spain after Spanish authorities announced they
would not allow any Israeli presence. Israeli officials described the exclusion as unprecedented and noted that
the OGP leadership did not issue any protest or response despite what Jerusalem characterized as a discriminatory
measure.

Another key factor was the decision by the OGP steering committee to initiate a review procedure targeting Israel
following a complaint submitted by a South African non-governmental organization. According to the Israeli
government, the complaint was based on allegations considered unfounded, excessive, and politically motivated,
illustrating what it views as the instrumentalization of the organization’s internal mechanisms for activist
purposes.

In a statement, Foreign Minister Sa’ar said the OGP had become “a fertile ground for anti-Israeli activism,” adding
that this situation “contradicts the principles of the Partnership and the very reasons that led Israel to join
it.” He concluded that Israel’s withdrawal puts an end to what he described as “a theater of the absurd.”

The withdrawal takes effect immediately and does not require a complex international procedure. Israel will cease
all participation in OGP forums, conferences, and review mechanisms. Israeli authorities emphasized, however, that
the country remains committed to the principles of transparency, the rule of law, and good governance, while
rejecting the use of those values as political tools against a member state.

The move comes amid broader Israeli criticism of what it describes as the increasing politicization of certain
multilateral organizations. Israeli officials argue that technical or normative forums are increasingly being used
to conduct campaigns of political delegitimization under institutional frameworks.

For Israel, the decision to leave the Open Government Partnership is intended as a clear diplomatic signal.
Officials said international cooperation can only function on the basis of fairness, neutrality, and mutual respect,
adding that Israel will continue to promote transparent governance within frameworks it considers legitimate and
non-instrumentalized.

Israel Pulls Out of Open Government Partnership After Politicization Row

Jerusalem —
January 24, 2026
•

EL-YA News Desk

Israel announced on Wednesday that it is withdrawing with immediate effect from the Open Government Partnership
(OGP), an international initiative originally created to promote government transparency, accountability, and civic
participation.

The decision was taken by Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar following an internal review
conducted by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and will be implemented in coordination with Economy Minister
Nir Barkat, according to an official statement.

Founded in 2011 at the initiative of former U.S. President Barack Obama, the Open Government
Partnership was designed to encourage participating states to strengthen transparency, fight corruption, and expand
access to government data. Israel joined the organization in 2012 as part of broader efforts to modernize public
administration and engage in international cooperation.

Israeli officials now say that the organization’s original mission has been progressively undermined. According to
the Foreign Ministry, the OGP has in recent months evolved into a political platform used to advance initiatives
described as explicitly hostile to Israel, in contradiction with the principles of neutrality and good governance
that initially justified Israel’s participation.

Several developments were cited in support of the decision. In September 2025, Israel was
prevented from participating in an official OGP conference held in Spain after Spanish authorities announced they
would not allow any Israeli presence. Israeli officials described the exclusion as unprecedented and noted that
the OGP leadership did not issue any protest or response despite what Jerusalem characterized as a discriminatory
measure.

Another key factor was the decision by the OGP steering committee to initiate a review procedure targeting Israel
following a complaint submitted by a South African non-governmental organization. According to the Israeli
government, the complaint was based on allegations considered unfounded, excessive, and politically motivated,
illustrating what it views as the instrumentalization of the organization’s internal mechanisms for activist
purposes.

In a statement, Foreign Minister Sa’ar said the OGP had become “a fertile ground for anti-Israeli activism,” adding
that this situation “contradicts the principles of the Partnership and the very reasons that led Israel to join
it.” He concluded that Israel’s withdrawal puts an end to what he described as “a theater of the absurd.”

The withdrawal takes effect immediately and does not require a complex international procedure. Israel will cease
all participation in OGP forums, conferences, and review mechanisms. Israeli authorities emphasized, however, that
the country remains committed to the principles of transparency, the rule of law, and good governance, while
rejecting the use of those values as political tools against a member state.

The move comes amid broader Israeli criticism of what it describes as the increasing politicization of certain
multilateral organizations. Israeli officials argue that technical or normative forums are increasingly being used
to conduct campaigns of political delegitimization under institutional frameworks.

For Israel, the decision to leave the Open Government Partnership is intended as a clear diplomatic signal.
Officials said international cooperation can only function on the basis of fairness, neutrality, and mutual respect,
adding that Israel will continue to promote transparent governance within frameworks it considers legitimate and
non-instrumentalized.