In a significant decision, the prestigious Oxford Union debating society has voted overwhelmingly to declare Israel a greater threat to regional stability than Iran. The November 13, 2025, debate concluded with members supporting the motion by a decisive margin of 265 votes to 113 .
The event featured prominent speakers on both sides. Arguing for the motion were Mohammad Shtayyeh, the former Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority, and Ataollah Mohajerani, a former Iranian vice-president. Opposing them were Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of the non-governmental organization UN Watch, and Sir Dominick Chilcott, a former British ambassador .
The debate and its outcome continue a pattern of criticism toward Israel by the Union. The society passed another motion last year that accused Israel of being "an apartheid state responsible for genocide" .
The Case Against Israel
Supporters of the motion argued that Israel's policies are the main source of instability in the Middle East. Mohammad Shtayyeh described Israel as an expansionist colonial state that was established by foreign powers and continues to act above international law .
He accused Israel of violating multiple United Nations resolutions and of enforcing a colonial regime based on apartheid against the Palestinian people. Shtayyeh stated that brutal occupation, crimes, and genocide are dragging the region into repeated conflicts . He also claimed that some Israeli lawmakers believe the country's borders should stretch from the Nile River to the Euphrates .
Shtayyeh concluded his arguments by asserting that Israel is the biggest cause of destabilization in the region .
The Defense of Israel and Accusations Against Iran
In his opposition to the motion, Hillel Neuer called the proposition an inversion of reality. He argued that regional stability should be measured by which country starts wars, not which one stops them .
Neuer contended that Israel does not arm terror proxies in five Arab countries, while Iran does exactly that. He said this is well understood across the Middle East, which is why many Arab states quietly depend on Israel for their own survival .
To support his case, Neuer pointed to the strategic alliance between Israel and moderate Arab states. He noted peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan, and the more recent normalization agreements with the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan under the Abraham Accords . He also highlighted the significant rapprochement between Israel and Saudi Arabia .
Neuer cited a specific example from April 2024, when Iran launched a major attack on Israel using drones and missiles. He emphasized that the defensive effort to intercept these weapons involved the air forces of Jordan, the United States, the United Kingdom, and France, with Gulf states providing intelligence support . He argued that this cooperative defense was a real-world vote on the motion, showing that Arab states see Iran as the existential threat and Israel as a partner .
Focus on Iran's Actions
A significant portion of the opposition's argument focused on detailing Iran's role in regional instability. Neuer stated that the Islamic Republic's reason for existing is revolutionary Jihad, which it seeks to export around the world .
He outlined Iran's influence through its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and proxy groups in several countries. He accused Iran of arming and training the Houthis in Yemen, who have attacked Israeli cities and contributed to that country's collapse .
In Lebanon, Neuer argued that Iran's proxy Hezbollah has hollowed out state institutions, creating a failed state. He said Hezbollah built a military stronger than the national army and has repeatedly dragged Lebanon into wars its people did not choose .
Regarding Syria, Neuer said Iran intervened to save the Assad regime, deploying commanders and militiamen. This led to a campaign of mass atrocities that killed hundreds of thousands and displaced millions, using the country as a base to attack Israel .
In Iraq, Neuer accused Iran of filling the post-Saddam vacuum by building militias stronger than the state. These groups answer to Tehran rather than Baghdad and have turned Iraq into a launchpad for attacks .
In Gaza, Neuer stated that Iran transformed Hamas into a mini-army by funding its rockets, tunnels, and drone programs. He said this diverted aid from civilians to weapons and resulted in the October 7th massacre, the deadliest attack on Jews since the Holocaust .
Neuer also accused his debate opponent, Ataollah Mohajerani, of complicity with Iranian regime crimes. He referenced a legal complaint filed by a human rights lawyer concerning Mr. Mohajerani's role during a period when Iran attempted or carried out hundreds of assassinations of dissidents in Europe .
Context and Aftermath
The debate took place at a time of heightened tension on Oxford's campus. Just days after the vote, a talk by former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was disrupted by dozens of protesters. Police made three arrests as demonstrators blocked the entrance and chanted slogans, with some inside the chamber having their hands painted red and shouting during the event .
A Union spokesperson responded to the incident by reaffirming the society's commitment to free speech. They stated that platforming a speaker does not mean the Union supports their positions .
Following the debate, Hillel Neuer expressed his disappointment on social media. He wrote that the proposition had initially struck him as deep satire. He connected the outcome to a previous Union controversy, noting that 501 members had recently voted to back a student leader who cheered the killing of an American far-right figure .
The Oxford Union, founded in 1823, is one of the world's most renowned debating societies. It has a history of hosting world leaders and shaping public discourse. Its debates and votes are often seen as reflecting the views of future leaders and the intellectual currents at elite universities .