Morocco’s official position is best described as a dual-track policy: it supports diplomatic relations and cooperation with Israel while maintaining that Palestinian statehood and the status of Jerusalem are central principles of its foreign policy. This approach allows Rabat to preserve strategic ties with Israel and the United States without formally abandoning its longstanding support for the Palestinian cause.

Support for a Palestinian State

Morocco officially supports the establishment of an independent and sovereign Palestinian state within the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital, living alongside Israel in peace and security. This has been repeatedly stated by the Moroccan Foreign Ministry and by King Mohammed VI.

The Moroccan government treats this as its core diplomatic position rather than as a temporary response to the Gaza war. Rabat has also stated that Gaza is an integral part of the future Palestinian state and should not be separated from the West Bank or placed under a different political framework.

King Mohammed VI and the Al-Quds Committee

Morocco’s official policy is strongly connected to King Mohammed VI’s position as chairman of the Al-Quds Committee of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. The committee is concerned with Jerusalem and the protection of its religious, historical, and cultural character.

Rabat regularly emphasizes that Jerusalem, or Al-Quds, must remain central to any credible peace process. Morocco has also condemned unilateral measures that it says threaten the legal and historical status of Jerusalem or the sanctity of the Al-Aqsa Mosque.

Through the Bayt Mal Al-Quds Asharif Agency, Morocco has supported social, medical, educational, housing, and humanitarian projects connected to Jerusalem. The government presents this activity as evidence that its support for Palestine is not limited to political statements.

Position on Gaza

Morocco has consistently called for:

• An immediate and lasting ceasefire
• Protection of civilians
• The unrestricted delivery of humanitarian assistance
• The return of displaced Palestinians
• Rejection of forced displacement
• Reconstruction of Gaza
• A renewed political process leading to Palestinian statehood

In its January 2025 statement on the Gaza ceasefire, Morocco urged all Palestinian and Israeli parties to respect the agreement, stop attacks on civilians, facilitate humanitarian access, and use the ceasefire as a foundation for a genuine peace process. When hostilities resumed in March 2025, Morocco strongly condemned what it described as the renewed Israeli aggression against civilians and again emphasized that a lasting ceasefire was necessary to create conditions for a two-state solution.

The official position does not amount to a complete break with Israel. Instead, Rabat presents its diplomacy as a way to maintain channels of communication while pressing for de-escalation, humanitarian access, and a political settlement.

Morocco’s Position on Israel

Morocco recognizes Israel and maintains official relations with it. These relations were restored in 2020 under the U.S.-backed Abraham Accords framework. The agreement committed the two countries to restoring official contacts and developing diplomatic, economic, technological, and security cooperation.

In September 2026, Morocco and Israel agreed to upgrade their relationship by establishing full embassies, appointing ambassadors, restoring direct flights, and expanding economic cooperation, according to Reuters reporting.

Rabat’s official argument is that diplomatic relations with Israel do not mean abandoning Palestine. Moroccan officials portray the relationship as a pragmatic instrument that can:

• Preserve Morocco’s ability to communicate directly with Israel
• Support regional de-escalation
• Promote economic and technological cooperation
• Strengthen Morocco’s ties with Washington
• Advance Moroccan interests concerning Western Sahara
• Give Morocco a platform from which to advocate for Palestinian rights

This is the central difference between the government and anti-normalization activists. The government argues that engagement gives Morocco influence, while opponents argue that normalization grants Israel legitimacy without producing sufficient benefits for Palestinians.

Official Condemnation Does Not Equal Severance

Moroccan statements have often been critical of Israeli military actions, civilian casualties, settlement expansion, unilateral measures in Jerusalem, and violations of the status of holy sites. At the same time, Rabat has not generally treated these disagreements as grounds for permanently ending relations.

From the government’s perspective, these positions are not necessarily contradictory. From the perspective of anti-normalization groups, however, maintaining official relations while condemning Israeli actions creates a credibility problem.

Western Sahara and the Strategic Dimension

Morocco’s relationship with Israel is also connected to Western Sahara, which Rabat considers a core national issue. The 2020 normalization arrangement coincided with the United States recognizing Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara. Israel later formally recognized Morocco’s position on the territory.

This strategic context helps explain why the Moroccan government has continued relations despite domestic opposition. For Rabat, ties with Israel are not only about Palestine or bilateral trade; they also form part of a wider diplomatic strategy involving U.S. relations, Western Sahara, defense and intelligence cooperation, regional influence, economic diversification, and relations with European and African partners.

This makes a complete diplomatic rupture less likely than temporary downgrading, public criticism, or suspension of selected forms of cooperation.

The Government’s Balancing Strategy

Morocco’s official stance can be summarized in the following matrix:

Why Hanawi’s Protest Challenges the Official Narrative

Aziz Hanawi’s flag-burning protest directly challenges the government’s claim that relations with Israel can coexist with firm support for Palestine. His action suggests that opposition groups reject the separation between diplomacy and principle.

The government, by contrast, is likely to argue that severing relations would reduce Morocco’s influence and eliminate a direct channel through which it can promote a ceasefire, humanitarian aid, and a political solution.

Overall Assessment

Morocco’s official stance is neither fully pro-Israel nor supportive of diplomatic isolation. It is a pragmatic policy combining three elements:

1. Formal relations with Israel
2. Strategic cooperation with the United States and Israel
3. Persistent public and diplomatic support for Palestinian statehood and Jerusalem

This policy gives Rabat flexibility, but it also creates a growing credibility gap. As Morocco deepens relations with Israel, official statements supporting Palestine may increasingly be judged against the practical consequences of normalization.

Hanawi’s protest is powerful precisely because it exposes that contradiction. It does not necessarily mean that Morocco will abandon the Abraham Accords, but it demonstrates that official diplomacy remains contested inside the country. The government’s challenge is to maintain its strategic relationship with Israel while convincing the Moroccan public that this relationship does not undermine Palestinian rights. — Khurram Ali Raza

Khurram Ali Raza

Senior journalist and geopolitical analyst writing for Faith & Freedom News – FFN. His work focuses on Middle East diplomacy, interfaith initiatives, the Abrahamic Movement, and the intersection of faith, freedom, and foreign policy across South Asia and the broader Islamic world.