By Peter Hanseler via ForumGeopolitica.com
Under Roger Köppel, the Swiss weekly newspaper “Weltwoche” has become a mouthpiece for Zionism. Its justification of genocide and war crimes is not only appalling but also mendacious. Is Köppel controlled by Israel?
Introduction
Since October 2023, “Die Weltwoche*” has been pursuing a very strange course. Its intellectually sluggish portrayal of the events surrounding October 7, 2023, has led the Weltwoche, under the leadership of its owner, publisher, and editor-in-chief Roger Köppel, to adopt an increasingly uncritical pro-Israel stance. The narrative disseminated by Köppel is riddled with “facts” that are not facts at all. Added to this are falsehoods and an underlying tone that seems to stem from Israel’s Zionist script and is readily adopted by a newspaper that claims to observe world events independently. The suspicion arises that Köppel has become a puppet of Israeli influence agents – and the evidence for such entanglement is mounting.
In this article, we analyze two posts published by Roger Köppel on April 10 and 27, 2026, by comparing the author’s claims with verifiable facts. The findings are shocking. Köppel instrumentalizes the history of the Jewish people to justify Israel’s Zionist policies in a manner that is historically and journalistically questionable.
analysis
genocide
On April 27, 2026, Köppel published the article “Sorry, Tucker. Sorry, Professor Mearsheimer. Regarding Russia, I agree with you. But not regarding Israel.” The title promises a serious and well-founded analysis of the arguments of these two American titans: Professor Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago, along with Professor Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University in New York, is a heavyweight in American geopolitics. Tucker Carlson is the most prominent and courageous journalist in the United States.
Köppel’s analysis of these leading American intellectuals amounts to describing Tucker Carlson as “courageous” and Professor Mearsheimer as “clever.” None of their arguments are seriously discussed. Why should they be? Köppel is more comfortable spreading pro-Israel propaganda and moves in intellectually shallow waters.
The ever-cheerful Swiss “feel-good” journalist denies that a genocide is taking place in Gaza. Based on his own unique interpretation—which he presents without further explanation—he explicitly exonerates Israel from the accusation of genocide. This is nothing new for “Weltwoche.” As early as December 2024, Köppel demanded: “Stop calling everything genocide.”
Köppel disregards the definition of genocide according to Article II of the Convention of 9 December 1948 on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. He downplays the rulings of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the subject of genocide and the international arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) against Netanyahu. Last summer, the author already drew malicious comparisons between Netanyahu and Putin in an attempt to exonerate the former.
“It wasn’t Israel, but Hamas that went too far with the massacre of October 7, 2023: 1,200 people murdered, raped, and abducted – including babies.” Köppel’s account of the events of October 7 finds no confirmation even in the Israeli press, in newspapers like Haaretz or The New York Times: According to Haaretz, there were 900 dead, 508 of them Israeli soldiers. There is no evidence of rape, no evidence of the killing or beheading of babies, as claimed by official Israeli sources. More than half of the victims were killed by Israeli fire. Haaretz and The Cradle point to the application of the so-called “Hannibal Directive.” This directive obligates the Israeli military to prevent the taking of Israelis as hostages, even if this results in the death of the hostages. Haaretz also noted the following: The number of civilians killed by Hamas was less than 100. The fact that most of those shot were armed settlers exposes the aforementioned Western “reporting” once again for what it is: incitement in the name of an apparently pre-defined political goal, which is uncritically adopted by Weltwoche.
The Israelis had known about the Hamas operation’s planning long before October 7, 2023. This was partly due to a tip from Egyptian intelligence. The Israeli leadership deliberately did not prevent this operation. What we didn’t know at the time is that Tel Aviv exploited this Hamas operation to justify the subsequent genocide in Gaza and to officially implement the “Greater Israel” project—as a kind of prelude. A fact that Köppel omits.
Hamas’s operation was military in nature: taking hostages in order to exchange them for thousands of Palestinians (including many children) who are being held without legal basis in Israeli prisons. It should be noted that armed resistance against an occupying regime is protected by international law.
According to the UN, since October 7, 2023, Israeli forces have killed 72,619 Palestinians, injured 172,484 and killed 391 UN staff members; these are the official figures – the actual number of victims buried under the rubble is likely to be many times higher.
Israel
Köppel claims that the Jews did not immigrate from Europe, but are a people with a millennia-old connection to Palestine. He argues that this invalidates the colonialism argument.
Köppel uncritically and shamelessly adopts this dishonest line of reasoning.
This is an absurd claim, as it would mean that any Italian, as a descendant of Rome, could use the same argument to annex land and houses in Zurich, the former Roman city of Turicum. Most of Israel’s Jewish inhabitants immigrated from Europe. In the wake of Hitler’s dictatorship and World War II, Israel was primarily settled by Holocaust refugees, initially from Eastern Europe. Later, many Jews came from the former Soviet Union, so that today, two million people of Russian—or rather, Soviet—origin live in Israel alone. The “people of Israel,” therefore, did not historically develop organically and thus has nothing to do with the people of Israel of the Old Testament.
Incidentally, all of Israel’s leading politicians have changed their names to conceal their European origins, including Netanyahu, whose real name is “Mileikovsky.” This, too, serves to create an impression that lacks any factual basis.
Köppel further asserts that “the State of Israel was not founded by an imperialist decree, but by a UN resolution.” He refers to UN Resolution 181 of November 29, 1947 (text here). This resolution envisioned a two-state solution. Ben-Gurion preempted this solution, which was conducive to peace between nations, by proclaiming the State of Israel on May 14, 1948, thereby provoking a war that the Arab neighbors had threatened in the event of a unilateral declaration of an Israeli state.
Köppel misleads his readers, leading them to assume he is familiar with the content of the resolution and presents it accurately. The prevention of the establishment of the State of Palestine led to the 1948 war, during which the Israelis expelled or murdered 850,000 Palestinians through ethnic cleansing in order to seize their first piece of land. For the Palestinians, these events—known as the “Nakba” (Arabic for catastrophe or disaster)—became a national trauma, much like the Holocaust in Jewish history.
Köppel thus distorts the entire history of Palestine in order to justify, downplay, and support the crimes that the Israelis have knowingly committed since the very first day of the existence of the State of Israel.
democracy
The main argument behind Köppel’s stance on Israel is his portrayal of Israel as the only democracy in the region. This demonstrates a remarkable ignorance of the realities on the ground in Israel.
Democracy consists of the following elements: free elections, recognition of fundamental and human rights as defined by the UN, separation of powers, the rule of law, and freedom of the press. Israel does not meet the criteria for a democracy, as fundamental and human rights include, for example, equality before the law regardless of religion. However, different rules and legal norms apply in Israel to Jews and non-Jews – revealing a system of apartheid. Amnesty International pointed this out in February 2022. The rule of law, which requires that laws apply equally to everyone, is also not upheld, as the laws differentiate between Jews and non-Jews; for example, in the West Bank, military law applies to non-Jews and civil law to Jews. The most recent example of racism and apartheid is the Knesset’s introduction of the death penalty for terrorism a few days ago, which applies exclusively to Palestinians.
There is documented evidence of torture and rape of Palestinian prisoners; the latter, incredibly, is also carried out by specially trained dogs. This abuse, which disregards all civilized norms, thus affects not only humans; animals, too, are forced to behave towards humans in ways that defy nature—all in the name of Zionism. This is the reality in “democratic Israel.” If a Palestinian has the misfortune of living in the West Bank or the Gaza Strip, they are degraded as a human being in a manner consistent with the provisions of the Generalplan Ost (General Plan East).
“What are the arguments in favor of Greater Israel?” asks Köppel.
In his article of April 10, 2026, entitled “Greater Israel: Not the Worst Idea,” Köppel looks to the future, losing all regard for legal and moral standards. He advocates a “struggle for living space” that is in no way different from Adolf Hitler’s visions and practices during the war against the Soviet Union. Köppel writes with conviction:
“I believe – in fact, I am almost convinced – that a larger Israel, meaning more Israel in the Middle East, would mean more peace, more prosperity and more democracy.”
Roger Köppel, Weltwoche, April 10, 2026
Since Israel declared itself a state in 1947, in violation of UN Resolution 181, the Middle East has been in a state of constant warfare. Prosperity and democracy remain the exclusive privilege of Israel’s Jewish population, at the expense of the Arab population. More Israel therefore means more war, more misery, and certainly no democracy.
Köppel argues that the “Greater Israel” project is a consequence of aggression by Israel’s Arab neighbors and necessary to establish freedom, peace, and democracy in the Middle East. This is a historically untenable and absurd claim, because “Greater Israel” has been a topic of national policy, both in planning and implementation, since the proclamation of the State of Israel: On May 21, 1948, Ben-Gurion wrote in his diary:
“The Achilles’ heel of the Arab coalition is Lebanon. Muslim dominance in that country is artificial and easily overthrown. A Christian state should be established there, its southern border along the Litani River. We would sign a treaty of alliance with this state. Then, once we have broken the strength of the Arab Legion and bombarded Amman, we would wipe out Transjordan; after that, Syria would fall. And should Egypt still dare to wage war against us, we would bomb Port Said, Alexandria, and Cairo. We would thus end the war and, in the name of our ancestors, settle the score with Egypt, Assyria, and Chaldea [southern Iraq].”
Source: David Ben-Gurion, May 21, 1948, to the General Staff. From Ben-Gurion: A Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978, p. 130.
As a reminder: “Greater Israel” includes the following countries or parts thereof: Egypt, Jordan, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and a large part of Saudi Arabia. This is Israel’s current official policy; every Israeli soldier now wears this map on their uniform. These countries, or parts thereof, are to be annexed and thus attacked by Israel. This strategy is in no way different from the bloody expansionist policies of Nazi Germany.
“Greater Israel” is also the reason for Israel’s attack on Iran, because this monstrous project – which has been pursued for almost 80 years – can only be realized if Iran is destroyed or at least neutralized.
By misusing a statement by Willy Brandt, who coined the slogan “Dare more democracy,” Köppel goes so far as to make the following statement under the slogan “Dare more Israel”:
“Anyone who takes the well-being of the civilian population as the benchmark – and this should be done in a debate where human rights are constantly invoked – must acknowledge the following: People are better off under the protection of Israel than under the protection of its neighboring states. A larger Israel would mean that more people would benefit from the rule of law, democracy, and economic participation. One might dismiss this as naive. But is the alternative – failed states, theocracies, civil wars – really any more promising? Hardly.”
Roger Köppel, Weltwoche, April 10, 2026
In doing so, Köppel is humiliating people – indeed, entire nations. Lebanon, for example, was long considered “the Switzerland of the Middle East.” That was before Israel, in collusion with other Western powers, made normal life in the country impossible through constant warfare. As we saw above, this was already Ben-Gurion’s plan in 1948, as he noted in his diary. Currently, Israel is proceeding in Lebanon exactly as it did previously in the Gaza Strip: The occupied territories in Lebanon are being razed to the ground, and their inhabitants are being expelled or murdered.
What defines journalism?
Sensitive topics such as Israel and Palestine require a special level of journalistic diligence. A careless attitude and the resulting superficiality are unacceptable.
Readers of an article published by a widely read, influential media outlet—especially one written by its editor-in-chief—have a right to thorough reporting and truthfulness. Most readers are unable to fact-check; they simply don’t have the time. Consequently, they rely on the integrity and word of the journalist, particularly the word of an editor-in-chief, owner, and publisher of a publication in neutral Switzerland.
These are simple but fundamental rules that should underlie Roger Köppel’s work. The reporting on Israel in “Die Weltwoche” stands in diametrical contradiction to them. The dishonesty with which Köppel argues, as well as his deliberate distortion and misinterpretation of facts, are unworthy of a journalist whom many readers in German-speaking countries trust.
I rule out the possibility that Roger Köppel believes what he writes, because the dishonesty is so blatant that it wouldn’t withstand even the most superficial scrutiny – especially editorial review. He must therefore be aware of his dishonesty. He is knowingly jeopardizing his reputation.
Interestingly, other media outlets, such as the “Neue Zürcher Zeitung” (NZZ), while indeed on Israel’s side, refrain from such open propaganda and exercise greater restraint.
Why is Köppel doing this?
It is well known that Tel Aviv uses all available means to influence public opinion regarding Israel. In the US, this issue is ubiquitous. In Western Europe, this is less the case, but that doesn’t mean similar activities aren’t taking place there. The last time I spoke with Roger Köppel, I asked him about his meeting with Netanyahu’s son—specifically, whether money had changed hands. He left this question unanswered.
The question arises whether Köppel is allowing himself to be manipulated by the Israeli authorities. According to rumors, Israeli representatives attempted to speak with the editor-in-chief of “Weltwoche” before the publication of the article “Greater Israel” on April 10, 2026. On May 14, I therefore contacted Roger Köppel by email and requested clarification. This inquiry also went unanswered.
No answer is also an answer.
