Interview with Israel’s Ambassador to Russia Oded Yosef, published by RTVI on March 14, 2026, is indeed a heavy read. Not because a diplomat is obliged to speak the language of ultimatums. And not because Jerusalem has no reason to maintain communication channels with Moscow. The heaviness lies elsewhere: in the same conversation, two incompatible lines are heard — the acknowledgment that Russia has taken a unilateral position on Iran, and simultaneously almost demonstrative compliments towards Moscow and personally to Putin.
Quotes
For those too lazy to read the original or who fundamentally refuse to read propagandistic Russian Z-type media, we will immediately provide the most striking quotes from the Israeli diplomat.
“They (Iran – ed.) produce long-range missiles that … can reach Russia.”
“We maintain very good relations with Russia. Russia is a very strong and important friend of Israel, and we have very good contacts at various levels. And … , Russia’s ability to play a significant role is very closely linked to the position that is broadcast in its official statements.”
“Unfortunately, what is heard in the form of official statements over the past few weeks is the acceptance of the Iranian narrative in a unilateral manner. I think this puts our very good friend, Russia, in a position where the ability to play a significant role is very, very limited.”
“Let me say once again that we highly value the position of the Russian leadership and especially President Putin when it comes to a very firm commitment to the security of Israel and the people of Israel. It is no secret that 20 percent of Israel’s population are immigrants from the USSR. Many of them still have Russian citizenship. And this commitment, which is expressed in many ways, is very important to us.”
“… I am very surprised by the official statements regarding recent events in Iran, which in this sense are very one-sided. I think we have many more points of contact than recent official statements on this matter suggest. In our bilateral agenda, these points of contact are very actively used to address strategic issues, as well as issues of cooperation in the field of economy and culture.
This year we are going to celebrate the 35th anniversary of the resumption of diplomatic relations between our countries. I am sure that this will be a wonderful year when Russia and Israel can emphasize how strong our ties are, how strong our friendship is.”
“I … consider one of my most important tasks to prepare visits of Israeli leadership, including, of course, Prime Minister Netanyahu, to Russia during this year, and I hope this will be realized.”
“— So the visit is still on the agenda, despite everything?
— Of course.”
“We respect Russia … and maintain good relations with it. I hope this can be used for the benefit of stability in the region.”
“… let me just say that between Israel and Russia there is very effective communication and very good interaction at various levels, especially between our two leaders.”
“— Russia recently accused Israel of attacks on the Russian Cultural Center in the Lebanese city of Nabatieh. The Russian embassy in Lebanon condemned the strike as aggression. Can you explain this attack? What happened? Do you have any information?
— I have no additional information on this matter. But I can assure you: whenever we receive requests for information or clarification from our Russian friends, we very carefully check the situation, the incident. If necessary, we conduct an investigation, and if necessary, we learn lessons from it. I have no comments on this particular issue, but as far as I understand, this situation is still being studied.”
“— By the way, one technical question. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently announced that Ukrainian military and specialists are being sent to the Middle East to train Gulf countries to shoot down Iranian drones. Did Israel ask Ukraine for such assistance?
— I think that since gaining independence in 1948, Israel has proven that we have managed to create a very strong army, powerful Armed Forces, and a very high-tech military potential. Thank God, we are in a situation where we can defend ourselves independently.”
“— Is it important for Israel that Russia joins the Peace Council on Gaza?
I believe that if Russia desires this and wants to play a role aimed at achieving this very goal … , then my answer is yes.”
“— By the way, did Vladimir Putin receive an invitation to visit Israel?
— President Putin is a great friend of Israel. I am not aware of a specific invitation, but I can assure you that President Putin is always a very welcome friend and guest in our country.”
“I confidently say that in my understanding, the Russian authorities fight anti-Semitism uncompromisingly. And I am glad about that. I can see with my own eyes a very active and very vibrant Jewish life that continues here in Russia.”
“We have very close cooperation when it comes to cultural life, academic exchanges. We could and should do much more in our trade relations. And this, I think, will be the main issues I would like to focus on in the coming year.”
…
Yosef directly states that Russia is a ‘very strong and important friend of Israel’, that he is ‘very surprised’ by Moscow’s official statements on Iran, and also calls Putin a ‘great friend of Israel’ and ‘always a very welcome friend and guest’. This is not a retelling of someone else’s emotions and not a phrase taken from an old archive. This is a fresh, public, recorded position, voiced already against the backdrop of a major war with Iran.
And here begins the main Israeli question. Where does diplomacy end and the humiliation of one’s own country begin — primarily its citizens, who live under the threat of missiles and drones?
What exactly was said in the interview and why it sounds jarring
To be fair, Yosef did not portray complete unity with Moscow. On the contrary, he acknowledged that Russian official statements on Iran sound one-sided, essentially accepting the Iranian narrative and limiting Russia’s ability to play a constructive role. Moreover, when asked about publications that mentioned the possible transfer of Russian data and drone warfare experience to Iran, the ambassador replied: if this is true, it would be a clear contradiction to Russia’s declared commitment to Israel’s security.
But that is precisely why the interview looks so dissonant. If Moscow, according to the ambassador himself, broadcasts a one-sided pro-Iranian approach, if even hypothetical assistance to Tehran would be a direct blow to Israeli security, then why in the same conversation repeatedly raise the level of friendly rhetoric? Why emphasize ‘strong ties’, prepare visits, and talk about a ‘wonderful year’ for Russian-Israeli relations right now?
The problem is not that the ambassador did not slam the door. The problem is that the public language at such a moment creates a sense not of professional restraint, but of moral confusion. For the Israeli viewer, who hears sirens, follows Iran’s strikes on Israel and neighboring countries, and understands the price of every mistake, this sounds not like subtle diplomacy, but like a dangerous substitution of concepts.
Against the backdrop of what messages this was heard
The context here is crucial. AP and Reuters last week reported messages that Russia could have provided Iran with information capable of helping Tehran strike American military targets in the region; meanwhile, US special envoy Steve Witkoff publicly stated that Moscow denied this. The RTVI interview also reminded of reports from CNN and The Washington Post about the possible transfer of Russian drone warfare experience and intelligence data to Iran on American targets. In other words, it was not about a theoretical debate in an academic audience, but about specific, extremely toxic suspicions for Israel.
It is also worth noting that Russia does not appear as a bystander. Reuters reported that Moscow publicly called on Israel and the US to stop the war against Iran, and ‘Rosatom’ confirmed the continuation of work at the Bushehr nuclear power plant, where Russia maintains a significant presence. This is not neutral geography and not abstract diplomatic arithmetic. This is a dense, material, strategic presence next to the Iranian state at the time of war.
Why for the Israeli audience such rhetoric looks like a mistake
Israel indeed must talk to all major players. This is the Middle East, not a seminar on political ethics. Here work interests, de-escalation channels, military calculations, hostage fates, the Syrian direction, the Iranian factor, the pressure of great powers. No one seriously demands that the ambassador switch to the genre of street activism.
But there is a limit. When a country suspected of aiding a regime that attacks Israel receives the status of a ‘very strong and important friend’ on air, it does not create the impression of mature diplomacy, but a feeling that the right words are said to the wrong recipients. Israeli society today is sensitive not to tonality in general, but to false tonality. And in this sense, Yosef’s formula sounds particularly bad precisely because the war has removed the space for ambiguity.
For an audience that follows the conflict not from Moscow studios, but through alarms, reports, and routes to the nearest shelter, NAnews — News of Israel | Nikk.Agency records here not a nuance of protocol, but a symptom: between the real threat and official rhetoric, a too noticeable gap has formed.
Friendship cannot be stronger than the reality of war
The most problematic part of the interview is not even the words about the ‘important friend’. The most problematic part is the ease with which the formulas about Putin as a ‘great friend of Israel’ and about friendship that is ‘very, very strong’ were spoken. Because in wartime, such phrases cease to be just a ritual. They become a political signal. And this signal is heard not only in Moscow.
It is heard in Tehran. It is heard by the families of Israelis who live under the threat of new strikes. It is heard by Israel’s allies, for whom the question is now extremely simple: who helps contain the Iranian threat, and who — directly or indirectly — expands the space for it.
That is why the reaction to this interview in Israel will not be calm. And should not be calm. Diplomatic contacts can be maintained. Bridges can be left unburned. Space for future negotiations can even be left. But in the midst of war, one cannot call the leader of a country, around which serious reports of assistance to the Iranian military machine are already circulating and which itself has publicly taken a position convenient for Tehran, a ‘great friend’.
Where is the line between restraint and disgrace
The line is where diplomatic language stops protecting the country’s interests and starts masking the obvious. Russia for Israel can be an interlocutor. It can be a factor. It can be a problem that has to be taken into account. But in the current circumstances, publicly describing it almost in the language of alliance means replacing strategic sobriety with a set of compliments that poorly match the military reality.
This is what makes Oded Yosef’s interview so uncomfortable to read. Not sharpness. Not controversy. But the feeling that the person representing Israel in one of the most dangerous moments for the region lacked the most important thing — the precision of moral emphasis.