Is Israel Alone? With Haviv Rettig Gur

Despite the perception of Israel's increasing isolation as depicted in certain media outlets and editorials, Israel remains integrated economically and geopolitically with most of the international community. The criticism of Israel's actions, particularly during times of conflict, may seem fresh and new, but it follows a familiar pattern and is not solely about the politicians leading Israel, but rather about Israel's existence and its approach to security. Aviv Retik Gur, from The Times of Israel, shares a positive assessment of the military situation on the ground during the ongoing conflict, but expresses concerns about the political framework and international response. Despite these challenges, Israel continues to be supported by many economic and geopolitical actors around the world.

The numbers of civilian casualties reported in the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza cannot be trusted due to Hamas' manipulation of data. Hamas has claimed that over 90% of the deaths are civilian, but their own admission of over 6,000 Hamas fighter deaths contradicts this claim. The Israeli side reports significantly fewer civilian deaths and lower soldier death rates, which is consistent with the observations of aid agencies and the conduct of the war. The Israeli army is currently in a new stage of the conflict, focusing on anti-tunnel operations and gathering intelligence, which has led Hamas to believe they are safe and make mistakes, resulting in faster degradation of their forces. An example of this was the recent battle at Shefa Hospital in Gaza City, where the Israeli army successfully trapped and arrested a large number of Hamas fighters, including commanders, and shut down a major command post. The international pressure on Israel is being used by Hamas as a false sense of security, and the Israeli army is using it to their advantage.

Despite international criticism and perceived isolation, Israel's military progress against Hamas in Gaza is systematic and effective at the ground level. However, the larger strategic political situation remains a question. The notion of Israel's increasing isolation in the world is largely based on sentiments and noise rather than facts. Criticisms from certain Jewish communities, governments, and media outlets may contribute to this perception, but Israel still has support from various quarters. It's essential to differentiate between analysis and prescriptive rhetoric. The Economist's cover and Senator Schumer's speech, for instance, may not reflect the reality of Israel's situation. The situation is complex, and it's crucial to maintain a nuanced perspective.

Israel's public diplomacy efforts have been ineffective due to a lack of competent English speakers and a cultural reluctance to justify themselves to the world. This was highlighted during a closed door meeting where Netanyahu was criticized for not making Israel's case effectively in the international media. The argument that young people's perception of Israel is shaped by Netanyahu is not new, but the current narrative comes from economists and Jewish leaders in the US who believe that supporting Netanyahu is not in America's interest. Israel's image problem is not just with young people but also with established critics of Israel. The solution lies in finding the right people to speak for Israel and improving the country's strategic communications. The recent shutdown of the public diplomacy ministry's budget due to the war further hinders Israel's ability to make its case to the world.

The disproportional response of Israel during military operations, such as the Israeli operation in southern Lebanon in 1996 (known as "Grapes of Wrath"), has been a recurring issue leading to international criticism and damage to Israel's image. During this operation, Israel's response to Hezbollah rocket attacks was seen as excessive, resulting in a large number of civilian deaths in Kharkana, and causing significant damage to Lebanon. This disproportional response, according to Tom Friedman in his column "Lebanon's Aftermath," led to Israel being seen as overstepping boundaries and getting away with actions that further fueled anti-Israel sentiment during a time when the US was closely aligned with Israel and there was no Soviet Union to speak up for the Arabs. This theme of disproportional response has continued to be a criticism of Israel in various conflicts and remains a significant issue in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The criticism against Israel's actions towards Hezbollah and collective punishment of Lebanon is not new and has been a recurring theme for decades, regardless of who is leading Israel. Critics argue that Israel's actions have isolated the country on the world stage. However, Israel's actions were seen as necessary responses to Hezbollah's threats, and international agreements requiring Hezbollah to withdraw from certain areas have not been enforced. Israel's withdrawal from South Lebanon in 2000 and the 2006 Lebanon War resulted in significant damage to infrastructure and loss of civilian lives. Critics' calls for Israel to be more restrained have not resulted in actual achievements towards peace or limiting Hezbollah's power. The discourse against Israel seems disconnected from any serious argument and can be repeated with different Israeli leaders and conflicts.

Israel's current war aim is to completely incapacitate Hamas's ability to use Gaza as a base for launching attacks against Israel, rather than just preventing another October 7 incident. This perspective stems from Israel's past experiences and the immense pressure it faces from various sources, including the Arab world and the left, to justify its actions in defending itself. The conventional wisdom that Israel must both defend itself and appease its critics has led to a complex and often contradictory approach to conflict resolution. The failure to address threats like Hezbollah in the past has resulted in traumatic consequences, making it crucial for Israel to take decisive action to prevent future attacks.

The unilateral withdrawal of Israel from Gaza in 2005, led by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, paved the way for Ehud Olmert's election as prime minister and the implementation of his "convergence plan" for the West Bank. Olmert, a former Likud member, founded Kadima and ran for prime minister on a platform of further withdrawals. Despite his unpopularity, Olmert was able to win a significant number of Likud votes, which contributed to Likud's poor performance in the 2006 elections. Netanyahu, who led Likud at the time, was unable to prevent the loss of votes to Olmert and the formation of a center-right coalition government. However, this withdrawal and the subsequent conflict with Hezbollah in Lebanon in 2006, highlighted the vulnerability of Israel to rocket attacks from militant groups, and the Israeli public's perception that Israel was not able to effectively respond to this threat. This perception led to criticism of Olmert and the international community for not doing enough to protect Israel from the Hezbollah threat. Despite the intense bombardment of Hezbollah positions, the organization was able to launch rockets from within civilian areas in Lebanon, causing widespread damage and displacement. The war ended with UN Security Council Resolution 1701, but the Israeli public's perception of inadequate protection against the Hezbollah threat persisted.

The Israeli trauma from past conflicts with Hamas and Hezbollah, including the 2006 war and the 2nd intifada, has led to significant investments in defense systems like Iron Dome and the building of bomb shelters. These conflicts have also fueled political instability and division within Israeli society, making it difficult to find a peaceful solution to the Palestinian question. The Israeli public's belief in the need to protect their country from threats, such as Hamas in Gaza, is deeply rooted and has led to support for military actions like Operation Defensive Shield and the eventual withdrawal from Gaza. However, these actions have also led to international criticism and the rise of the BDS movement, which is seen by many Israelis as an attack on their right to exist. The complex history of Israeli-Palestinian conflicts and the deep-seated beliefs and emotions on both sides make finding a peaceful and lasting solution a significant challenge.

The Israeli public's belief in the necessity of their current policies towards Palestine is deeply rooted in their belief that withdrawal from occupied territories could lead to increased threats to their safety. This belief, shaped by years of conflict and perceived Palestinian refusal to understand Israeli perspectives, makes it challenging to change Israeli behavior through external pressure. The Israeli left, or those advocating for peace and withdrawal, must find a way to rebuild trust and belief in their vision among the Israeli public. Dismissing Israel as an aspirational analysis or wish casting, rather than a serious analysis, does not contribute to the conversation. Instead, understanding the Israeli cost-benefit calculation and addressing their concerns of security and survival is crucial for any meaningful progress towards peace.

The Israeli public plays a significant role in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict resolution process, yet the Palestinian leadership has not effectively engaged with them. The Egyptian-Israeli rapprochement in the late 1970s serves as a powerful example of how acknowledging and speaking to the Israeli public can shift public opinion. However, Palestinian leaders have failed to do so, instead leaving Hamas and Hezbollah to shape the Israeli narrative. To move forward, the international community must acknowledge the importance of the Israeli political psyche and engage with it. Ignoring Israel's complex political landscape and focusing solely on specific leaders, like Netanyahu, is disingenuous and ineffective. The Israeli public's perception of the conflict and their identification with Israel are crucial factors in finding a resolution.

Israel's communication with the world about its actions, particularly during times of conflict, is crucial in shaping the narrative and mitigating negative perceptions. The absence of clear and consistent messaging creates a vacuum that can be filled by small voices with big microphones, potentially harming Israel's image. While Israel has the ability to shape its environment, the same criticisms from certain voices towards Israel persist, regardless of the leader or tactics. Israel's geopolitical and economic position, fueled by its tech boom and integration into the region and the world, has significantly benefited the country. Being alone is not an ideal situation for Israel, and its integration into the world has been a key factor in its growth and security.

Israel, despite being a small country with no domestic market to speak of, has become a global hub for innovation and problem-solving for multinational companies. Over 400 companies, including tech giants like Apple, Meta, Intel, and non-tech companies like Procter and Gamble, Coca Cola, and Walmart, have set up shop in Israel to address their biggest innovation challenges. These companies are not leaving Israel amidst geopolitical tensions, but rather reaffirming their commitment to the country due to mutual economic interests. Israel's relationships with these countries and companies are crucial for its strength and growth, and the country has both current and future friends in the region. The economist's article suggesting Israel's isolation is a misrepresentation of the reality, as no country or company has shown a willingness to hurt their own interests to make a statement against Israel.

Israel's survival and regional stability have been linked to American support since Israel became a capable regional power. However, Israel has a history of fighting alone and will continue to do so if necessary. The absence of Western support won't deter Israel from defending itself, but it may lead to more intense and decisive conflicts. The Israeli psyche and historical experiences are crucial to understanding the Israeli mindset, and ignoring these realities in favor of moral wish casting won't lead to productive engagement or resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Ultimately, the speaker believes that Palestinians need to understand Israel's strength and choose better strategies for dialogue, but acknowledges that Israel's isolation may be the only way to force this realization.

Israel's strength and ability to defend itself against its enemies is a significant factor in maintaining allies and preventing isolation. The speaker argues that Israel's enemies, such as Hamas, may try to make Israel alone and weak, but this would only increase the number of friends Israel has due to the shared threat. The speaker also emphasizes that criticism of Israel, particularly from the international community, can be performative and not concrete, as shown by the example of Canada's arms sales. Israel's exports of weapons to Canada totaled $6.72 million in 2022, while imports were only $191,000, highlighting the asymmetrical nature of the relationship. Overall, the speaker argues that Israel's strength and alliances are crucial for its survival and success in the region.

Despite Canada's performative actions of limiting arms sales to Israel, the economic relationship between the two countries remains strong. Israel exported over $1.3 billion to Canada in 2022, while importing $506 million. Israel's economy has grown significantly more than Canada's over the past decade, and the trend is continuing. The speaker argues that if countries truly want to impact Israel, they must be willing to harm themselves economically. Despite tensions, no country has left the Abraham Accords, and many continue to engage with Israel. The Palestinian National Movement faces a long and unlikely path to success, and even if it does, Israel will still be a dominant player in the region. The speaker's message is one of resilience and self-determination. Israel holds its fate in its own hands, and there is no other truth to this moment in Jewish history except that one.

Rebecca Strom is the media manager for this podcast, and Martin Huergo lends a hand with additional editing. Dan Senor hosts the show. This information is important for anyone interested in the production team behind the podcast. By knowing the names and roles of the key players, listeners can gain a deeper appreciation for the work that goes into creating each episode. It's a reminder that behind the scenes, there are dedicated individuals who ensure the final product is polished and high-quality. Additionally, knowing the names of the team members can help build a connection with the podcast and create a sense of community among listeners. So, whether you're a new listener or a long-time fan, take a moment to appreciate the hard work of Rebecca Strom, Martin Huergo, and Dan Senor.