Speaker 1: 0:05

Israel Policy Forum warns the senseless killing of Yaron Lashinsky and Sarah Milgram last night in the terrorist attack at the American Jewish Committee Young Diplomats reception in Washington DC. Our hearts go out to their families and to their Israeli embassy colleagues. A killer must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. This was an anti-Semitic terrorist attack targeting a Jewish event, ostensibly carried out in the name of Palestinian solidarity. There can be no space for this in the United States. Support for Palestinians confers no legitimacy to attack Jews, Israeli or otherwise, and the terrorist who gunned down two innocents last night has only damaged whatever cause he was allegedly trying to advance.

Speaker 1: 0:44

Neither the October 7th attacks nor the war in Gaza provide any justification for political violence, and the language used in anti-Israel protests that often glorifies such violence must stop. Jews in this country should not have to live in fear because of fighting taking place 6,000 miles away, and we reject any attempted connection between these two arenas. We also reject the immediate rush to map terrorism on American shores to domestic Israeli partisan politics, the political points scoring already taking place, as though the terrorist was motivated by statements from politicians on either side of the spectrum rather than by events on the ground in his own twisted anti-Semitic hatred is unseemly and must stop. Our thoughts and our condolences are with Yaron and Sarah's families.

Speaker 2: 1:39

Shalom and welcome to the Israel Policy Pod. I'm Nery Zilber, a journalist based in Tel Aviv and a policy advisor to Israel Policy Forum. A lot to discuss this week, with our regular catch-up with Israel Policy Forum's very own Chief Policy Officer, michael Koplow, and Shira Efron, the Diane and Guilford Glazer Foundation Senior Fellow and Director of Research. We'll be discussing the start of the long-threatened IDF offensive into Gaza, the growing international pressure on Israel, which really ratcheted up this week, the humanitarian situation inside the Strip and the big question hovering over everything what, if anything, does Donald Trump want? Just a bit of housekeeping before we start. We're now a video podcast. Yes, we're on video live and direct, so if you like to watch us as you listen to us, you can check us out on YouTube and, of course, audio version still available. Wherever you get your podcasts, please subscribe and leave a good rating. If the mood strikes you, let's get to Michael and Shira. Hi Michael, hi Shira. Welcome back to the podcast.

Speaker 3: 2:50

Hi guys.

Speaker 4: 2:51

Hi Gary.

Speaker 3: 2:51

First one on video.

Speaker 4: 2:53

Yeah, but. I'm always smiling like that when we start the conversation.

Speaker 2: 2:58

But now I and everyone else can see your bright, beautiful faces and not just your voices, so it's a marked improvement. A lot to get into. This week. We're going to go around the horn on the big issues, literally, of this past week, primarily in and around and about Gaza. And just for the record for our listeners, we're recording this Wednesday afternoon, tel Aviv time, just in case anything happens between now and when this episode goes up.

Speaker 2: 3:25

But I wanted to start here. Over the weekend the IDF officially launched its new offensive against Hamas in Gaza major airstrikes across the strip, five divisions of IDF infantry and armor pushing in. A general evacuation order issued to Khan Yunus, the second biggest city in the Gaza Strip in the south. Also, the talks that had been ongoing in Doha and Qatar for a new ceasefire for hostage deal have effectively stalled, it seems, at least for now, after there was some glimmer of optimism late last week. So first question to you, michael were you surprised by both of these developments? No ceasefire deal, even if a temporary one, on the one hand, and the start of this long threatened Israeli offensive into Gaza, on the other?

Speaker 3: 4:16

I wasn't surprised by either. As both of you and everyone who ever listens to us knows, I'm generally pessimistic about the prospects of getting to a deal, certainly under the current circumstances. So, despite the chatter last week about the sides being close and people compromising.

Speaker 3: 4:36

I never bought it. Never say never, and I suppose something can still happen, and obviously a lot of it is going to depend on what the Trump administration does and how hard they push for it. But I was not surprised that the two sides are still not agreeing and with the offensive, I think it remains to be seen just how wide ranging it's going to be. You noted the divisions are moving in. So far, it seems like we're still in the phase of mostly airstrikes and maybe at some point they will do what they've said they're going to do, which is move into Gaza in full force and take territory. But at least for now, it's unclear to me what the point of this is. I don't understand what people think the real motivation for this operation is because it's blindingly clear that it's not going to get the hostages back. We know the numbers on those right. There's no ambiguity it's 148 hostages who have come back through negotiations or quote unquote goodwill gestures, and it's eight hostages who've been rescued by the IDF. So this isn't going to rescue the hostages, an effort to really put pressure on Hamas for negotiations, because, at least according to reporting, hamas has started to soften some of what it's asking for, and the Israelis haven't budged at all. Not to mention that Netanyahu, in some senses, keeps on moving the goalposts about what would be required. Right, it isn't now.

Speaker 3: 6:29

It's certainly not only about releasing the hostages. It's also about Hamas leaders going to exile. It's also about them laying down their arms. It's also about, after that happens, israel remaining in Gaza until there's full disarmament of the territory. So he's not exactly creating wiggle room in a way that Hamas can actually meet. And when it comes to using this to defeat Hamas militarily, there's really no evidence that recruiting people. This is just going to be a counterinsurgency. So I think it's time to drop the fiction that one more operation and just more force and a new maneuver where this time you hold territory that's going to lead to complete Hamas defeat and surrender. I just don't buy it. So where this all leads, especially when, just in the last few days, we have Trump himself clearly losing patience and we have the Europeans threatening new sanctions and all sorts of really bad developments, without evidence that this operation is going to accomplish anything that it's supposed to accomplish, I just don't see the point, and we'll see how far it goes, but it doesn't seem like a smart exercise to me.

Speaker 2: 7:56

So save your thoughts about both Trump and international pressure. We'll get into both those issues later on, trust me. And in terms of achieving the goals or the motivations, well, the Israeli government would beg to differ. Obviously, the Israeli government still maintains in every statement that the goal of the operation is to both get the hostages out and to defeat Hamas. As you all know, and as this podcast has tried to explain for months now, both those objectives are likely mutually exclusive, for all the reasons that we know, shira, the start of the operation, the lack of a new ceasefire deal did it come as a surprise to you?

Speaker 4: 8:43

So yes and no. First of all, I do want to qualify. There's a lot of talk about the military operation, for the most part in terms of they're mostly airstrikes. There are those divisions Now it's three divisions who are sort of like popes in the territory. But as far as I know and again I'm not like on the maps there's not actually a lot of active fighting at the moment. So it's more the talk of actual fighting that is happening and there have been evacuation orders.

Speaker 4: 9:17

It does not mean that the Palestinians in Gaza are not suffering from the threat of war, but in terms of how much active fighting there is on the moment on the ground, with going into territory areas, right, this operation is not supposed to again be launched against the same targets.

Speaker 4: 9:37

We've been through I will try to be diplomatic about it nine times already. Right, this is not the idea. It is to go to areas where there hasn't been a grand operation so far. So we're talking about the central areas, right, the Blasi area, which was defined by Israel as the humanitarian zone, and we know it was infiltrated by Hamas and actually Hamas, kind of like, was the sovereign or sort of managed law and order in that lawless area for a long time. This has not happened yet, so I think we need to be just mindful of that. I am a bit surprised how quickly things did turn. I think there are a lot of, you know, respected analysts that I respect and also people who are officials within the system that when we had last, I think, mary we spoke on Sunday about it were convinced that this was going to some sort of Not on a microphone, not on a podcast.

Speaker 4: 10:37

Not on a podcast. We spoke on the phone, of course.

Speaker 2: 10:41

That also happens in real life, as a kid said.

Speaker 4: 10:45

But they were people, people, and those are people who are pessimistic all along that actually, when the second ceasefire happened, were. So anyway, I had good reasons, I think, to be more optimistic about it, for a variety of reasons. First and foremost was the us pressure. Right, donald trump, but not just trump. Right, there's whitcoff and bowler all of a sudden, and hamas playing a very smart move with releasing Idan Alexander without essentially requesting anything in return. Right, which I thought was wise on their part. And it seemed also that if Hamas continues to play its cards right, they can call the Israeli bluff because, going back to where we are in the ground operation, all polls indicate that this has no public support in Israel. You know, there are some people on the right, right, even those who want to see Hamas, which is basically all of us right. No one wants to see Hamas there, which is basically all of us right, no one wants to see Hamas there. But even those that see this as a priority, the 70% of the Israeli public, plus or minus, want to see the hostages back in. Understanding what Michael I won't repeat it, but what Michael basically said right, this war is to no end and it's not going to achieve its stated objectives. So what's the point, knowing very well that this is going to lead to the death of more and more IDF soldiers? We've just seen the last couple of days, right Even with absent the fighting, we're seeing soldiers dying there, more injuries, the state of PTSD, and then with this diplomatic tsunami, which I'm sure we'll get into in a moment, plus with the temperature, I just thought, and sort of. In addition to that, domestic issues, with the vote in Knesset committee which did not allow for an extension of the eight, the war Sav Shmona, which is the eight, warrants. The others think that this must go in a certain direction and you know, netanyahu, being Netanyahu, is going to continue threatening the military war and do a little bit of everything. Nothing immediate, but we're heading into a positive direction, in my view, which would be toward a ceasefire.

Speaker 4: 13:12

What happened was a very quick switch, which, of course, came also with probably President Trump, you know, I don't know if he was Leaving the region a top priority for the administration. Hamas basically saying they have been more flexible but this is not new, but where they have been consistent all along you got to give it to them has been on. This needs to lead to the end of war with guarantees, and there's no reason to think that with this Israeli threat or you know, if I don't kill you today but I'll kill you in three days why would they agree to be more flexible in the negotiations? And I think where I was less or not a surprise, but where I realized things were not heading in the right direction was with the israeli decision to allow humanitarian assistance to go in, hardly insufficient.

Speaker 4: 14:17

We, I'm sure we're going to get into it, but to me, if there was a ceasefire imminent, right, right, israel would push the humanitarian assistance going in a little bit by a few more days. Right, there's no reason to give it now. They can give it as part of their reward for a ceasefire. The fact that they were willing to cave to pressure to bring it in to me was an indication that a ceasefire is heading away. Now we're talking on Wednesday, you know, maybe by Saturday things here could change, but it doesn't look like it's going in the right direction and all depends on how, uh, on how hard, uh, trump, um, you know, turns the screws, um, so we're back, we're back if he turns the screws, and again we'll uh, we'll speculate later on in this episode and, as you know, shira, I wasn't that surprised, uh, that the offensive was launched and I wasn't that surprised, as michael alluded to, that the talks didn't work out.

Speaker 2: 15:15

Uh, I took this israeli government at its word, uh, that it wanted to launch this operation and that the the threat of the operation wasn't just mere words. It it was a leverage play to apply pressure on Hamas to essentially cave and cave to Israeli demands to give up half the remaining living hostages and perhaps some of the deceased hostages, and Israel would be willing to halt the war for maybe two months. But even as Netanyahu said, I believe, last week. He said we'll take those hostages if Hamas wants to and we'll pause the war. It'll only be a pause and then we'll go back to launching this exact same full-scale offensive. We're going to reconquer the strip and we're going to destroy Hamas. So he says it out loud if you were Hamas, what incentive do you have to agree to anything, truly? And so I didn't really see where the zone of possible agreement could come in, unless there was external pressure on Israel and also on Hamas' end.

Speaker 4: 16:21

But even Hamas obviously has a lot less to lose than Israel, right, but he did say Nery, he did say these things, but I think for the first time ever we heard Netanyahu quoted that they were talking discussing all different models for a ceasefire, including a model for ending the war.

Speaker 2: 16:37

He did say that and this was an interesting thing that everyone picked up on as a was like a positive signal that maybe, maybe, maybe I saw the same statement as you did, shira, as did everyone else. Uh, that statement was meant for one audience, and one audience only, and I think that was the us negotiators, steve woodcuff, because they were in doha at the time that the statement came out and they were trying to find some formula to either halt the war and get a temporary ceasefire with the eye to negotiating a permanent end to the war, or maybe a bigger package to fully end the war. And so Netanyahu, I think in his own mind, had to put out that statement and be like all right, I'm willing to talk about everything, including ending the war, but these are our demands, and those demands are very difficult, if you're Hamas, to accept.

Speaker 3: 17:31

And frankly, I'm totally with you, nery, and it was designed to do what Netanyahu always tries to do, which is he thinks he can say some stuff and he'll pull the wool over the eyes of people who don't know any better. And I think that's exactly what he's trying to do with Trump and with Goff. He thinks that perhaps they don't know him well enough yet or they're not sick of him enough yet to kind of reject what he says at face value, the way lots of Democrats have for years, and so he's playing his usual games, and I really fail to see how there's a credible argument right now that this operation is designed to create pressure for a better negotiated outcome. I just I don't see how it's possible. As I said, it's belied by everything that Netanyahu and plenty of other government ministers say and do.

Speaker 4: 18:39

I don't think any of us. We don't agree with you and it's very clear. This continued war you know, we know what it serves, right, it allows for. Not ending the war is where the Israeli government continues, as is. There's no national inquiry, commissioner of inquiry, right. There are no elections, all these things that the DAO doesn't want, and also this trial. There's no question with that. But you know, at one point you think if you don't have enough troops, right, let's say, you have enough reservists to come in for other fronts, but you know you have thousands of soldiers in the West Bank as well. You still have the North, right. I mean, you need to sustain all this. We might be in an era and I you know.

Speaker 4: 19:25

A couple of weeks ago someone spoke to me abroad. A European official asked about the possibility of an Israeli strike on Iran, even as the US negotiates, and I said, of course not. Israel would never attack in Iran without a US green light, which I still subscribe to this view and think that there's a limitation of what Israel can do without US backup and a strike in Iran. It's also right, you need US support for a variety of military stuff. Report of CNN. That intelligence showed that Israel is still planning for a strike in Iran, despite the negotiations and against US pressure. So we might be in a situation where it's just like everything we think of calculations, and do you have the people and the public support and the reservists, and the US and the international community and BDS? And whereas I would think that Netanyahu, even though he's not implementing a policy that I support, right, but you would think that he'd be susceptible to all these arguments and make the calculations, we might be in a different world and I don't know. Connecting the two to me is very concerning, because there is no public support for this in Israel, right.

Speaker 4: 20:43

What about the soldiers? Who's supposed to occupy Gaza and hold on to it?

Speaker 2: 20:50

So just on that point, I assume Netanyahu and this government believe that they have enough support in their right-wing base to continue the war and to even escalate the war, and that's what matters to them. And with regard to that CNN report about Israel making preparations to strike Iran, shira, I can't believe I'm saying this. But don't believe everything you read in the media, even if it's coming from our dear friends at CNN over 15 years, that every time there's some sliver of negotiations, either Israel or the Americans leak that Israel is now really, really close to actually pulling the trigger and striking Iran. It wasn't true at any point in the past 15 years. I definitely don't think it's true now, as Donald Trump is negotiating with the Iranians. I think there's a 0% chance. 0% chance.

Speaker 2: 21:47

Netanyahu gives a green light for Israeli strike on Iran as the negotiations continue and in the face of what Donald Trump wants. So on that front we should be maybe a bit calmer until not. But your overall point I agree with Shira that with what army right that if you actually go and continue this offensive up to what they're promising to do, which is completely reoccupy Gaza for an unlimited amount of time, you're going to be battling an insurgency there, whether you want to call it Hamas or not, for months and years to come, on top of the other fronts, very, very difficult to see. But uh, this is a glide path we're on. I don't see, I don't see an out for Netanyahu politically and strategically, given everything he's promised. So that's the concerning thing, but uh, we have to move on. Yeah, the people watching on video should have just seen Shira's face. Yes, she is also she's also incasperated?

Speaker 4: 22:51

I don't think so. If you look at the support among also the right wing there is. It's not. There's a very hardcore base, the Smotrich and Benvir base, that is pro these things. It's not the vast majority of Israelis, even on the right. And I think when we talk, we connect this to the diplomatic tsunami that is happening. Right, we talk about the UK. You write for a British newspaper. We're not talking about a sort of like random country that Israel doesn't have. It has defense dogs. Israel buys arms from the UK.

Speaker 4: 23:26

I mean, things are happening in a way that you know, going down this course, which I think is still reversible. That's what. That's what I was making this face. Maybe we should be on video. I made this face because I don't think we're at the point of no, there's no right, there's no turning back. I do think there's always a turning back and I was the master of that right. He's the good thing about like one step forward, two steps back and do a little bit of this. Does that talk about it? There is a way back which he can take and I hope for the sake of everyone that he does, because otherwise it will be very, very difficult, including to his base to live in this country.

Speaker 3: 24:02

I don't think he cares. I genuinely don't think that he cares. I think that 10 years ago I would have agreed with this, with your analysis that he always finds the exit point before the disaster and that all the things that we've been talking about now for the last 20 minutes piling up would get him to turn back. You know, the last 20 minutes piling up would get him to turn back. I'm just, I'm not confident of that at all. He's been doing this now. He's been doing deeply unpopular things now it's not even just since October 7th it's obviously before Deeply unpopular things that Israelis don't want that have caused him problems with now. You know two US presidents in a row that are causing deep problems with the Europeans. It's just, it's all of it S presidents in a row that are causing deep problems with the Europeans. It's just, it's all of it, and I don't think he cares.

Speaker 4: 24:51

So this was my point about the Iran report, which I said. I think it's unlikely, but we might be in a world where Netanyahu no longer cares. And this is. You know, I don't have, I'm not a psychologist, I don't know what he cares about, what he doesn't care about. I do hope that at one point this madness will stop.

Speaker 2: 25:12

I was just going to say that Netanyahu in the past always stopped always stopped the war before Israel got into trouble, even in the face of major opposition and disagreement amongst his own right-wing base. And he was always able to sell it and he always did it ahead of time. And now he's digging deeper and deeper. Okay, we'll be right back after this brief message.

Speaker 1: 25:42

Israel Policy Forum is a policy organization rooted in the Jewish community. Our mission is to build support for a secure Jewish democratic Israel through a viable resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, advancing pragmatic US policy towards the conflict, us-israel relations and regional diplomacy among policymakers and community leaders. We promote policy measures endorsed by credible security experts, develop analysis and commentary and convene programs that engage and educate leaders across the political, denominational and generational spectrums. Our Young Professionals Initiative, ipf Atid, works to elevate the discourse among next-generation leaders by building community and facilitating engaging programs related to Israeli-Palestinian affairs. To learn more about our work, visit us online at israelpolicyforumorg and follow us on social media. If you rely on Israel Policy Forum for credible and nuanced analysis, please make a tax-deductible gift today at ipfli slash supportthepod or at the support the show link in the show notes which Shira, as they say in journalism, signposted very well, which is the international context within which all of this is happening.

Speaker 2: 26:50

What did you call it? A diplomatic tsunami? I don't know if we're there quite yet, but we have seen, just in the last couple of days, growing international pressure on Israel to both halt the offensive in Gaza and allow the reentry of humanitarian aid back into the Strip. We'll get into the aid issue in just a minute. But in terms of the growing international outcry, we've seen the UK, France, Germany issue this very, very strong letter warning Israel that they would take quote unquote concrete steps against Israel if Israel didn't stop the offensive, If Israel didn't stop the offensive.

Speaker 2: 27:24

And then we saw yesterday, Tuesday, the UK government suspend negotiations with Israel over a new free trade agreement. And we also saw I assume with the encouragement of the Macron government in Paris, the European union say that they would reassess the very important association agreement that the EU has with Israel. Not good stuff, to say the least. Israel, for its part, obviously rejected all of this criticism, saying that there was a huge prize given to Hamas by these various Western states, that this was still a war of civilization over barbarism and that the British mandate ended 77 years ago. So the Israeli position is very clear it doesn't want to hear it at all. So, Shira, just circling back to the point you started making earlier, do you think this week is really a watershed moment for the international community's patience with Israel? I mean, is that the way you see it?

Speaker 4: 28:31

Definitely, definitely. So I will just say that I was. You know, I get to meet people from outside of Israel pretty frequently, with lots of conferences and meetings with officials and non-officials, and I think I told you both. I was in Europe, in a European city two weeks ago on a session with mostly officials from Arab countries and Europe very small meeting and I came back and I was shocked. I have heard language that I've never heard on Israel before, including from representatives of the important countries you mentioned. Right, and when you hear Brits talk like that in France, it's not, you know, we can dismiss, right, let's dismiss the Swedes, scandinavians, no, it was from countries that we are dependent on for a variety of things, and I was shocked when I spoke to some people about it in Israel. I think. In addition to that, you know these are at the verge of suspensions of agreements and threats, and Europeans we can joke that they, you know what are they going to do to us. They're going to condemn, well, whatever.

Speaker 4: 29:35

But I think what is missing is that decision by the Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund, which is the largest sovereign wealth fund in the world, to divest from a series of Israeli companies and not the ones that it's Paz, which is one of the biggest oil companies because it operates in the settlements. Banca Poalim, one of the biggest banks branches in the US. Banca Poalim Teva, one of the biggest pharmaceuticals in the world. So you're missing. I think it's $1.8 trillion. That's what's worth the Norwegian sovereign wealth fund. They invested or maybe they haven't invested from Bank of Poland, but they basically invested. They're investing for a variety of Israeli companies and they're holding on to sorry, I'm sorry, and they're holding on to sorry, I'm sorry, they're holding on to. They have stocks of these companies Teva and Bank of Poalim, and chemicals and other things but they're starting divestments. There's also the Sovereign Wealth Fund of Ireland.

Speaker 4: 30:40

In Japan, you have politicians calling not to sell bonds of the Israeli government. All these things. I think that we're going to see. We've seen the downgrading of Israel's credit history right throughout this war a sequence of downgrades. This is going to affect our lives. It's going to affect the value of the Israeli currency. It's going to affect the debt right, how we finance our debt. It's going to affect the discount, um that is attached to the israeli, uh, israeli company bonds, uh, and you know these are companies that basically support all our livelihoods.

Speaker 4: 31:15

So I think it's not just threats, I think things are happening and ironically, I would say that I think what gave the Europeans the sort of like freedom to say those things that they said closed doors is Trump right. All these reports about whether they're accurate or not accurate, about Trump losing his patience from Israel. All of a sudden, it unleashed the European criticism on Israel. It would be pretty ironic if Israel is what brings the Europeans and the Trump administration together. I don't know that we're there yet, but I am more concerned than I've been before Because basically, what they're saying is we've let you do whatever you want for almost 20 months.

Speaker 4: 32:01

We let you do things that are against our values, including in the humanitarian stuff right, which we might be able to get to on this conversation, but enough is enough. What are you doing? What is the next step? And we go back right to this offensive that Israel reportedly is launching hasn't fully started yet, but for the launching, for the launching continuing the war, the statements that anything, any land we occupy, will never be returned right, which means Jewish settlements occupying Gaza forever and, of course, on the how we, how we consider the lives of Palestinians there. So I'm concerned.

Speaker 3: 32:51

Michael, it should definitely, of course, be concerning, and I hate to see these countries divest from Israel and from Israeli companies, but the Israeli government response is just completely bonkers, if not outright offensive. The idea that if you're a European country or anyone for that matter, and you support more assistance, humanitarian assistance, going to Gaza, and you criticize Israel for not doing it. The idea that, because Hamas has the same position, that means that you are now on the side of Hamas. Idea that because Hamas has the same position, that means that you are now on the side of Hamas. Okay, you know. You know what position Hamas has as well. It's that there should be an all out war on the Palestinian authorities to try to collapse it.

Speaker 3: 33:36

Guess guess who's doing that? The Israeli government. So is the Israeli government now on Hamas' side too, because you know they want the same thing? I mean, it's a, it's a stupid right, it's a stupid infantile argument. And the idea that you have the, the israeli prime minister and the foreign minister going around making these arguments as if they're, as if they're social media trolls, as if their job is to, to, to rally, to like, rally, rally people, um, you know, online, it's just, it's it's ridiculous but I'll do you.

Speaker 2: 34:10

I'll just interrupt you for a two-finger uh caveat. They're they're making these uh criticisms and they're rejecting the criticisms as if we're in october of 2023 and these countries and these countries are making these arguments, which is not the case that all these, all these governments were hugely supportive of the Israeli war effort coming out of October 7th. It's just that, after 19 months of pretty brutal war, uh, they want to see a different path taken.

Speaker 3: 34:42

Right and it's the. And it's the same way. It's the same way on the war itself and on this new Merkavot-Gidon operation. Right Gideon's chariots. Israel is conducting lots of airstrikes across Gaza. To me, this looks like what happened in October 2023. In October 2023, the death toll was terrible to 23,. The death toll was terrible, but as awful as it was, it made sense because Hamas had just done this horrific thing and their leadership was still intact and you still had 33,000 Hamas fighters and they were talking about doing it again. If, given the opportunity, it's not reasonable to, 19 months later, do the exact same thing in light of everything that's gone on, and act as if everybody should be supporting it in the same way and that the justification is exactly as it was then and the Israeli government just wants a blank check to do anything and everything, no matter what's going on in the ground, no matter what the circumstances are, no matter what time has elapsed, no matter what lessons have been learned.

Speaker 3: 35:50

No matter the domestic Israeli diplomatic context political context either which everyone follows very closely as well that anyone is, you know, aside from the kind of the most hardcore supporters of this government.

Speaker 3: 36:10

I don't understand why they think that anybody is going to buy it. Shira, on the kind of intersection between the Europeans and Trump, I actually wonder you know you were saying that you think that the emerging daylight between Trump and Netanyahu and the US and Israeli government maybe is kind of giving them a permission slip. I wonder, actually, if there's something else going on, which is that because the United States is still perceived as being in Israel's corner and in the past there was only so far the Europeans were willing to go if the US wasn't going to support it. I almost wonder if you know, when you look at the UK, france and Canada, if this is their way of standing up to Trump and signaling that they're going to go their own way and even if the United States is not where they are, they're annoyed annoyed enough with Trump to kind of now do their own thing and form their own coalition. But I don't know. That's just speculation on my part.

Speaker 2: 37:11

But, michael, on that point, you sit in DC usually when you're not traveling. Have you seen any comment or condemnation by Trump administration officials or anyone else in DC of the steps the Europeans and the others have taken in the last couple of days?

Speaker 3: 37:30

No, I, uh, I haven't yet, Um, but you know, we'll see, we'll see what they say. And I I do wonder, um, if this leads to a renewed effort for some sort of resolution at the UN and then security council. I'm very curious to see how the United States approaches it. If they move to veto something right away, if they move to negotiate different language. I have no idea. The inner workings of the Trump administration in many ways still remain a mystery to me. I think, actually, in many ways, that probably remain a mystery to lots of people who are working in the Trump administration. So, uh, we'll, we'll, we'll see what happens, um, but you know, there, there, we've certainly seen, we've seen the Trump administration, from the president and from Marco Rubio, criticize the Israeli government on the humanitarian stuff, and you know this, this was focused directly on that Um. So we'll see how it evolves.

Speaker 2: 38:31

And we just got word. By the way, miracles do happen and pressure does what pressure sometimes does as well. It's a very clear indication that even he understands that he has to go out and stiffen spines and explain himself to the Israeli public, given the events of the past few days. Moving on to the issue of humanitarian aid and it's a big one Israel, as we all know, halted all entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza in early March, after the end of the first phase of the ceasefire, in order, ostensibly, to put pressure on Hamas in the ceasefire negotiations. That clearly has not had the desired effect, at least not yet.

Speaker 2: 39:26

But, as mentioned earlier, this week, netanyahu reversed himself and said that the situation in Gaza was nearing quote unquote a red line and that Israel's closest friends across the world, and even in Washington, would not accept pictures of mass starvation his words from Gaza. So this week he allowed, in limited amounts of aid, to start going back into the Strip. Shira, as the expert on these issues, I mean this is a big question and again, again, you don't have to go into all the details, but give our listeners, and also me and michael, a sense how bad really is the situation now in gaza. Uh, if even bb netanyahu is saying, okay, we have to give some kind of aid again after 11 weeks of no aid at all.

Speaker 4: 40:17

Where to even begin. So first of all, we have to say that I think the ceasefire ended. Israel ended the ceasefire right and during the ceasefire we had really large quantities of aid. We're talking about 4,200 trucks per week and, based on the math that some people did in the IDF and in COGAT those were numbers that I think were leaked there was some sort of an assessment, that based on calories per person, it's really awful right, but we're talking about between 60 and 70 something, 90 day, 80 day kind of math in terms of what would be enough.

Speaker 4: 40:58

By the way, when you say humanitarian, it's easiest to talk about food. But there are, you know, there are like hygiene kits, there are medical supplies, medicine. I mean, it's bigger than this. I'm not even going to shelter, education. I'm talking about the basics. But the basics is not just food. Okay, talk about even medicines.

Speaker 4: 41:18

The Israeli politicians like always the politicians they said, oh, there's a sufficient aid there for six months and the humanitarian community all along said it's two to three weeks. The problem is that, because of previous disagreements between Israel and the international community, the humanitarian community, the UN, that they, in Israeli words, say they have cried wolf about famine and other things before and their threats have not materialized. We're not taking their threats seriously. I will tell you that sort of as an analyst, I had reservations about the Israeli professional assessments, even about the 60 day and 75 days and all these things, because you know, we know that in an effort to implement a ceasefire, what you counted as a truck wasn't always a truck. Sometimes it was a pickup truck and when we count trucks, we don't necessarily count how many pallets there are, how many tons of food or supplies there are. So you take the assumption was that each one of those things is a very big truck with food, and food could be potato chips, which we had a lot of trucks with potato chips going in. So overall, I always thought that the Israeli numbers are even the assessment that was professional. It was professional, it was methodologically calculated, was too naive and even tenants were at some point. Maybe they have different standards, maybe they have different standards.

Speaker 4: 42:54

The days and the weeks went by and what we're starting seeing earlier on is indications of the food prices that have gone up increasingly right and gradually very quickly. We've known that perishables have not been available in Gaza. There's a picture of like one market that we see, but I don't know if the angle of how many actual tables are in this market seems pretty small market, but essentially there are no perishables in Gaza. So it was very clear, I think, to anyone who looked, that the situation was extremely bad even a few weeks ago. What is happening now and this is where I don't know if it is now all of a sudden I turn on the tv and saw the images from gaza, or it was a combination of um understanding that we get to what the military right said all along, that we're going to be at the red line at around this period. Right, and we asked it already with a combination of an idea that Israel would switch to a different model which would be private companies securing right. Private military companies would secure a few distribution points where there's going to be assistance provided to the people who would come there and those people would be vetted and there's facial recognitions, a lot of like fancy stuff at plant that looks really nice on paper and has zero chance of being implemented as described in the context of Gaza. We could go into it.

Speaker 4: 44:26

So I don't know if it wasn't also just the rush to get this mechanism started. This mechanism started when they tried to get this mechanism launched, the humanitarian community came and also the donor community said, hey, we're not playing ball with this thing. And then they said you have to let us bring in aid in the previous model which was, you know, basically the UN bringing trucks in. But for that to happen, you have to be really in a red line mode and for that you have to blame the IDF, right? The IDF told me, and also the Trump administration. There could be two things here. Theoretically it could be Witkoff and Trump really hearing from the Gulf. As far as we know, they may have showed him even a video right Clips from Gaza of what's happening there. Right, it's an effective we know it's effective with him to show. So I don't know what he saw there and if he heard about it, and Marco Rubio was a Turkey when he spoke about the humanitarian situation, so he'd be hearing from others.

Speaker 2: 45:24

Right.

Speaker 4: 45:25

He could be invited. Pressure from Israel to say, hey, can you? And there's speculation that it's invited. Right, it's too coordinated to say all of a sudden that the American administration all of a sudden cares about the humanitarian situation. Gaza, for the first time, speaks about it in those terms and I don't know what's the theory. I think it's important that they say it.

Speaker 4: 45:48

And I also know firsthand that when Israel decided to stop the humanitarian assistance, I had arguments with lots of people inside the IDF where they said, well, with Trump, he's not going to care, he's going to let us do whatever we want. And I said I don't think you understand that no one in America likes to see hungry children on TV. This is not. You know. There are things that, yeah, maybe they care less, they're less sensitive. You want to get the Blinken treatment or not.

Speaker 4: 46:19

We can talk about this at this coaster, but I don't know that by being a Republican administration, you're necessarily going to approve, give a carte blanche to anything. There are things you know that just like are undone. So I think this was also an assumption with Israel, in addition to other assumptions on the Trump administration. They're going to be doing whatever they want. So just like fast forward to where we are today. Israel there's the Gaza humanitarian foundation that says that they pose conditions to Israel to address vulnerabilities with this mechanism that Israel is trying to launch and now the Americans are taking custody over, but it's, I don't know, the right hand and the left hand and it's too complicated to explain, I think, and we don't have the time for this, but Israel's hands was forced to allow trucks in, to come in the old model the first day.

Speaker 2: 47:14

As a bridge.

Speaker 4: 47:16

We saw nine trucks of baby food Today we yesterday there were 93 trucks UN and this is the UN. Right when Israel said no UN, no, nothing. Now it's UN. As of today, I saw there are 56 trucks that went into Karim Shalom the crossing but have not been picked up by the one. I guess you need coordination inside. This is a drop in a bucket, a drop in the ocean.

Speaker 4: 47:42

The needs far supersede this and I also fear that I fear of what you call not just looting and not Hamas taking over this, but also just like people trying to get a hold of the aid, and we've heard stories about right, like of mothers and daughters being crushed to death in a bakery when there was more food inside Gaza, and I'm really scared that this little aid is going to lead to other disasters besides the hunger and other things we're seeing there. So the situation is really, really bad, but I do hope we will continue having this pressure and, ari, you know also that domestically in Israel, I think it's the first time that there's a serious discussion about it, at least of what is the use of not enabling food to come into Gaza. What does it serve? It doesn't make Hamas surrender and it definitely doesn't help Israel's peace in the world, even if there's no empathy here for the Palestinians.

Speaker 2: 48:45

And the person who argued this point that Israel needed to move in aid into Gaza in order to enable the IDF to fight the war and to give the IDF time to quote-unquote destroy Hamas was Bibi Netanyahu in the beginning of the war, justifying not only to the Israeli public but really to his allies in the government why Israel needed to facilitate the entry of aid. He kind of forgot about that at some point, instituted a full blockade in early march and a few days ago remembered it again and he said it in in the video he released. Uh, by the way, we've said from the beginning you know, we need to facilitate the entry of aid. It's like where, where have you been? Where have you been? It's a. It's a self-inflicted goal.

Speaker 4: 49:30

but remember, nary, when he said it initially, right at the beginning of the war, israel didn't allow any aid to go in. It bombed convoys that went through Rafah, through Egypt. At the beginning, everything that Israel did on the humanitarian front was pressure from outside, mostly from the Biden administration. So I don't blame you. I have a deja vu also. So all of a sudden we have pressure from the Trump administration, or real pressure or fake pressure, but there's pressure or criticism on the Trump administration, so he's using the same arguments. And this is also, by the way, the deja vu is also related to the bigger issue or not bigger, but connected to it is on the ceasefire right, we will have a pressure on the humanitarian. We're going to allow the humanitarian. This is going to be the source of the argument as we stall in the ceasefire negotiations.

Speaker 3: 50:19

And Neri, I would argue that he hasn't really remembered it because right now we're at the height of incoherent policy. Right, so we can, as, as as we knew would happen, but as hopefully now everybody can agree, happen, but as hopefully now everybody can agree, preventing assistance from going in from March 1st up until this week did nothing to collapse Hamas. So, okay, we can stipulate that. So we're restoring aid. Well, if that's the case, then actually do it right, instead of the trickle of assistance that's going in, instead of sending it in, and you know, as Shira notes, it's not getting distributed anywhere.

Speaker 3: 50:57

How could it be with, with Israeli airstrikes, at the pace of of what they were early, early year on in the war, um, like what, what's? You're not. It's like the Israeli government wants to, wants to get credit for saying, okay, you know, now, now we're, now we're worried about starving people in Gaza, so we're going to let it in, but you're not really letting it in, not, not even, not even on the face of it, not, not in an amount that's going to fool anybody, not with any distribution mechanism that's going to fool anybody. It's like the entire thing is just, is, like I said, completely incoherent. They're, they're, they're, clearly seems to me they're not actually trying to alleviate the problem and they're not doing enough to even get credit for trying to alleviate the problem, and maybe that'll change over the next few days and weeks. I sincerely hope that it does, but this is just silly.

Speaker 2: 51:46

It accomplishes nothing alleviate the suffering inside Gaza. It doesn't alleviate the pressure on Israel, so you've solved neither problem that you have as Israel. Michael, I wanted to ask you what did you think of Shira's theory that this was actually not pressure from the Trump administration on Israel to allow aid back in? Steve Witkoff, Trump's special Middle East envoy, said the president was nothing if not a humanitarian and that there would not be a humanitarian crisis in Gaza on Donald Trump's watch. So do you not think Donald Trump cares about the people of Gaza?

Speaker 4: 52:27

Wait, before you go to Michael, I'll just say it's not my theory. Some people around me were saying because, all of a sudden, it was all the coincidence with the timing of the Gaza humanitarian foundation that people in Israel wanted to launch. And if you wanted to prevent the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, I would argue that we've been in the humanitarian crisis in Gaza for the duration of his presidency. Okay, so that's my argument. But here, michael, your response presidency.

Speaker 3: 52:56

Okay, so that's, that's my argument. But here, michael, you respond. Yeah, I was going to make. I was going to make a similarly snarky comment, which is that, you know, avoiding a humanitarian crisis on president Trump's watches. We're a bit too late for that. I'm pretty sure it's already happened. Um, listen, I think that, um, it's very strange.

Speaker 3: 53:13

President Trump is a guy who famously does not seem to have much empathy for many, many different groups or people. He genuinely seems to have empathy for the Israeli hostages. I think that's we've seen it. We've seen it over and over and over again from the campaign on until now. And he also seems to have genuine empathy for Palestinians in Gaza. Now it comes out sometimes in strange ways, right Like when he unveiled the Gaza Lago plan, rooted in that we have to do something for the Palestinians because they can't possibly be expected to stay in Gaza when it's like this. But he seems to actually have real empathy for the scenes of starving Palestinians in Gaza and Palestinians being killed in Gaza.

Speaker 3: 54:01

So I'm not sure that, again, not attributing this to Shira, understanding that this is sort of a conspiracy theory that's floating around there. I'm not sure that this is some kind of feint up by the White House and by you know, netanyahu. I think that Trump genuinely seems upset about what's going on. If he wasn't, I don't think you'd see it filtering down to folks like Marco Rubio, who clearly have gotten, you know, either direct orders or, at least you know, are smart enough to understand that when the boss says something, you should parrot it too, where we now hear Marco Rubio, too, not only talking about assistants having to go in, but also, yesterday, saying that so far it's not enough. So you know, if this is a coordinated PR stunt, it's being done very poorly. I think that the administration actually is annoyed by what's going on and upset by what's going on, and it doesn't seem to me like Netanyahu is responding fast enough for them.

Speaker 4: 55:07

But do you think it may be so? Maybe this is where it's sort of like they were trying to get to the big deal right, like let's have this final deal, we will end the war, and that's why they were holding off criticism on the humanitarian stuff. But as they saw the negotiations were stalling, they were losing patience and then it's like okay, we're going to start talking about the other stuff that does concern us and we let Israel get away with because we were going to do things different than Biden. I don't know. To me it also and again, just speaking with some officials from the Gulf a few weeks ago, it was very clearly the humanitarian issue was going to come up in his visit.

Speaker 4: 55:42

But a lot of things came up in the visit. I don't know to what extent. So it just the humanitarian situation. It wasn't. It's not like binary right One day there's no humanitarian crisis, another day there is, and all of a sudden to care. In a way, it must've been a combination of a few factors that made this sort of US criticism come up so strong against all at the same time.

Speaker 3: 56:10

Yeah, and listen, I wrote and said repeatedly when Trump was elected and immediately after he took office, he's there. There are things that he says over and over again and when he harps on an issue, it's generally a sign that he means it and it's something that he actually cares about. He said over and over and over he wanted to see the Gaza war be concluded quickly, and it was unclear what he meant by that. If what he meant was a quick deal, which you know, that seems to be the initial thinking when he took office and the ceasefire was basically forced on Netanyahu by Wyckoff or if he meant that the Israelis should just, you know, go in all restraints are off and finish things up quickly.

Speaker 3: 56:58

At this point I'm not sure it actually matters which he had in his head. It's pretty clear that the main point was finish it quickly, and it hasn't been finished quickly, and I think that's why we're seeing him lose patience. And this shouldn't be surprising because, like I said, it was telegraphed and people not only not only noted it at the time that the Israelis were probably going to have a relatively short leash, even if the president didn't care what was on the end of you know kind of how you got to the end of the leash. The leash was short and I think that we're seeing that now.

Speaker 2: 57:31

But surely, michael and this is going to be the last topic, which is a big one Donald J Trump is the topic. I think humanitarian aid is one thing, and my theory is that he talked to enough Arab leaders before and during his trip to the Gulf and they said you have to do something to alleviate the suffering in Gaza. And okay, he told his people I want to see aid go in. And this is the result.

Speaker 3: 57:55

Yeah, I think that's undoubtedly true as well.

Speaker 2: 57:57

Yeah, and but the but. The second point is I think it's separate from forcing Israel to stop the war. If Donald Trump really wanted to Israel and Bibi Netanyahu really to end the war, he would get up there and say it or he would tweet it and that would be that up there and say it, or he would tweet it and that would be that we may get there.

Speaker 3: 58:24

According to the news today, the Mossad representatives from the Israeli negotiating team are still in Doha, but everybody else has left.

Speaker 3: 58:28

Steve Witkoff is not there. So it's very possible that the next time the president talks to Witkoff and Witkoff says to him you know the, the next time the, the the president talks to Wyckoff and Wyckoff says to him I'm not sure if the Israelis are trying their hardest, or I'm not sure if the Israelis are serious, we, we may end up with the, with a truth, social blast from the president, uh, directed at Netanyahu, that that would not surprise anybody at this point. It wouldn't wouldn't surprise me. I'm not saying it's definitely going to happen, but it's not all that far-fetched. And if that happens, then Netanyahu is really in even deeper trouble politically. So if I were him, I would be trying to avoid it. But I don't see. I think he's trying to do it in all the superficial ways we talked about up front. I think he's trying to scam Trump and Whitcough, which is kind of how he approaches the United States generally, and Trump just doesn't seem like a guy who has infinite patience for it.

Speaker 2: 59:27

Shira, do you think we'll get a true social blast or a Trump comment demanding Bibi Netanyahu end the war?

Speaker 4: 59:35

I think there are a lot of people in Israel and around the world that are yearning for that right, for that moment where he's willing to turn the screws, and then again, I don't think Netanyahu would be able to just say like no, screw it, I'll let like 90 more trucks go in. I don't know the decision and the process, the Trump administration, why they are not doing this. I agree with Michael seems to be quite a transparent president in the sense of, like he does say what he needs on a variety of things. Right, he said he wants an agreement with Iran. He wants this, he wants an agreement with. You know, I mean a lot of things. He said he wants an agreement with Iran. He wants this, he wants an agreement with. I mean a lot of things are happening in the world. We keep talking about this issue. So we might get there, and some of it would depend on what Israel does.

Speaker 4: 1:00:27

This whole idea of Israel keep trying to send a message that everything's okay and we got Washington back. I'm not sure it's. I'm not sure it's correct. You know there were reports that the Derm are meeting with Trump in itself an achievement right. Most countries don't have this access where a minister of strategic affairs meets with the president, but the reports that came out that this was a pretty the tone was pretty harsh in the meeting. And even if one paragraph in the Washington Post is not indicative of what is happening and maybe you all reporters don't report the truth, it seems that there's been what there's been a surge in reports from Washington that indicates that there's an indication that there's less patience to the Israeli policy. And I don't know if you saw yesterday I think it was the Wall Street Journal the front page of the Wall Street.

Speaker 4: 1:01:32

Journal saw the Guardian talking about what Israel is doing in Gaza. I think. To me it's indicative that winds are shifting. I don't know when Trump is going to say, hey, I'm done with this, and Israel, you should be done, but as far as I'm concerned, it's going to be a moment too soon.

Speaker 3: 1:01:52

I will tell you the tide definitely seems to be turning here. I will tell you, the tide definitely seems to be turning here. Like you note the Wall Street Journal Shira, there's a new Senate resolution, co-sponsored by every single Democrat in the Senate save one, demanding for much more humanitarian assistance to go into Gaza. Every single Democrat except for one. Now, it's not like having 99 senators on it, but the Democrats tend to be pretty fractured on Israel. There's a real divide, and this got all of them except for one, so they're really. I can't stress enough how much.

Speaker 2: 1:02:47

And they're really. I can't stress enough how much Israeli government acting as if this is still recorded podcast. I'm still skeptical that Trump will actually bring the hammer down and force Israel to stop the war, netanyahu to accept the ceasefire deal. There was jubilation and people here and in many other places said he's going to force Israel to essentially accept the second phase of the ceasefire and fully end the war and, by the way, get all the hostages back. There was no pressure that came down and that Yahoo was given a green light to collapse, a ceasefire to restart the offensive, and they've, as a few days ago to bring it all back full circle, have actually restarted the offensive. Remains to be seen. We'll leave it there, shira, michael, as always, thank you so much for your time. I hope next time you're both on we'll have happier news, more optimistic news.

Speaker 2: 1:04:03

Let's hope. Here's to hope. Take care, bye, thank you guys Bye. Okay, thanks again to Michael Koplow and Shira Efron, as always, for their generous time and insights. Also, a special thanks to our producer, jacob Gilman, and to all of you who support Israel Policy Forum's work. Do consider making a donation to Israel Policy Forum, so keeping a credible source of analysis and ideas on issues such as these that we all care deeply about, including this podcast. And, most importantly, thank you for listening.