Israel's Endgame in Gaza | Operation Gideon's Chariots
59:59 Share

If you look into his background, you start reading things, you'll see phrases like offshoot of Al-Qaeda or member of Al-Qaeda or al-Nusra Front, offshoot of ISIS. And I'm thinking to myself, okay, offshoot of Al-Qaeda. What year did the offshoot, did the branching off take place?

These people were adults on 9/11. If you have chosen to become a member of Al-Qaeda or ISIS after 9/11, you probably thought that the 9/11 attacks were a good idea, you were happy, you celebrated. Hello and welcome to State of the Nation with me, Alon Levy.

It is nearly 600 days into the October 7th war and full-scale hostilities in the Gaza Strip have returned. Israel has just launched what it's calling Operation Gideon's Chariots to capture the whole of the Gaza Strip. It's a change in strategy. No more game of cat and mouse, no more going into Gaza, taking territory, clearing Hamas, withdrawing, having Hamas take over back and go back in the vacuum. Now Israel is saying we're capturing the entire Gaza Strip in order to drive Hamas out once and for all.

What does it mean for the hostages? Well, Israel says military pressure is the way that it is going to get Hamas to free the hostages. Hostage families rightly terrified, of course, that this could be a death spell for the hostages and their pressure tactic intended to get Hamas to release them will end up putting them in mortal peril. Plenty to discuss. And joining me back on the podcast today is one of my favorite guests, Daniel Paul Rubinstein.

Rubenstein? Rubenstein? I always get it mixed up. I'd say Rubenstein. Rubenstein, but it doesn't... Einstein or Einstein? Einstein. Daniel Paul Rubenstein. In any case, it doesn't matter because iconic figures like JFK were identified only by your three initials DPR. So Rubenstein, Rubenstein, Rubenstein, doesn't matter. We'll call you DPR. You're back from a campus tour.

In the US, how did that go? I spoke on seven campuses. It was a great experience. Seven campuses for seven fronts. Seven campuses for seven fronts. Really, I was visiting the eighth front. I heard many stories from students who have been dealing with

the assault on them since one day after the October 7th massacre. We saw anti-Israel activity on American college campuses skyrocketed. People were celebrating the October 7th massacre just one day later, and we're still dealing with the effects of this. Many Jewish students are eager to connect with Israel, to learn, to discuss. They want to visit.

So I'm optimistic about the future. How bad was the situation on campus that you saw with your own eyes? Did your events get protested or managed to slip under the radar? No, my events managed to slip under the radar. They must be hosted either at Hillel or Chabad. When I was on campus, it was relatively quiet. The students required sign-up sheets. There was security presence quietly nearby. I guess I wasn't famous enough to get totally disrupted.

That's why I'm here. What were you feeling from the students on campus in terms of their mood? Are they still fired up, ready to go? Are they feeling intimidated by what's happening outside? Do they see that the anti-Israel protests have begun to subside? How much social pressure are they facing because of the ostracization that they have been subjected to? What do you notice? Well, there's a bit of a bias because the ones who show up

to my talks are the ones who are most excited and energized always. If they weren't excited and energized, they probably wouldn't come to an event on campus featuring an Israeli speaker. But those who came were eager to connect. They want to visit Israel as soon as possible. I spoke at one campus right after a birthright orientation.

for many students who are coming to birthright to Israel for the first time. And we're talking, it was multiple buses on this one campus of students who were coming to Israel. So the signs are there that students are becoming more energized and more engaged rather than the opposite. They're not becoming disconnected as a result of this challenging war. Interesting, because that actually tracks what I'm seeing from opinion polling across the general public writ large. I went and had a look at poll, looking at what has happened in the UK public sentiment in the course of the war.

And I'm seeing that, look, the majority of people when asked, are you on the Palestinian side, the Israeli side, are still saying neither or don't know. And that's important to bear in mind. But

The war has radicalized people in favor of the Palestinians. The percentage of people who say they're pro-Palestinian has gone up, but it's also radicalized the pro-Israeli side. The percentage of people who say they are pro-Israel has gone up in the course of the war. It's sharpened that divide and really made people pick a side. And we're seeing the same with students as well. I wonder, I mean, I won't put you on the spot and ask what is the most difficult question they asked you, but what are you noticing that they're really struggling to grapple with and explain as they find themselves

against their will, you know, kind of like brand ambassadors for Israel. I think they struggle to explain the exact same issues that you and I have trouble explaining. We know very well how the war started. We don't know how it ends. We don't know how to achieve all of the objectives. If it ends. If it ends and to what extent and who will announce what and how. We don't know many different things about all of the seven fronts and they are as nervous as we are about the future. And I think

What they're looking for is to be among people who also share the same concerns and we can discuss them. But is what they're grappling with questions about, hang on, how many aid trucks and what happened in this hospital and that hospital? Or are there more fundamental questions about Israel's identity, the role, the place of a Jewish state in the Middle East, their role within a discourse that has become about oppressor, oppressed, colonialism that they're struggling with, the more deeper questions about how Israel is...

framed even before we get into the minutiae of trucks and hospitals. Much more the latter. I find myself prepared to deal with people who ask, you know, what do I say when they accuse Israel of genocide? And I could present the whole framework. I find most students are not asking questions about the day-to-day in the news, this crisis, that crisis. They're asking questions about the future of the U.S.-Israel relationship. They're asking questions about the future of Jews in the United States.

more than anything else about the latest that we see on Twitter, the latest controversy, the latest press release from the IDF. Questions about whether Jewish life in the US has long-term viability and feasibility? Questions as stark as that? Yes. Really? Do you think they're being a bit overdramatic? Well, I think if they look across the pond...

and look at what has become of Jewish life in France or the UK, they may see themselves facing a similar future where they are not really wanted in the mainstream of society in the way that they were used to, where Jews have access to all high positions of power in many countries in Europe and elsewhere. They would rather not see Jews in high positions. And this is a concern. You can feel the

the tension. Yeah. Okay. Right. Well, let's crack on with a couple of issues I wanted to talk to you about. Before we get into the war, and we'll have to talk about the war, Eurovision. You're an American. Was Eurovision a thing when you were growing up? I do not think I had heard of Eurovision until I moved to Israel. Wow. I knew your cultural knowledge is like cultural desert, but not even knowing what Eurovision is? It's probably the biggest cultural event in the world. Americans have culture.

No, we didn't know what Eurovision was. We didn't care. We didn't have a competition. I don't even remember reading about Israel participating in the Eurovision. It was not a thing to me until friends in Israel participated.

watched Eurovision and certainly when Israel won Eurovision a few years ago, then suddenly it becomes as relevant as ever. Well, you know what was happening in Eurovision this year and I know the reason you know, the reason I know that you know about what was happening in Eurovision is that we watched it together, so I want to get your take on the result. Full disclosure. For those Americans in particular who aren't familiar with Eurovision, the world's biggest song contest brings together all countries in Europe and beyond. That's how Israel is part of it. They compete in a very kitschy, campy,

Songfest, and Israel did amazingly well this year. Israel was not only the runner-up, it won the public vote by a landslide. The votes are divided into two. There are the public votes from the audience at home, the national juries. As always, the left-leaning music industry national juries were not kind to Israel at all, but the public loved it. Israel won the full 12 points from 12 countries

and the aggregation of votes from the rest of the world for the third year in a row. Israel came second this year, last year it came fifth, the year before it came third.

And there were some incredible moments of irony. The Irish public broadcaster tried to get Israel cancelled and thrown out of the competition. The Irish public gave Israel 10 votes. The Irish jury gave Israel 7 votes. Spain started its broadcast with a sign on screen saying, Justice for Palestine. The Spanish public were like, No, we're giving 12 points to Israel. The UK also gave 12 points to Israel. And yesterday I did a round of media interviews. The Israeli media who are scratching their heads and asking,

to quote the name of the British song, what the hell just happened? We thought the whole world was against us, everyone hates us, public opinion is souring on Israel. How is it possible that Yuval Raphael, a survivor of the Nova attack, who hid under dead bodies for seven, eight hours and played dead as Hamas death squads were outside roaming, who gave this amazing, powerful ballad of survival and resilience called A New Day Will Rise,

How is it possible that she was by far Europe's favorite? I think it's connected to what you said earlier, which is that this war has caused a

a lot of polarization, meaning people who had feelings have even stronger feelings. If you supported Israel, you support Israel even more. If you were pro-Palestinian, you're pro-Palestinian even more. And then of course there's the middle, which doesn't have a dog in the fight, but the people who have opinions have very strong opinions. So if you are an opinionated person and you find yourself extremely pro-Israel anywhere in Europe with

voting rights in Eurovision, then you're going to vote for Israel. This is a way for you to express your distaste, whether with your own national music industry voters who had a high weight of the result, or with your government who is not supportive enough of Israel, or you actually like the Israeli song. So all of these factors cause people who support Israel to have a very clear view

decision that they're going to vote for Israel in the Eurovision. Well, if you hate Israel, if you want to see Israel lose, if you want to see Hamas win the war, who are you voting for? It seems like you might have a lot of choices. Yeah. There are many countries where maybe you, that are perceived as extremely anti-Israel and you could support them. Well, what happens is that the anti-Israel voters are

in Europe have many different choices for how to express their disdain for Israel. And also they probably had someone else that they did want to support because they liked the song or they liked the country. So the anti-Israel vote was divided and the pro-Israel vote was unified. And what happens in such a political system is that there's a clear winner. And I think that's actually really encouraging because suddenly Israel finds itself when it's judged on merit,

and the political system isn't one where it's possible, you can't downvote Israel. There is nothing you can vote against it. Then it does quite well, because when it's judged on its merits, people like the song. You know, I come back to the opinion polling from before. In the UK, I see 26% of the public say they support the Palestinians. But it means that three quarters of the public are either pro-Israel or willing to hear it out. And there may be some hostility to

the bullying and the perception of the Israeli side being bullied. I mean, and it really was. I mean, we were very close to an incident during the event where someone wanted to storm the stage with a bucket of red paint to pour on Yuval Raphael, who I'll remind listeners, hid under dead bodies for eight hours during the Nova Festival, right? How sick do you have to be? How sick in the head to think that poor

that pouring red paint, fake blood, on a woman who hid under real blood for eight hours is a good gimmick and makes you the good guy. I have no idea. I have to believe that the Israelis deserved October 7th because they're guilty of such an egregious list of crimes that they deserve everything that happened to them. That's what years of incitement will do. It's a homegrown extremism problem. It's a homegrown extremism problem, not from Islamists, but from...

white wokeists, if you can call it that. What happened in the UK, by the way? You guys got the exact same number of votes as the Americans who don't participate in the Eurovision. Hey, what do you mean you guys? The grand total of... What do you mean you guys? You're accusing me of being American. No, so that's definitely encouraging, the fact that Israel got this support from around Europe because there was no way to downvote it and people were willing to listen to it. But does that mean that...

Actually, you know, maybe the problem is overblown in terms of the fight for public opinion. Maybe it's not as bad as we think. The European street is still with us. Maybe we don't even need to bother explaining what's happening in the war. Europe's with us. No, certainly when I look at the UK, I see...

that the anti-Israel side is quite prominent in one of the major parties in the UK that has significant power. We saw a number of years ago that Jeremy Corbyn had a chance at becoming the prime minister of the UK. So we can't just sit and ignore these trends in politics that a domestic government

group is becoming more radicalized against Israel and against Jews, and we must do everything to prevent that from happening. I would be really fascinated. I hope someone out there is thinking of doing an in-depth study to find the people who voted for Israel. Of course, all the conspiracy, the rumor mill is going crazy saying that Mossad somehow rigged the vote with televotes.

and tried to work out why did they vote for Israel? Was it purely on merits because it was a good song? Was it a middle finger up at the protest? Was it out of identification with her as a terror victim? Was it like, what was going on there? It's a good idea for a YouTube video. Someone should go film and ask questions in the countries that were most supported. Yeah, but I mean a scientific poll, a scientific poll that tries to explore because there is clearly something that Israel needs to tap into. But the

trend that the pro-Israel side has become more pro-Israel is really fascinating. I mean, I'm looking at this poll from YouGov in the UK that shows on the eve of the October 7th massacre, 10% of the British public said its sympathies were more with Israel than the Palestinians. The other options being don't know and neither. And again, that's more than half of the public don't know or neither.

It's gone up from 10% to 17%, okay? And the pro-Palestinian side has gone up from 24% to 26%. So the war has made, like, has expanded the pro-Palestinian camp. But percentage-wise, it's expanded the pro-Israel camp even more. They're not as noisy. They're not as organized. They don't have as clear a message. Because again, as you said, we don't actually know where this is going and what the day after plan is. And there's less message discipline, ideological discipline. But that's definitely a positive...

positive trend. And what I ended up telling on the news in Israel yesterday when they asked me was, I said, look, the impression that the whole world is against us, that they hate us, it doesn't matter what we do, is wrong. It's false. Get it out of your heads.

But this does show us there's a whole pitch in the middle to play for of people who are willing to give Israel a fair hearing. And when the country gives up, unfortunately, in fighting for its own name, in making its own case out of this nihilistic, fatalistic belief that the whole world is against us, it's a tragic mistake. Preaching to the choir, I have nothing to add. Okay, perfect. Well, then we move on to the next topic. You're back in the Middle East. Who else was in the Middle East?

President Trump. President Donald J. Trump. And do you know what he and Hamas's leaders had in common this week? I do because I tweeted it. Ah, you know my source material. What did they have in common? When President Trump was in Qatar, he had something in common with the leader of Hamas. It's just they were both in Qatar at the same time. And I did not see this reported that the president of the United States and the head of Hamas were in Qatar at the same time. I wonder how far apart they were from each other.

The President of the United States was not only in Qatar, he also accepted a plane from the Qataris as the new Air Force One, which would seem like a bit of a Trojan horse. I mean, they're going to have to absolutely sweep it for bugs, but it's worse than just the question of whether it's bugged. I mean, this is a naked attempt to buy the President of the United States and to bribe the American administration. And this is part of an influence campaign that Qatar has poured billions into.

billions in the united states in order to buy influence i mean it's about what 6.3 billion dollars they've invested in universities and 100 billion dollars according to the free press that they've invested in buying influence in the united states overall and you know we've been trying to drive this line that says you want to get the hostages out pressure qatar qatar is hamas's patron

People who listen to this podcast know the spiel, okay? Qatar condemned Israel for October 7th. On October 7th, while the massacre was still ongoing, the mother of the Emir of Qatar mourned Yahya Senua publicly. They've been pushing since day one to get a ransom deal that would leave Hamas in power. Qatar has been telling Hamas, keep the hostages. And we've been saying pressure Qatar. And I wonder now whether the president of the United States taking a plane from Qatar and being received with such royal fanfare in Qatar, it's just the final nail in the coffin.

of the attempt to get pressure on Qatar? Or does it mean that actually the U.S. has more sway over Qatar and can do something behind the scenes? I don't know. How do you read the situation? First of all, we're fighting an uphill battle. I've seen all of these reports about the amount of money that Qatar has spent on influence campaigns, or rather how much Qatar has given to American universities. The issue for the general American public who doesn't know anything about Qatar is

or hears from their leadership that Qatar is an ally, if they are then hearing that Qatar is giving money to U.S. college campuses, their reaction is going to be a shrug. So what? It doesn't matter how much a foreigner is giving to American college campuses if the foreigner is with us. They don't know that Qatar is an enemy state, that Qatar is... Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Qatar hosts the biggest American base in the Middle East, Al Udeid. How can it host an American military base and be an enemy state at the same time? That makes no sense. They're sneaky.

Well, Qatar is trying to survive in a hostile neighborhood and keep the Americans on their side and fulfill their vision of a form of Islam that is quite hostile to the existence of the state of Israel. Qatar is doing everything it can to undermine Israel's

Israel's place in the Middle East and to support the groups that are most committed to Israel's destruction. And as I don't get tired of saying, Qatar told Hamas to keep the hostages. So I'm going to call Qatar an enemy state. I'm going to keep repeating it. I'm going to say it loud. I'm going to encourage everyone else to say it just as Qatar is doing to us.

In terms of buying influence? In terms of branding us as an enemy state. Oh, absolutely. Qatar is waging a massive information warfare campaign in order to brand Israel as the greatest source of evil in the world. And we, the Israelis, are spending our time saying, well, we're not genocidal. How do we respond to this? What does the Genocide Convention say? You are drowning in Qatari-funded information warfare and coming up with great bullet points about how to respond to that

But you're not going to say anything about Qatar? I am. Qatar is an enemy state. If they don't like hearing this message, they can come out and try to refute that they're not an enemy state. Well, first they can tell Hamas to free the hostages. That would be a welcome development. They could condemn Hamas for any single thing ever.

Yeah, I will talk about my criticism of Qatar if Qatar amplifies its criticism of Hamas. Qatar has never said a bad word about Hamas. And people will say, oh, well, that's because they're the mediator. Oh, they're the mediator. Well, they're saying bad things about Israel every single day. So it's clear they're not a mediator. They are Hamas's agent and they need to be called out for it.

Okay, well, your Royal Highness the Emir of Qatar, there you have it from our guest DPR. If you are willing to condemn Hamas, if you're willing to find one thing that Hamas did wrong and condemn its terrorism, he will back down from his campaign. I will turn it down a notch. He will turn it down a notch. He's not going to back off. He's not going to back it up. We're going to demand another price if we're going to, but we're going to take it down from 10 to 8. If you condemn Hamas for just one thing and for every hostage you tell Hamas to release, we'll turn it down another notch. I feel...

Fair enough. It's fair enough. And Qatar probably is not too worried at this point. Probably not too worried, but we should make it worried. Meanwhile, the way that the President Trump's visit to the Middle East was canceled is actually we, the Israelis, should be worried because Israel used to see itself as being the gateway to Washington. If you want to go to the United States, you have to go through Israel. One of the reasons I think that President Erdogan

a rapprochement with Israel in 2021. I think it was with President Herzog's visit to Ankara. There's been a few rapprochements. Yeah, the recent one when President Herzog went to Ankara, the impression was this was...

Erdogan trying to get back in the US is good books. Israel seen itself as a gateway to the middle. He agreed to write Turkey in the Turkish language instead of Turkey. I had to make that adjustment at the press releases when I was working there. Anyway, Erdogan, did you see, by the way, his video with Macron this week? I did. When he was like tugging on Macron's finger in a massive power move saying, I've got you in a pincer grip. Power move. Yeah.

The media coverage was that, you know, Israel should be worried. Israel's not in the room. There is President Trump. He's being welcomed in the UAE. He's visiting Saudi Arabia, Qatar. They're welcoming him in the most extraordinary marble palaces, everything covered in gold exactly as he likes it. And who's not in the room? Not...

Al Jalani, who until just a few months ago had a $10 million bounty for location of his whereabouts because he was a wanted terrorist and now he's the president of Syria, and he's shaking hands with President Trump. Israel's not in the room. And there was talk that perhaps President J.D. Vance would be coming to Israel to, sorry for Vice President, but I said Vice President J.D. Vance would come to Israel in order to balance things out. And now Barak Rafi, the Axios, who still blocks you on Twitter, right? We've never worked out why that happens.

Maybe we'll try to orchestrate a rapprochement between the two of you. I asked him a question he didn't like, and he blocked it. Okay, well, after Israel-Turkey, we'll get a rapprochement between the two of you. In any case, he's reporting now that they devised... I know he likes steaks. If he invites me, then all is clear. Okay, Barak Ravid will add into our request the emir of Qatar. If they're willing to condemn Hamas, he will take it down from a 10 to an 8. And if you unblock TPR on Twitter, then he'll take you out for a steak. In any case, Israel's not in the room.

Okay, and J.D. Vance is apparently not coming to Israel as Barak Rafid now is reporting, apparently not wanting to give the impression that the U.S. is behind the resumption of hostilities in this attempt to capture the Gaza Strip. But certainly from an optics perspective, the spin that came out of President Trump's visit is Israel's not in the room and it's being sidelined and

We've gone from the US administration, no daylight, we're on the same page on every picture to saying, maybe Israel is beginning to be nudged out. How do you read it? Well, you mentioned the word optics. I think that's an important word. Any politician, certainly any president of the United States, wants good optics and wants wins.

wants to travel overseas and be perceived as great and wants to bring home something for his constituents, for the United States of America. I don't know if Trump perceived any possible win for visiting Israel at this time, because perhaps he sees that this war is in a sort of stalemate. There's maneuvering.

Is Israel going to go all the way? Is Israel not going to go all the way? What's the situation with humanitarian aid? There's a lot of uncertainty. Yeah, we're not going to invest $1.2 trillion in the US, are we? Correct. And at a time when Trump is raising tariffs...

The issue of the economy is a huge concern in the United States. And the Qataris and the Emiratis and the Saudis have trillions of dollars. It's important to use the word dollars. Dollars is the U.S. currency. They are putting their dollars in the United States. They are carrying out transactions in dollar-denominated assets. They are buying U.S. treasuries. We want...

oil wealth of the Gulf states to be invested in the United States and not in China, not in Russia, not in Iran, not in North Korea. So it's important from the U.S. perspective to keep the Gulf countries in the U.S. orbit if our pre-

priority of challenges list, China, Russia, Iran, North Korea. We can't also have Qatar on the same list, apparently, because there are other challenges. So it's important from the U.S. perspective and Trump who wants wins to be able to go and broadcast something that he did successfully. Right. So maybe we shouldn't read too much about Israel not being included in the birth certificate. Not everything is about us all the time. It's not all about us. I thought the world revolved around Israel.

That's a wake up call. Okay. So let's not read too much into it. President Trump wanted to win economically, but I wonder, is it just economics? I mean, is the reason he's shaking hands with Al Jolani because he wants Syrian investment in the United States or geopolitically? Is there something important we need to pay attention to?

Well, we've seen Trump previously meet with the leader of North Korea. In North Korea? In North Korea. So President Trump is willing, able, eager to meet anyone, anywhere, anytime. This is his philosophy.

And I think the prevailing attitude regarding Syria is, let's see what happens. Let's give them a chance. The sanctions that were in place against Syria were sanctions that were in place on the Assad regime for both its crimes against its own people and also for its role in sponsoring terrorist groups in the Middle East and its relationship with Iran. The Assad regime is gone. There's a new regime in town. And Trump perhaps is leading with a diplomacy first,

approach to see what happens to him. It's a handshake. It's a photograph. It's not necessarily a concession on Syria policy. It's a complicated place. And we still don't know if Syria is going to be a country.

There are parts of Syria that are not under Syrian government control. There are maybe factions in Syria that don't accept the authority of the central government. We may see the breakup of Syria or not. I have no idea. We are in Israel very much in a wait and see approach. President Trump did say that he wants to see Syria and Saudi Arabia normalize relations with Israel. And the Saudi angle particularly understands Israel.

Maybe it's not going to happen immediately because the war has complicated things. And we know now from a report in the Wall Street Journal that maybe the reason that Hamas launched the October 7th massacre on October 7th was in order to foil Israeli-Saudi peace.

One of the big mysteries is why did Sinwa jump the gun and invade without telling the other Iranian proxy armies the ring of fire around Israel? Because if they had attacked in a pincer movement, we now understand that if Hamas and Hezbollah had attacked in a pincer movement together with a concerted wave of ballistic missiles from Iran and Yemen, I mean, it would have been over.

It would have been over. We don't understand how lucky we were because of October 7th that it saved us from this concerted pincer attack. It's horrific to think that it could have been so much worse, but it could have been. And the Wall Street Journal has got its hands on Israeli intelligence. Minutes of a meeting that took place just days before the October 7th massacre in which Sinoir spoke of imminent Israeli-Saudi normalization as something he wanted foiled or something dramatic.

He jumped the gun, horrific, barbaric, barbaric, barbaric terror attack, but could have been much worse if he'd been coordinated with his other goons around the region. But President Trump's saying he wants Syria to make peace.

And I think that's really important that he's saying it because it's not obvious. I think when world leaders talk about the importance of a ceasefire in Lebanon, as if it's brought peace without telling the Lebanese, you need to make peace with Israel. And just as we're going to harangue the Israelis about the two-state solution being where everyone knows we have to go, even if it's not implementable tomorrow, we have to keep a pathway and we have to aspire towards that.

The world should be telling Lebanon, Syria, Saudi Arabia, we expect you to make peace with Israel. Let's work on how we create that pathway towards peace and normalization with Israel. But that's the expectation, even if it's not going to happen tomorrow. And here's President Trump saying, yeah, I expect Syria to make peace with Israel. And I wonder, what do you make of that shift in messaging? And do you see any prospects? First of all, we should never lower the bar. I agree with you completely that every...

State, every member nation of the United Nations should be living in peace with every other member state of the United Nations. And Israel and Syria should be living at peace. That is a simple and radical idea. From that point, it's clear to understand, well, there are many factions in Syria and elsewhere that will do everything to prevent that. Their defining ideology is that there can't be an Israel in the Middle East. I mean, look at the current president of Syria.

If you look into his background, you start reading things, you'll see phrases like offshoot of Al-Qaeda or member of Al-Qaeda or al-Nusra Front, offshoot of ISIS. And I'm thinking to myself, okay, offshoot of Al-Qaeda. What year did the offshoot, did the branching off take place?

These people were adults on 9-11. If you have chosen to become a member of Al-Qaeda or ISIS after 9-11, you probably thought that the 9-11 attacks were a good idea, you were happy, you celebrated.

And Jalali admitted as much. Yes. He gave an interview and he said, if anyone in the Arab or Islamic world is telling you they weren't happy on 9-11, they're lying to you. This was a few years ago. So it's quite obvious that the new president of a state that borders Israel is not just him himself, but his regime celebrated the 9-11 attacks. They were happy. Now they have a lot of responsibility. 20 years have passed.

Let's see what happens. But in the meantime, they should be told you should make peace with Israel and they should be told that the path to a better future is through peace and not through war. Do you see any feasibility for Trump to make it happen? With Syria? Absolutely not. Because as I was saying, we barely know that there's going to be a Syria. Who does this leader actually represent? What do you mean there might not be a Syria?

There are many factions in Syria that may not respect the leadership. He was not elected. It's not a democratic process. There was a civil war in Syria of many factions, and one faction has now

But there are other factions besides the Sunni radical majority. There is a Druze minority in the south of Syria. There are Kurds in Syria. There are Christians in Syria. So it's going to be a complicated balancing act. And all I can do from Israel is sit and watch. But you mentioned Saudi Arabia.

And how Sinoir was plotting or putting into motion the October 7th attacks, right? A few days before, because he heard about... Sinoir, who has now been reunited with his brother, apparently. Two Sinoirs, yes. I remember the days before October 7th, 2023. What was the biggest news story in the Middle East in the days before October 7th, 2023? I'm talking October 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th.

It was headlines about peace getting closer between Israel and Saudi Arabia. There was an Israeli government minister in Saudi Arabia during the Jewish Sukkot holiday, and he was photographed with the Jewish ritual objects, the Lulav and the Etrog in Saudi Arabia. So there was a lot of optimism that Saudi Arabia was moving in a different direction. We didn't see

how we would exactly get to peace, what the terms would be. But it seemed like the ball was rolling and could not be stopped that Israel and Saudi Arabia were going to establish peaceful, normal relations. And we know with the Abraham Accords, which were signed in 2020 with the UAE and Bahrain, I invite everyone to open a map, look at the UAE, look at Bahrain, and then look at Saudi Arabia.

The Abraham Accords could not have happened without the quiet blessing of Saudi Arabia saying to Bahrain, saying to the UAE, you do this first, give it a shot, let's see how it works. Saudi Arabia allowed Israeli planes finally to fly over Saudi Arabia. Things were moving in a better direction, and that is one of the motivations for Hamas to carry out the October 7th massacre as quickly as it could to disrupt this process because Hamas understood that

That it's very difficult to make peace in the middle of a war, right? The Qataris have been poisoning the minds of an entire generation, multiple generations of people in the Middle East. The Qataris have turned up their anti-Israel rhetoric on their news networks like Al Jazeera and the so-called journalists that they're funding in various places. They turned up the heat on Israel. They incited young separatists.

Saudis. So now if the leader of Saudi Arabia knows that the future will be better, if he makes peace with Israel and his country will be better, he cannot go against the will of his entire population that might be very upset that, oh, we heard that Israel's genocidal and now you're going to make peace with Israel. So the longer this war continues, the more Hamas may achieve its objective of spoiling the expansion of the Abraham Accord.

The longer the war continues. I think two very important messages there. One, first of all, that every world leader should demand peace in the Middle East and not let the Arabs off the hook for having abnormal relations with Israel. Normal relations should be the normal, and that's what everyone should demand. And the second thing is the reminder that the reason there isn't peace in the Middle East is that Arab states refuse to make peace with Israel. Israel is not

the side making demands. We will only make peace with Saudi Arabia if they give us X, Y, Z. We will only make peace with Oman if they give us this. It's the Arab side that is refusing to make peace with Israel, that is putting conditions on making peace. And I think the demand should be peace should be unconditional.

There is no border dispute between Saudi Arabia and Israel. There is no border dispute between Oman and Israel. These countries should have normal relations. And whatever disagreements they have, sure, let's continue to argue about the Palestinian issue. But they should take place in the context of normal diplomatic relations. And the Arabs should frankly quit this childish game of not recognizing Israel. In order to do that, they need to re-educate their populations who they have incited for

70 years to tell them that Israel is horrible. They have to turn down the dial and say well actually Israel is not so horrible It's Iran or the others that are that are horrible. Yeah, they cannot they've made their bed now That's not so easy to go against the system that they've preached for so long the war. Let's talk about that It's a seven front war. Of course, it's reminder of the Gaza Strip. We've got Judean Samaria the West Bank Lebanon Syria Yemen

Iraq, Iran itself, seven fronts, eight including the diaspora. Let's look at Gaza because it's the one that's raging at the moment. Israel has just launched this campaign called Operation Gideon's Chariots. I think it's a better name than Swords of Iron, which is the original name for the war. And the idea is no more cat and mouse. We're going into the Gaza Strip. We're going to capture the whole thing, seize it from Hamas.

And as part of this change, just in the last few hours, Israel has announced that it will resume the deliveries of humanitarian aid into the Gaza Strip. A little bit of background. On the eve of the October 7th war, there were two goods crossings into the Gaza Strip.

There was the Kerem Shalom crossing into Israel and the Rafah crossing into Egypt. And everyone wants to forget, of course, that Gaza also shares a border with Egypt. He had the Erez crossing too, where some goods went in. The Erez, but it was mostly a pedestrian crossing. It was completely trashed and destroyed and its workers were massacred and abducted on October 7th. Kerem Shalom was attacked as well. Israel shut off supplies and said, these crossings that have just been attacked are not going to be used to deliver supplies into enemy territory.

international pressure. Israel eventually allows supplies to enter through the Gaza Strip and there are no limits on the amount

that can go in. There is no limit on, no quantitative limit on what can go in. And at one point, the UN has up to a thousand trucks inside the Gaza Strip that are piling up that have gone in that they're not able to distribute. You're talking about the end of 2023, early 2024. Deep into 2024, the UN had more trucks inside Gaza than it could possibly distribute. And despite all the fake news and misinformation about Israel blocking aid,

I mean, I remember when I was a government spokesman, I thought I was going absolutely mad when I looked up the UN figures myself. April 2024, 150 trucks of food are going in every day. Before the war, only 70 trucks. At one point, there was more than twice as much food going into the Gaza Strip than there was before the war. And Hamas was hijacking.

A lot of it. Hamas, government of Gaza, taxing it, stealing it on the black market. And so even as the UN agencies complain, there's no food, there's no food, there's no food, the markets are absolutely full and someone is making, and I choose my words carefully here, a killing on the theft of humanitarian aid.

Anyway, we get to the last ceasefire. Let's bring everyone up to speed. The ransom for the hostages. As part of the ransom for the hostages who were released in the most recent trunch, Israel allowed in 450,000 tons of aid. That's 25,200 trucks. In context of the war, a third of all the aid that entered the Gaza Strip since Hamas declared war on October 7th

A third of it went in in just that six-week period. After which Israel said, we're switching it off. Nothing is coming in. The Gaza Strip is under total blockade. Nothing is coming in. Cue immediately allegations that Gaza is starving. Allegations began like the day after Israel stopped

letting things into Gaza. And things have really reached a boiling point right now to the point that last night, Israel, the Prime Minister's office announced this. And I want to get your take, first of all, on the issue of humanitarian aid and the dilemmas, but also about the way that Israel is presenting the decision to return to delivering humanitarian aid. Prime Minister's office said as follows.

At the recommendation of the IDF and out of the operational need to expand the expansion of intense fighting to defeat Hamas, Israel will allow the entry of a basic quantity of food for the population in order to ensure that a hunger crisis does not develop in the Gaza Strip. Such a crisis would endanger the continuation of Operation Gideon's chariots to defeat Hamas,

Israel will act to deny Hamas the ability to take control of the distribution of humanitarian aid to ensure that the aid does not reach Hamas terrorists. Israel, in effect, saying food should reach the people who need it. Hamas should not be able to steal it. The current mechanisms have failed because Hamas has been able to exploit them. Of course, that doesn't end, that doesn't stop. Craven officials like the UN humanitarian chief, Tom Fletcher, who has started accusing Israel of genocide,

in the Gaza Strip, saying as follows: "To those proposing an alternative modality for aid distribution, let's not waste time. We have a plan. It's set out. It's rooted in humanity, impartiality, neutrality and independence, backed by a coalition of donors. Just let us do our job. We've done it before. We can do it again. We know how to get the supplies registered and delivered without diversion, without delay.

I mean, there is so much to unpack here. That's my first sentence, exactly. Wow. So much to unpack. First of all, what is the problem with the existing UN aid distribution system for getting aid into the Gaza Strip? What is Israel's objection to it?

Well, the situation we had for most of the war, as you mentioned, Israel allowed massive amounts of food and supplies to enter the Gaza Strip via UN aid agencies and others.

When you send massive amounts of food and supplies into a territory that is governed by the enemy, controlled by the enemy, the enemy is going to get its hands on it. You use the word hijack. Hamas didn't have to hijack the aid. It was delivered to Hamas. Okay? It wasn't delivered to UN warehouses? These warehouses are staffed by locals.

People imagine that, I don't know, people from Norway, Australia, Mexico, the United States, Sweden, with blue helmets, are coming in and delivering packages to the people of Gaza. This is not the case. The aid agencies are hiring locals. They're hiring locals in a territory that is governed by Hamas. Who do you think the locals are?

Who do you think is able to get their hands on the most aid? It's like a mafia. It's not done in public, out in the open, on Amazon. But it's obvious that if Hamas is controlling territory, then they're going to get their hands on the supplies and they're going to be able to sell these supplies and use the revenue from these sales, from the taxes they collect. They're going to use the revenue to pay their fighters. They're going to use the revenue to pay the people who are holding the hostages.

And they're going to use the revenue to recruit more teenage boys to become Hamas fighters. Right, they're selling food in order to pay the people who are starving the hostages. Now, we told ourselves, well, there are hostages in Gaza. The hostages need food. We hope that the food and the medicine and the supplies that is going in by the truckload is also going to reach the hostages.

The Israeli public opinion on this issue changed during the first phase of the hostage ransom release agreement. When hostages came out of Gaza alive, came back to Israel, we all saw the images. They didn't need to say anything.

We learned that Hamas is torturing and starving the hostages. Hamas is not giving the hostages the food that is coming into Gaza. The Hamas guys are having nice meals a very short distance away from the hostages and not giving the food to the hostages. So it's clear that after more than a year of this policy of allowing unauthorized

unlimited food and supplies to enter territory governed by the enemy, an enemy that is barbarically holding your people in underground dungeons, this cannot continue. If Hamas is not going to release hostages, then the current system cannot continue because it is what is keeping Hamas in power. And one of the goals of the war is the overthrow of the Hamas government in Gaza. Right. The supply chain that Hamas has been able to infiltrate has been quite literally destroyed

financing Hamas's war machine, prolonging the war. I've been asked in interviews, hang on, surely with all the intelligence Israel has, don't you have more visual or intelligence evidence of Hamas hijacking the goods? The best I can point to is the Wall Street Journal article that said that Hamas is running low on funds and can't pay its fighters because supplies were choked off. But maybe Israel's missed a trick here by not copping

coughing up the hard evidence that Hamas... Well, that's why I say we don't need to say that Hamas hijacked it. It's common sense that if Hamas is the government and Hamas controls the territory and you're sending trucks into the territory controlled by this terrorist army, then they are going to be controlling the supply... Well, you say it's obvious, but our friend Mr. Fletcher from the United Nations says we know how to get our aid supplies registered, scanned, inspected, blah, blah, blah, without diversion. Um...

And, you know, you have Jan Egerland, the head of the Norwegian Refugee Council, who is really a contemptible figure, has been tweeting that Israel has never given any evidence that the system that worked well and saved many lives has any major flaws. The evidence, again, is common sense that Hamas is the government of Gaza and

To side with, to kind of steel man the point that the UN official is making, the United Nations is emphasizing its neutrality.

They love to emphasize their neutrality. We're not neutral. We want Hamas to lose. We want Israel to win. They don't care. Their primary concern is the humanitarian situation in Gaza. That's the purpose of their organization. That is their primary concern. Our primary concern is the destruction of the Hamas regime and the safe return of the hostages. There's a clash between that. So what the UN is calling on us to do is to enable Hamas to rule Gaza forever.

forever and to give them the supply line. I just want to pause a second and just process that thought. It's really important when people say

I don't think you have to go all the way and say that the UN is complicit with Hamas, that it's part of the cover-up. The point really is that Israel has a priority. The priority is to remove the Hamas regime from power. The United Nations, whether or not they're sympathetic with Hamas, even if we want to assume the best of intentions, is neutral. It doesn't care who governs Hamas. It doesn't care who governs Gaza. And that means that as for whether Hamas will continue to govern Gaza, it's apathetic.

about the question. And what it wants to do is get the most food to the most people. And it doesn't care really whether anything is getting hijacked along the way or getting appropriated by the local authorities, because that's just not its concern as a neutral organization. So while the UN says, well, the UN has different interests. The UN isn't trying to topple Hamas. Israel is. The rest of the free world should be behind it too. And it becomes much more complicated because we are abiding by the Geneva Conventions and

there is a requirement to ensure that the civilian population of Gaza does not starve. So on the one hand, we are not obligated to send... Is that the obligation? In a short answer, if we are going to carry out siege warfare...

which is to say we control the sky above Gaza and the border crossings in Gaza, and we're not going to allow anything in, then there needs to be a safe passage out

for people who want to escape the siege. That's what makes it legal under international humanitarian law is that civilians have somewhere to go. Which is what Israel is now saying. It's saying we're placing, say, northern Gaza under siege. If you want aid, you can go 20 miles to the south. There, there will be aid, but northern Gaza will be under siege and we are not obligated to allow supplies into enemy-held territory. Civilians are perfectly welcome to get out of enemy-held territory. There's additional caveats.

It's regarding both of the countries that are bordering Gaza. One option, hypothetically, is that the safe passage for civilians in Gaza who are not Hamas and want no part of this war, they could have safe passage into Israel.

I do not see that as being a feasible option for Israel to essentially take enemy civilians, a million of them, and somehow find place for them in Israel. No, if the purpose of the October 7th war was to resettle Gazans in Israel, the result of the October 7th war cannot be the resettlement of Gazans in Israel.

It's a military option. If you're going to have a siege and say, okay, well, we have a siege, therefore people need to have a safe passage out. And now we're saying, okay, so the safe passage is not with us. Egypt is saying we want no part of this. The safe passage is not going to be with us. That's why we're stuck with the humanitarian situation that we have. It's a bad humanitarian situation.

and Hamas remains the government of Gaza, and Hamas continues to hold hostages. So that's why the U.S. and Israel, not the United Nations, the U.S. and Israel are coming up with a plan to provide humanitarian aid to people in Gaza that will not...

go deep into the territory that Hamas continues to control. It's a very difficult situation because in order to send, in order to not have Hamas get its hands on the food and supplies, then there needs to be a territory that Hamas is not controlling where the food and supplies goes. This is like a four-year-old can check this.

Is Hamas controlling the territory where the food and supplies are going? Then guess what? Hamas is going to get the food and supplies. Is Hamas not controlling this area? Then okay, probably Hamas won't get it. So I don't know exactly the details of the system where people in Gaza are going to perhaps have to walk a certain distance to get food and go back. It's a complicated situation, but it needs to...

not be what existed for all of 2024, which is that Hamas was using the food and supplies in order to prolong the war. And that is a really important point that aid should get to people who need it. Put me like on the humanitarian beating heart side of the question about aid into Gaza.

aid you to get to the people who need it. We don't want people to starve. We don't want people to suffer. But it's also important that a terrorist organization not be able to hijack it in order to prolong the war and prolong everyone's suffering. And it means, therefore, that it's important that aid go through an independent humanitarian foundation that is not complicit with Hamas, that has not been infiltrated by Hamas, that has not been turning a blind eye to Hamas seizing funds and supplies, and is on board or backed by the country that is on board with the mission that you need to...

provide supplies for civilians but consistent with the goal of removing the Hamas regime from power. Actually, the policy has been criticized by Yoav Galant, the defense minister from the beginning of the war who was recently fired by the prime minister, who said...

Clearly this is evidence of a policy failure because if you're talking about a plan to distribute aid that isn't going through Hamas, it means that you haven't defeated Hamas. If you'd captured the territory from Hamas already, then you wouldn't be talking about how do you stop aid getting hijacked in territory that Hamas is still controlling.

There's no good option. That's the bottom line. But I'm optimistic in this case. We had mentioned earlier that President Trump skipped Israel on his visit. This is an issue of tremendous importance, the humanitarian situation in Gaza. And instead of Israel having to work with UN agencies that hire locals in Gaza and wonder why things don't work out so well, on this issue, the United States and Israel are working on a mechanism. And if

United States and Israel agree on this mechanism, it means that the United States is backing Israel's decision and backing Israel's policy in the war. And you've got these UN officials pushing back against

having this new humanitarian foundation with independent security contractors distributing aid by saying it's untested, by saying it's unproven. But also the argument, look, the argument you went for the legality of this is one, siege warfare is lawful under international law, like many things that are horrible because it's a war. They're lawful, but they're regulated. Imposing a siege is illegal.

permissible if the goal isn't to starve the local population into submission but you want to starve the enemy of its resources you allow safe passage for civilians out under the Geneva Convention it's an obligation to allow the

entry of supplies necessary for the survival of the local population unless the enemy is diverting it or using it for a definite military advantage, which it is. And in order to confront these arguments, which makes sense, I mean, this is how international law works. Notice how the UN then has to invent this argument. This is, ah, but those aren't the rules of international law that apply because Gaza is occupied. And if Gaza is occupied, then...

Israel is not under an obligation just to facilitate the provision of aid. It's under an obligation to make sure that the civilian population has what it needs. And then you go, wait, we need to have an obligation to provide civilians with what they need

in territory controlled by Hamas in which case it's not occupied because the definition of occupation is that you have effective control that it's the territory under the actual authority of a hostile army and if we had actual authority then Hamas wouldn't be hijacking aid there and we'd be able to distribute food to the people from the square houses that are

inside Gaza that Hamas is controlling? I mean, what do you make of that attempt to create these intellectual somersaults in order to justify the claim that actually Israel is ultimately responsible for feeding Gazans and taking care of their welfare so that Hamas is free to continue massacring Israelis because they've been let off the hook? Ultimately, my response to such arguments is thank you for sharing your opinion. I mean, we are 19 months into this war.

It's clear how it started. It's clear how it needs to end. We just need a path to get there. And I'm optimistic that if Israel is going to coordinate with the United States on the humanitarian mechanism, then Israel can carry out its war objectives and also have the support of the United States. You remember about a year ago when Israel was considering

Entering Rafah. Rafah is a Palestinian city in Gaza that was a major launching point for the October 7th massacre. And as Israel was preparing to enter Rafah to find the Hamas terrorists there in Rafah to remove the infrastructure that Hamas had built under and around homes, the president of the United States said that if Israel enters Rafah, we're not sending them the weapons.

This was a major crisis point in U.S.-Israel relations. I'm optimistic that the Israeli government is coordinating with the American government and coming up with a mechanism that it won't be, we won't come to that point where two allies who see roughly eye to eye on most things are not going to reach a point of such a public break.

And we don't have to listen to UN bureaucrats if Israel is going to have the support of the United States. Help me explain how Netanyahu is spinning this decision for the Israeli public and why the decision to allow humanitarian aid into Gaza is something that even needs to be spun. He says in his statement that I read earlier that this is at the recommendation of the IDF. Signpost that.

out of an operational need to enable the expansion of fighting to defeat Hamas. And Israel will allow the entry of a basic quantity of food for the population to ensure that a hunger crisis does not develop in the Gaza Strip. Help me explain why he's telling the Israeli public that this is at the recommendation of the IDF. That allowing aid is linked to allowing an expansion of the fighting.

And specifically, that he's allowing an entry of a basic quantity of food to ensure there's no hunger crisis, which is very different from what happened before the ransom, which was no restrictions on aid. Here he's saying there are restrictions. We're allowing a basic amount in. Why? Phase one of the hostage ransom payment ended. And the prime minister of Israel and the defense minister said, from this point on, we are not allowing food.

We're not facilitating the transfer of any food or supplies into the Gaza Strip until we start seeing hostages come out. That's what they said on the record. One hostage has come out since that time, and it was a hostage with American citizenship. And this is a Eden Alexander and President Trump and his administration pushed the Qataris very hard to push Hamas to bring this hostage out of captivity.

So we've seen one hostage come out and now Israel is saying, the prime minister is saying, we will be allowing food and supplies to enter Gaza. So he has done a complete 180 on what he said. The Israeli public and certainly his voting constituency is going to be upset at this change. Look at him and said, look, you said unless the hostages are coming out, that nothing is going in. Now stuff is going in. You have to justify that.

So that explains the prime minister's statement pointing to the army, to operational needs, because those can certainly override any political consideration. It's an attempt to tell the Israeli public, we need to do this, and there are good reasons for doing this. And the big picture, since October 7th,

is that it is very unpopular in the Israeli public to see convoys of trucks, food, supplies, everything going into Gaza, seeing images on social media of lots of food in Gaza, people enjoying meals in Gaza while there are hostages in captivity. It's an intolerable situation. There is not a big enough sense of urgency

whether from the Israeli government or from every government in the world, that Hamas is holding hostages. It's now considered just kind of normal. It's one of the issues that we have to deal with. The law of nature. There is a lot of emotion,

and anger among the Israeli public, certainly among the prime minister's voters that Israel has resumed, made this concession to send food and supplies into Gaza at a time when hostages are not coming out. Now, the reason that Israel is doing this, we've already discussed. There are many other considerations and the prime minister pointed to a couple of them, military considerations, humanitarian considerations, international law considerations, and foreign relations considerations.

um the united states does not want to be seen as israel's top ally if israel is going to be starving the population of gaza which has not happened until this point despite the accusation so there are many other political considerations that the prime minister has to take into account aside from the feelings of his own voting base so he is managing many different constituencies i do not envy his job no i don't envy his job either i um

I was asked at the beginning of the war about my personal opinion and I said with a wry smile, "I'm glad I don't have to make decisions, I only have to explain them." And now these decisions have become so painful with such impossible trade-offs. And I wrote a long post on Twitter that's done very well explaining these impossible choices. It's on my sub stack as well. Anyone who hasn't subscribed should read that note about the impossible dilemmas that we face. We have only very difficult choices, only impossible decisions.

ahead of us, they're impossible to reconcile. And therefore, I'm glad I don't even have to explain these decisions. I just have to explain the dilemmas that Israel faces and the trade-offs and the costs because we have no good options. I think the ransom that Hamas is demanding is one we can't afford, but we also can't afford not to pay it. And that means we're stuck between not even a rock and a hard place, a rock and a rock.

and it's a terrible situation. And here on this podcast, you've helped me understand much better the strategic environment that Israel is working in. DPR, as always, good to pick your brains. How can people follow you, your work? There's a few ways that people can find me. Those of you who are on Instagram, you can find me. My Instagram name is Ruby Guides Israel. That's R-U-B-Y Guides Israel. On Twitter, X, I post...

frequently there as well. My username there is Paul Rubens, P-A-U-L-R-U-B-E-N-S. And I also have a Substack where I occasionally write essays. You can find it at dprpr.substack.com. Fantastic. Great to have you in the studio. Thank you for having me again.

And that's it for this episode of State of a Nation. As always, if you enjoy these episodes, please share them with a friend. Give us a nice review. Subscribe if you haven't on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, YouTube, wherever you get your podcasts. Follow us on social media, State of a Pod. I'm Elon Levy, and thanks for joining.