How did Israel become a country whose prime minister declares that it is destined to turn into a “super-Sparta,” a nation that survives by the sword, and politically and economically isolated? How did a country that enjoyed worldwide sympathy after the catastrophe it endured less than two years ago become shunned, almost a pariah?
I will begin with three truths. First, antisemitism is deep-rooted, and the Jewish state is a convenient substitute target for our haters. Second, many Western countries have large Muslim minorities. Like other minorities, they seek to influence policy, and sometimes they succeed. Finally, there are numerous Muslim and Arab states, some of which play significant roles in the international arena.
The impact of these truths should not be underestimated, but they do not fully explain how we reached this point.
Soon after the Israel-Hamas War began, a key question arose: What are Israel’s objectives in Gaza? States asked, journalists asked, Israelis themselves wanted to know how the country envisions the future of the Gaza Strip. We heard at length from the prime minister about what would not be, but as for what would be, we had little apart from vague slogans like “total victory.”
In other words, Israel poured immense resources, including diplomatic credit, into a campaign with no clear goal. Who embarks on a shopping spree without an idea of what they will buy? Who enters a medical procedure without a defined purpose? Cut here, stitch there, and don’t worry – everything will be fine.
Meanwhile, as Israel shifted its focus between the Philadelphi Corridor and Netzarim Corridor – while sealing crossings to food and then reopening them, under pressure, with an operation run by an obscure, inexperienced body – the toll of civilian casualties in Gaza mounted, infrastructure collapsed, buildings crumbled.
Without a clear objective, it became increasingly difficult to explain what purpose destruction and bloodshed serve. Our friends, who stood with us in our hour of tragedy and understood the need to respond to it, warned against the use of force for revenge or humiliation. At first, they were polite in response to Israel’s actions; then they became increasingly firm.
There is a saying: if one person tells you you’re drunk, you can ignore it. If two say it, pay attention. If three do, stop handling dangerous machinery and think about it. Instead, Israel’s leadership clung to the truths set out at the beginning of this column, invoked the Holocaust and the Spanish Inquisition, scolded and insulted, dismissed and belittled. Israel behaved like a petulant child: It’s my right! No one will tell me what to do!
Other nations have the right not to cooperate with Israel
Even if we accept that it is Israel’s right, other countries have the right not to cooperate. Sports fans will hopefully forgive me for saying that the damage if Israel is excluded from European competitions will be limited.
But if, for example, the European Union carries out its threat to cut us off from “Horizon,” the program enabling Israeli researchers to join major scientific projects while strengthening academic and industrial ties, the implications for Israel’s knowledge, technology, and economy, would directly affect every one of us. Should trade sanctions be applied, it won’t only be our kitchen cabinets that will suffer, but also our medicine cabinets.
Instead of retreating into the same assertions again, instead of condemning itself to isolation that a small country may not survive, Israel would do well to admit that the path it has taken has not led to good results. It must look soberly at its capabilities, define its goals realistically, and seek partners to achieve them. Hopefully, it is not too late.
The writer was Israel’s first ambassador to the Baltic states after the disintegration of the Soviet Union, ambassador to South Africa, and congressional liaison officer at the embassy in Washington. She is a graduate of Israel’s National Defense College.