Israel's Gaza Offensive Amid Global Pressure

On this week’s episode, Israel Policy Forum Policy Advisor and Tel Aviv-based journalist Neri Zilber hosts Chief Policy Officer Michael Koplow and The Diane and Guilford Glazer Foundation Senior Fellow and Research Director Shira Efron. The trio discuss the launch of Israel’s new offensive in Gaza, growing international pressure on Israel to end the war, concerns over the grim humanitarian situation inside the strip, what President Trump actually wants, and more.  

This podcast was recorded before the terrorist attack at the Capital Jewish Museum. Read Israel Policy Forum's statement below: 

Israel Policy Forum mourns the senseless killing of Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim in the terrorist attack at the American Jewish Committee Young Diplomats reception in Washington, D.C. Our hearts go out to their families and to their Israeli Embassy colleagues, and their killer must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

This was an antisemitic terrorist attack targeting a Jewish event ostensibly carried out in the name of Palestinian solidarity, and 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. Neither the October 7 attacks nor the war in Gaza provide any justification for political violence, and 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 six thousand 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 point scoring already taking place, as if the terrorist was motivated by statements from politicians on either side of the spectrum rather than by events on the ground and his own twisted antisemitic hatred, is unseemly and must stop.

Our thoughts and condolences are with the victims’ families.

Support the show

Follow us on Instagram, Twitter/X, and Bluesky, and subscribe to our email list here.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:05):
Israel Policy Forum warns the senseless killing of
Yaron Lashinsky and SarahMilgram last night in the
terrorist attack at the AmericanJewish Committee Young
Diplomats reception inWashington DC.
Our hearts go out to theirfamilies and to their Israeli
embassy colleagues.
A killer must be prosecuted tothe fullest extent of the law.
This was an anti-Semiticterrorist attack targeting a

(00:26):
Jewish event, ostensibly carriedout in the name of Palestinian
solidarity.
There can be no space for thisin the United States.
Support for Palestiniansconfers no legitimacy to attack
Jews, Israeli or otherwise, andthe terrorist who gunned down
two innocents last night hasonly damaged whatever cause he
was allegedly trying to advance.
Neither the October 7th attacksnor the war in Gaza provide any

(00:47):
justification for politicalviolence, and the language used
in anti-Israel protests thatoften glorifies such violence
must stop.
Jews in this country should nothave to live in fear because of
fighting taking place 6,000miles away, and we reject any
attempted connection betweenthese two arenas.
We also reject the immediaterush to map terrorism on

(01:07):
American shores to domesticIsraeli partisan politics, the
political points scoring alreadytaking place, as though the
terrorist was motivated bystatements from politicians on
either side of the spectrumrather than by events on the
ground in his own twistedanti-Semitic hatred is unseemly
and must stop.
Our thoughts and ourcondolences are with Yaron and

(01:27):
Sarah's families.

Speaker 2 (01:39):
Shalom and welcome to the Israel Policy Pod.
I'm Nery Zilber, a journalistbased 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 ownChief Policy Officer, michael
Koplow, and Shira Efron, theDiane and Guilford Glazer
Foundation Senior Fellow andDirector of Research.

(02:00):
We'll be discussing the startof the long-threatened IDF
offensive into Gaza, the growinginternational pressure on
Israel, which really ratchetedup this week, the humanitarian
situation inside the Strip andthe big question hovering over
everything what, if anything,does Donald Trump want?

(02:21):
Just a bit of housekeepingbefore we start.
We're now a video podcast.
Yes, we're on video live anddirect, so if you like to watch
us as you listen to us, you cancheck us out on YouTube and, of
course, audio version stillavailable.
Wherever you get your podcasts,please subscribe and leave a

(02:41):
good rating.
If the mood strikes you, let'sget to Michael and Shira.
Hi Michael, hi Shira.
Welcome back to the podcast.

Speaker 3 (02:50):
Hi guys.

Speaker 4 (02:51):
Hi Gary.

Speaker 3 (02:51):
First one on video.

Speaker 4 (02:53):
Yeah, but.
I'm always smiling like thatwhen we start the conversation.

Speaker 2 (02:58):
But now I and everyone else can see your
bright, beautiful faces and notjust your voices, so it's a
marked improvement.
A lot to get into.
This week.
We're going to go around thehorn on the big issues,
literally, of this past week,primarily in and around and
about Gaza.
And just for the record for ourlisteners, we're recording this

(03:19):
Wednesday afternoon, tel Avivtime, just in case anything
happens between now and whenthis episode goes up.
But I wanted to start here.
Over the weekend the IDFofficially launched its new
offensive against Hamas in Gazamajor airstrikes across the
strip, five divisions of IDFinfantry and armor pushing in.
A general evacuation orderissued to Khan Yunus, the second

(03:44):
biggest city in the Gaza Stripin the south.
Also, the talks that had beenongoing in Doha and Qatar for a
new ceasefire for hostage dealhave effectively stalled, it
seems, at least for now, afterthere was some glimmer of
optimism late last week.
So first question to you,michael were you surprised by

(04:05):
both of these developments?
No ceasefire deal, even if atemporary one, on the one hand,
and the start of this longthreatened Israeli offensive
into Gaza, on the other?

Speaker 3 (04:16):
I wasn't surprised by either.
As both of you and everyone whoever listens to us knows, I'm
generally pessimistic about theprospects of getting to a deal,
certainly under the currentcircumstances.
So, despite the chatter lastweek about the sides being close
and people compromising.
I never bought it.

(04:37):
Never say never, and I supposesomething can still happen, and
obviously a lot of it is goingto depend on what the Trump
administration does and how hardthey push for it.
But I was not surprised thatthe two sides are still not
agreeing and with the offensive,I think it remains to be seen

(04:59):
just how wide ranging it's goingto be.
You noted the divisions aremoving in.
So far, it seems like we'restill in the phase of mostly
airstrikes and maybe at somepoint they will do what they've
said they're going to do, whichis move into Gaza in full force
and take territory.
But at least for now, it'sunclear to me what the point of

(05:25):
this is.
I don't understand what peoplethink the real motivation for
this operation is because it'sblindingly clear that it's not
going to get the hostages back.
We know the numbers on thoseright.

(05:45):
There's no ambiguity it's 148hostages who have come back
through negotiations or quoteunquote goodwill gestures, and
it's eight hostages who've beenrescued by the IDF.
So this isn't going to rescuethe hostages, an effort to
really put pressure on Hamas fornegotiations, because, at least

(06:07):
according to reporting, hamashas started to soften some of
what it's asking for, and theIsraelis haven't budged at all.
Not to mention that Netanyahu,in some senses, keeps on moving
the goalposts about what wouldbe required.
Right, it isn't now.

(06:29):
It's certainly not only aboutreleasing the hostages.
It's also about Hamas leadersgoing to exile.
It's also about them layingdown their arms.
It's also about, after thathappens, israel remaining in
Gaza until there's fulldisarmament of the territory.
So he's not exactly creatingwiggle room in a way that Hamas
can actually meet.
And when it comes to using thisto defeat Hamas militarily,

(06:53):
there's really no evidence thatrecruiting people.
This is just going to be acounterinsurgency.
So I think it's time to dropthe fiction that one more
operation and just more forceand a new maneuver where this

(07:16):
time you hold territory that'sgoing 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 Trumphimself clearly losing patience
and we have the Europeansthreatening new sanctions and

(07:39):
all sorts of really baddevelopments, without evidence
that this operation is going toaccomplish anything that it's
supposed to accomplish, I justdon't see the point, and we'll
see how far it goes, but itdoesn't seem like a smart
exercise to me.

Speaker 2 (07:56):
So save your thoughts about both Trump and
international pressure.
We'll get into both thoseissues later on, trust me.
And in terms of achieving thegoals or the motivations, well,
the Israeli government would begto differ.
Obviously, the Israeligovernment still maintains in
every statement that the goal ofthe operation is to both get

(08:17):
the hostages out and to defeatHamas.
As you all know, and as thispodcast has tried to explain for
months now, both thoseobjectives are likely mutually
exclusive, for all the reasonsthat we know, shira, the start
of the operation, the lack of anew ceasefire deal did it come

(08:40):
as a surprise to you?

Speaker 4 (08:43):
So yes and no.
First of all, I do want toqualify.
There's a lot of talk about themilitary operation, for the
most part in terms of they'remostly airstrikes.
There are those divisions Nowit's three divisions who are
sort of like popes in theterritory.

(09:03):
But as far as I know and againI'm not like on the maps there's
not actually a lot of activefighting at the moment.
So it's more the talk of actualfighting that is happening and
there have been evacuationorders.
It does not mean that thePalestinians in Gaza are not
suffering from the threat of war, but in terms of how much
active fighting there is on themoment on the ground, with going

(09:26):
into territory areas, right,this operation is not supposed
to again be launched against thesame targets.
We've been through I will try tobe diplomatic about it nine
times already.
Right, this is not the idea.
It is to go to areas wherethere hasn't been a grand
operation so far.

(09:47):
So we're talking about thecentral areas, right, the Blasi
area, which was defined byIsrael as the humanitarian zone,
and we know it was infiltratedby Hamas and actually Hamas,
kind of like, was the sovereignor sort of managed law and order
in that lawless area for a longtime.
This has not happened yet, so Ithink we need to be just

(10:12):
mindful of that.
I am a bit surprised howquickly things did turn.
I think there are a lot of, youknow, respected analysts that I
respect and also people who areofficials within the system
that when we had last, I think,mary we spoke on Sunday about it
were convinced that this wasgoing to some sort of Not on a

(10:34):
microphone, not on a podcast.
Not on a podcast.
We spoke on the phone, ofcourse.

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 alongthat actually, when the second
ceasefire happened, were.
So anyway, I had good reasons,I think, to be more optimistic
about it, for a variety ofreasons.
First and foremost was the uspressure.
Right, donald trump, but notjust trump.
Right, there's whitcoff andbowler all of a sudden, and
hamas playing a very smart movewith releasing Idan Alexander

(11:06):
without essentially requestinganything in return.
Right, which I thought was wiseon their part.
And it seemed also that ifHamas continues to play its
cards right, they can call theIsraeli bluff because, going
back to where we are in theground operation, all polls

(11:31):
indicate that this has no publicsupport in Israel.
You know, there are some peopleon the right, right, even those
who want to see Hamas, which isbasically all of us right.
No one wants to see Hamas there, which is basically all of us
right, no one wants to see Hamasthere.
But even those that see this asa priority, the 70% of the
Israeli public, plus or minus,want to see the hostages back in
.
Understanding what Michael Iwon't repeat it, but what

(11:53):
Michael basically said right,this war is to no end and it's
not going to achieve its statedobjectives.
So what's the point, knowingvery well that this is going to
lead to the death of more andmore IDF soldiers?
We've just seen the last coupleof days, right Even with absent
the fighting, we're seeingsoldiers dying there, more
injuries, the state of PTSD, andthen with this diplomatic

(12:13):
tsunami, which I'm sure we'llget into in a moment, plus with
the temperature, I just thought,and sort of.
In addition to that, domesticissues, with the vote in Knesset
committee which did not allowfor an extension of the eight,
the war Sav Shmona, which is theeight, warrants.
The others think that this mustgo in a certain direction and

(12:48):
you know, netanyahu, beingNetanyahu, is going to continue
threatening the military war anddo a little bit of everything.
Nothing immediate, but we'reheading into a positive
direction, in my view, whichwould be toward a ceasefire.

(13:12):
What happened was a very quickswitch, which, of course, came
also with probably PresidentTrump, you know, I don't know if
he was Leaving the region a toppriority for the administration
.
Hamas basically saying theyhave been more flexible but this
is not new, but where they havebeen consistent all along you

(13:34):
got to give it to them has beenon.
This needs to lead to the endof war with guarantees, and
there's no reason to think thatwith this Israeli threat or you
know, if I don't kill you todaybut I'll kill you in three days
why would they agree to be moreflexible in the negotiations?

(13:59):
And I think where I was less ornot a surprise, but where I
realized things were not headingin the right direction was with
the israeli decision to allowhumanitarian assistance to go in
, hardly insufficient.
We, I'm sure we're going to getinto it, but to me, if there was

(14:20):
a ceasefire imminent, right,right, israel would push the
humanitarian assistance going ina little bit by a few more days
.
Right, there's no reason togive it now.
They can give it as part oftheir reward for a ceasefire.
The fact that they were willingto cave to pressure to bring it
in to me was an indication thata ceasefire is heading away.
Now we're talking on Wednesday,you know, maybe by Saturday

(14:42):
things here could change, but itdoesn't look like it's going in
the right direction and alldepends on how, uh, on how hard,
uh, trump, um, you know, turnsthe screws, um, so we're back,
we're back if he turns thescrews, and again we'll uh,
we'll speculate later on in thisepisode and, as you know, shira

(15:07):
, I wasn't that surprised, uh,that the offensive was launched
and I wasn't that surprised, asmichael 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 launchthis operation and that the the
threat of the operation wasn'tjust mere words.
It it was a leverage play toapply pressure on Hamas to
essentially cave and cave toIsraeli demands to give up half
the remaining living hostagesand perhaps some of the deceased

(15:37):
hostages, and Israel would bewilling to halt the war for
maybe two months.
But even as Netanyahu said, Ibelieve, last week.
He said we'll take thosehostages if Hamas wants to and
we'll pause the war.
It'll only be a pause and thenwe'll go back to launching this
exact same full-scale offensive.

(15:58):
We're going to reconquer thestrip and we're going to destroy
Hamas.
So he says it out loud if youwere Hamas, what incentive do
you have to agree to anything,truly?
And so I didn't really seewhere the zone of possible
agreement could come in, unlessthere was external pressure on

(16:20):
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 didsay Nery, he did say these
things, but I think for thefirst time ever we heard
Netanyahu quoted that they weretalking 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 awas like a positive signal that
maybe, maybe, maybe I saw thesame statement as you did, shira
, as did everyone else.
Uh, that statement was meantfor one audience, and one
audience only, and I think thatwas the us negotiators, steve

(16:59):
woodcuff, because they were indoha at the time that the
statement came out and they weretrying to find some formula to
either halt the war and get atemporary ceasefire with the eye
to negotiating a permanent endto the war, or maybe a bigger
package to fully end the war.
And so Netanyahu, I think inhis own mind, had to put out
that statement and be like allright, I'm willing to talk about

(17:21):
everything, including endingthe war, but these are our
demands, and those demands arevery 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 whatNetanyahu always tries to do,
which is he thinks he can saysome stuff and he'll pull the
wool over the eyes of people whodon't know any better.
And I think that's exactly whathe's trying to do with Trump
and with Goff.
He thinks that perhaps theydon't know him well enough yet

(17:56):
or they're not sick of himenough yet to kind of reject
what he says at face value, theway lots of Democrats have for
years, and so he's playing hisusual games, and I really fail

(18:17):
to see how there's a credibleargument right now that this
operation is designed to createpressure for a better negotiated
outcome.
I just I don't see how it'spossible.
As I said, it's belied byeverything that Netanyahu and
plenty of other governmentministers say and do.

Speaker 4 (18:39):
I don't think any of us.
We don't agree with you andit's very clear.
This continued war you know, weknow what it serves, right, it
allows for.
Not ending the war is where theIsraeli government continues,
as is.
There's no national inquiry,commissioner of inquiry, right.
There are no elections, allthese things that the DAO
doesn't want, and also thistrial.

(18:59):
There's no question with that.
But you know, at one point youthink if you don't have enough
troops, right, let's say, youhave enough reservists to come
in for other fronts, but youknow you have thousands of
soldiers in the West Bank aswell.
You still have the North, right.

(19:19):
I mean, you need to sustain allthis.
We might be in an era and I youknow.
A couple of weeks ago someonespoke to me abroad.
A European official asked aboutthe possibility of an Israeli
strike on Iran, even as the USnegotiates, and I said, of
course not.

(19:40):
Israel would never attack inIran without a US green light,
which I still subscribe to thisview and think that there's a
limitation of what Israel can dowithout US backup and a strike
in Iran.
It's also right, you need USsupport for a variety of
military stuff.
Report of CNN.

(20:01):
That intelligence showed thatIsrael is still planning for a
strike in Iran, despite thenegotiations and against US
pressure.
So we might be in a situationwhere it's just like everything
we think of calculations, and doyou have the people and the
public support and thereservists, and the US and the
international community and BDS?

(20:21):
And whereas I would think thatNetanyahu, even though he's not
implementing a policy that Isupport, right, but you would
think that he'd be susceptibleto all these arguments and make
the calculations, we might be ina different world and I don't
know.
Connecting the two to me isvery concerning, because there
is no public support for this inIsrael, right.

(20:43):
What about the soldiers?
Who's supposed to occupy Gazaand hold on to it?

Speaker 2 (20:50):
So just on that point , I assume Netanyahu and this
government believe that theyhave enough support in their
right-wing base to continue thewar and to even escalate the war
, and that's what matters tothem.
And with regard to that CNNreport about Israel making
preparations to strike Iran,shira, I can't believe I'm
saying this.
But don't believe everythingyou read in the media, even if

(21:13):
it's coming from our dearfriends at CNN over 15 years,
that every time there's somesliver of negotiations, either
Israel or the Americans leakthat Israel is now really,
really close to actually pullingthe trigger and striking Iran.

(21:34):
It wasn't true at any point inthe past 15 years.
I definitely don't think it'strue now, as Donald Trump is
negotiating with the Iranians.
I think there's a 0% chance.
0% chance.
Netanyahu gives a green lightfor Israeli strike on Iran as
the negotiations continue and inthe face of what Donald Trump

(21:55):
wants.
So on that front we should bemaybe a bit calmer until not.
But your overall point I agreewith Shira that with what army
right that if you actually goand continue this offensive up
to what they're promising to do,which is completely reoccupy
Gaza for an unlimited amount oftime, you're going to be

(22:20):
battling an insurgency there,whether you want to call it
Hamas or not, for months andyears to come, on top of the
other fronts, very, verydifficult to see.
But uh, this is a glide pathwe're on.
I don't see, I don't see an outfor Netanyahu politically and
strategically, given everythinghe's promised.
So that's the concerning thing,but uh, we have to move on.

(22:42):
Yeah, the people watching onvideo should have just seen
Shira's face.
Yes, she is also she's alsoincasperated?

Speaker 4 (22:51):
I don't think so.
If you look at the supportamong 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 ofIsraelis, even on the right.
And I think when we talk, weconnect this to the diplomatic
tsunami that is happening.
Right, we talk about the UK.

(23:11):
You write for a Britishnewspaper.
We're not talking about a sortof like random country that
Israel doesn't have.
It has defense dogs.
Israel buys arms from the UK.
I mean, things are happening ina way that you know, going down
this course, which I think isstill reversible.

(23:32):
That's what.
That's what I was making thisface.
Maybe we should be on video.
I made this face because Idon't think we're at the point
of no, there's no right, there'sno turning back.
I do think there's always aturning back and I was the
master of that right.
He's the good thing about likeone step forward, two steps back
and do a little bit of this.
Does that talk about it?
There is a way back which hecan take and I hope for the sake

(23:54):
of everyone that he does,because otherwise it will be
very, very difficult, includingto his base to live in this
country.

Speaker 3 (24:02):
I don't think he cares.
I genuinely don't think that hecares.
I think that 10 years ago Iwould have agreed with this,
with your analysis that healways finds the exit point
before the disaster and that allthe things that we've been
talking about now for the last20 minutes piling up would get

(24:24):
him to turn back.
You know, the last 20 minutespiling up would get him to turn
back.
I'm just, I'm not confident ofthat at all.
He's been doing this now.
He's been doing deeplyunpopular things now it's not
even just since October 7th it'sobviously before Deeply
unpopular things that Israelisdon't want that have caused him
problems with now.
You know two US presidents in arow that are causing deep
problems with the Europeans.
It's just, it's all of it Spresidents in a row that are

(24:45):
causing deep problems with theEuropeans.
It's just, it's all of it, andI 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 wemight be in a world where
Netanyahu no longer cares.
And this is.
You know, I don't have, I'm nota psychologist, I don't know
what he cares about, what hedoesn't care about.
I do hope that at one pointthis madness will stop.

Speaker 2 (25:12):
I was just going to say that Netanyahu in the past
always stopped always stoppedthe war before Israel got into
trouble, even in the face ofmajor opposition and
disagreement amongst his ownright-wing base.
And he was always able to sellit and he always did it ahead of
time.
And now he's digging deeper anddeeper.

(25:34):
Okay, we'll be right back afterthis brief message.

Speaker 1 (25:42):
Israel Policy Forum is a policy organization rooted
in the Jewish community.
Our mission is to build supportfor a secure Jewish democratic
Israel through a viableresolution to the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict,advancing pragmatic US policy
towards the conflict, us-israelrelations and regional diplomacy
among policymakers andcommunity leaders.
We promote policy measuresendorsed by credible security

(26:02):
experts, develop analysis andcommentary and convene programs
that engage and educate leadersacross the political,
denominational and generationalspectrums.
Our Young ProfessionalsInitiative, ipf Atid, works to
elevate the discourse amongnext-generation leaders by
building community andfacilitating engaging programs
related to Israeli-Palestinianaffairs.
To learn more about our work,visit us online at

(26:24):
israelpolicyforumorg and followus on social media.
If you rely on Israel PolicyForum for credible and nuanced
analysis, please make atax-deductible gift today at
ipfli slash supportthepod or atthe support the show link in the
show notes which Shira, as theysay in journalism, signposted

(26:48):
very well, which is theinternational 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 therequite yet, but we have seen,
just in the last couple of days,growing international pressure
on Israel to both halt theoffensive in Gaza and allow the
reentry of humanitarian aid backinto the Strip.
We'll get into the aid issue injust a minute.
But in terms of the growinginternational outcry, we've seen

(27:13):
the UK, France, Germany issuethis very, very strong letter
warning Israel that they wouldtake quote unquote concrete
steps against Israel if Israeldidn't stop the offensive, If
Israel didn't stop the offensive.
And then we saw yesterday,Tuesday, the UK government
suspend negotiations with Israelover a new free trade agreement
.
And we also saw I assume withthe encouragement of the Macron

(27:37):
government in Paris, theEuropean union say that they
would reassess the veryimportant association agreement
that the EU has with Israel.
Not good stuff, to say theleast.
Israel, for its part, obviouslyrejected all of this criticism,
saying that there was a hugeprize given to Hamas by these

(28:01):
various Western states, thatthis was still a war of
civilization over barbarism andthat the British mandate ended
77 years ago.
So the Israeli position is veryclear it doesn't want to hear
it at all.
So, Shira, just circling backto the point you started making
earlier, do you think this weekis really a watershed moment for

(28:25):
the international community'spatience with Israel?
I mean, is that the way you seeit?

Speaker 4 (28:31):
Definitely, definitely.
So I will just say that I was.
You know, I get to meet peoplefrom outside of Israel pretty
frequently, with lots ofconferences and meetings with
officials and non-officials, andI think I told you both.
I was in Europe, in a Europeancity two weeks ago on a session
with mostly officials from Arabcountries and Europe very small

(28:52):
meeting and I came back and Iwas shocked.
I have heard language that I'venever heard on Israel before,
including from representativesof the important countries you
mentioned.
Right, and when you hear Britstalk like that in France, it's
not, you know, we can dismiss,right, let's dismiss the Swedes,

(29:12):
scandinavians, no, it was fromcountries that we are dependent
on for a variety of things, andI was shocked when I spoke to
some people about it in Israel.
I think.
In addition to that, you knowthese are at the verge of
suspensions of agreements andthreats, and Europeans we can
joke that they, you know whatare they going to do to us.
They're going to condemn, well,whatever.

(29:35):
But I think what is missing isthat decision by the Norwegian
Sovereign Wealth Fund, which isthe largest sovereign wealth
fund in the world, to divestfrom a series of Israeli
companies and not the ones thatit's Paz, which is one of the
biggest oil companies because itoperates in the settlements.

(29:55):
Banca Poalim, one of thebiggest banks branches in the US
.
Banca Poalim Teva, one of thebiggest pharmaceuticals in the
world.
So you're missing.
I think it's $1.8 trillion.
That's what's worth theNorwegian sovereign wealth fund.
They invested or maybe theyhaven't invested from Bank of

(30:16):
Poland, but they basicallyinvested.
They're investing for a varietyof Israeli companies and
they're holding on to sorry, I'msorry, and they're holding on
to sorry, I'm sorry, they'reholding on to.
They have stocks of thesecompanies Teva and Bank of
Poalim, and chemicals and otherthings but they're starting
divestments.
There's also the SovereignWealth Fund of Ireland.

(30:40):
In Japan, you have politicianscalling not to sell bonds of the
Israeli government.
All these things.
I think that we're going to see.
We've seen the downgrading ofIsrael's credit history right
throughout this war a sequenceof downgrades.
This is going to affect ourlives.
It's going to affect the valueof the Israeli currency.

(31:00):
It's going to affect the debtright, how we finance our debt.
It's going to affect thediscount, um that is attached to
the israeli, uh, israelicompany bonds, uh, and you know
these are companies thatbasically support all our
livelihoods.
So I think it's not just threats, I think things are happening

(31:21):
and ironically, I would say thatI think what gave the Europeans
the sort of like freedom to saythose things that they said
closed doors is Trump right.
All these reports about whetherthey're accurate or not
accurate, about Trump losing hispatience from Israel.
All of a sudden, it unleashedthe European criticism on Israel
.
It would be pretty ironic ifIsrael is what brings the

(31:44):
Europeans and the Trumpadministration together.
I don't know that we're thereyet, but I am more concerned
than I've been before Becausebasically, what they're saying
is we've let you do whatever youwant for almost 20 months.
We let you do things that areagainst our values, including in
the humanitarian stuff right,which we might be able to get to

(32:07):
on this conversation, butenough is enough.
What are you doing?
What is the next step?
And we go back right to thisoffensive that Israel reportedly
is launching hasn't fullystarted yet, but for the
launching, for the launchingcontinuing the war, the
statements that anything, anyland we occupy, will never be

(32:29):
returned right, which meansJewish settlements occupying
Gaza forever and, of course, onthe 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 seethese countries divest from
Israel and from Israelicompanies, but the Israeli
government response is justcompletely bonkers, if not
outright offensive.
The idea that if you're aEuropean country or anyone for

(33:14):
that matter, and you supportmore assistance, humanitarian
assistance, going to Gaza, andyou criticize Israel for not
doing it.
The idea that, because Hamashas the same position, that
means that you are now on theside of Hamas.
Idea that because Hamas has thesame position, that means that
you are now on the side of Hamas.
Okay, you know.
You know what position Hamashas as well.

(33:34):
It's that there should be anall out war on the Palestinian
authorities to try to collapseit.
Guess guess who's doing that?
The Israeli government.
So is the Israeli governmentnow on Hamas' side too, because
you know they want the samething?
I mean, it's a, it's a stupidright, it's a stupid infantile
argument.
And the idea that you have the,the israeli prime minister and
the foreign minister goingaround making these arguments as

(33:56):
if they're, as if they'resocial media trolls, as if their
job is to, to, to rally, tolike, 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 uhcriticisms and they're
rejecting the criticisms as ifwe're in october of 2023 and
these countries and thesecountries are making these
arguments, which is not the casethat all these, all these
governments were hugelysupportive of the Israeli war

(34:30):
effort coming out of October 7th.
It's just that, after 19 monthsof pretty brutal war, uh, they
want to see a different pathtaken.

Speaker 3 (34:42):
Right and it's the.
And it's the same way.
It's the same way on the waritself and on this new
Merkavot-Gidon operation.
Right Gideon's chariots.
Israel is conducting lots ofairstrikes across Gaza.
To me, this looks like whathappened in October 2023.
In October 2023, the death tollwas terrible to 23,.

(35:10):
The death toll was terrible,but as awful as it was, it made
sense because Hamas had justdone this horrific thing and
their leadership was stillintact and you still had 33,000
Hamas fighters and they weretalking about doing it again.
If, given the opportunity, it'snot reasonable to, 19 months
later, do the exact same thingin light of everything that's
gone on, and act as if everybodyshould be supporting it in the

(35:31):
same way and that thejustification is exactly as it
was then and the Israeligovernment just wants a blank
check to do anything andeverything, no matter what's
going on in the ground, nomatter what the circumstances
are, no matter what time haselapsed, no matter what lessons
have been learned.
No matter the domestic Israelidiplomatic context political

(35:53):
context either which everyonefollows very closely as well
that anyone is, you know, asidefrom the kind of the most
hardcore supporters of thisgovernment.
I don't understand why theythink that anybody is going to
buy it.

(36:14):
Shira, on the kind ofintersection between the
Europeans and Trump, I actuallywonder you know you were saying
that you think that the emergingdaylight between Trump and
Netanyahu and the US and Israeligovernment maybe is kind of
giving them a permission slip.
I wonder, actually, if there'ssomething else going on, which

(36:36):
is that because the UnitedStates is still perceived as
being in Israel's corner and inthe past there was only so far
the Europeans were willing to goif 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 wayof standing up to Trump and
signaling that they're going togo their own way and even if the

(36:57):
United States is not where theyare, they're annoyed annoyed
enough with Trump to kind of nowdo their own thing and form
their own coalition.
But I don't know.
That's just speculation on mypart.

Speaker 2 (37:11):
But, michael, on that point, you sit in DC usually
when you're not traveling.
Have you seen any comment orcondemnation by Trump
administration officials oranyone else in DC of the steps
the Europeans and the othershave 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 thisleads to a renewed effort for
some sort of resolution at theUN and then security council.
I'm very curious to see how theUnited States approaches it.
If they move to veto somethingright away, if they move to

(37:52):
negotiate different language.
I have no idea.
The inner workings of the Trumpadministration 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 areworking in the Trump
administration.
So, uh, we'll, we'll, we'll seewhat happens, um, but you know,

(38:14):
there, there, we've certainlyseen, we've seen the Trump
administration, from thepresident and from Marco Rubio,
criticize the Israeli governmenton the humanitarian stuff, and
you know this, this was focuseddirectly on that Um.
So we'll see how it evolves.

Speaker 2 (38:31):
And we just got word.
By the way, miracles do happenand pressure does what pressure
sometimes does as well.
It's a very clear indicationthat even he understands that he
has to go out and stiffenspines and explain himself to

(38:57):
the Israeli public, given theevents of the past few days.
Moving on to the issue ofhumanitarian 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

(39:19):
Hamas in the ceasefirenegotiations.
That clearly has not had thedesired effect, at least not yet
.
But, as mentioned earlier, thisweek, netanyahu reversed himself
and said that the situation inGaza was nearing quote unquote a
red line and that Israel'sclosest friends across the world
, and even in Washington, wouldnot accept pictures of mass

(39:42):
starvation his words from Gaza.
So this week he allowed, inlimited amounts of aid, to start
going back into the Strip.
Shira, as the expert on theseissues, I mean this is a big
question and again, again, youdon't have to go into all the
details, but give our listeners,and also me and michael, a

(40:03):
sense how bad really is thesituation now in gaza.
Uh, if even bb netanyahu issaying, okay, we have to give
some kind of aid again after 11weeks of no aid at all.

Speaker 4 (40:17):
Where to even begin.
So first of all, we have to saythat I think the ceasefire
ended.
Israel ended the ceasefireright and during the ceasefire
we had really large quantitiesof aid.
We're talking about 4,200trucks per week and, based on

(40:41):
the math that some people did inthe IDF and in COGAT those were
numbers that I think wereleaked there was some sort of an
assessment, that based oncalories per person, it's really
awful right, but we're talkingabout between 60 and 70
something, 90 day, 80 day kindof math in terms of what would
be enough.
By the way, when you sayhumanitarian, it's easiest to
talk about food.

(41:01):
But there are, you know, thereare 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.
The Israeli politicians likealways the politicians they said
, oh, there's a sufficient aidthere for six months and the

(41:24):
humanitarian community all alongsaid it's two to three weeks.
The problem is that, because ofprevious disagreements between
Israel and the internationalcommunity, the humanitarian
community, the UN, that they, inIsraeli words, say they have
cried wolf about famine andother things before and their
threats have not materialized.

(41:45):
We're not taking their threatsseriously.
I will tell you that sort of asan analyst, I had reservations
about the Israeli professionalassessments, even about the 60
day and 75 days and all thesethings, because you know, we
know that in an effort toimplement a ceasefire, what you
counted as a truck wasn't alwaysa truck.

(42:05):
Sometimes it was a pickup truckand when we count trucks, we
don't necessarily count how manypallets there are, how many
tons of food or supplies thereare.
So you take the assumption wasthat each one of those things is
a very big truck with food, andfood could be potato chips,

(42:26):
which we had a lot of truckswith potato chips going in.
So overall, I always thoughtthat the Israeli numbers are
even the assessment that wasprofessional.
It was professional, it wasmethodologically calculated, was
too naive and even tenants wereat some point.

(42:48):
Maybe they have differentstandards, maybe they have
different standards.
The days and the weeks went byand what we're starting seeing
earlier on is indications of thefood prices that have gone up
increasingly right and graduallyvery quickly.
We've known that perishableshave not been available in Gaza.

(43:09):
There's a picture of like onemarket that we see, but I don't
know if the angle of how manyactual tables are in this market
seems pretty small market, butessentially there are no
perishables in Gaza.
So it was very clear, I think,to anyone who looked, that the
situation was extremely bad evena few weeks ago.
What is happening now and thisis where I don't know if it is

(43:33):
now all of a sudden I turn onthe tv and saw the images from
gaza, or it was a combination ofum understanding that we get to
what the military right saidall along, that we're going to
be at the red line at aroundthis period.
Right, and we asked it alreadywith a combination of an idea
that Israel would switch to adifferent model which would be

(43:57):
private companies securing right.
Private military companieswould secure a few distribution
points where there's going to beassistance provided to the
people who would come there andthose people would be vetted and
there's facial recognitions, alot of like fancy stuff at plant
that looks really nice on paperand has zero chance of being

(44:21):
implemented as described in thecontext of Gaza.
We could go into it.
So I don't know if it wasn'talso just the rush to get this
mechanism started.
This mechanism started whenthey tried to get this mechanism
launched, the humanitariancommunity came and also the
donor community said, hey, we'renot playing ball with this

(44:41):
thing.
And then they said you have tolet us bring in aid in the
previous model which was, youknow, basically the UN bringing
trucks in.
But for that to happen, youhave to be really in a red line
mode and for that you have toblame the IDF, right?
The IDF told me, and also theTrump administration.
There could be two things here.
Theoretically it could beWitkoff and Trump really hearing

(45:06):
from the Gulf.
As far as we know, they mayhave showed him even a video
right Clips from Gaza of what'shappening there.
Right, it's an effective weknow it's effective with him to
show.
So I don't know what he sawthere and if he heard about it,
and Marco Rubio was a Turkeywhen he spoke about the
humanitarian situation, so he'dbe 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 thatit's invited.
Right, it's too coordinated tosay all of a sudden that the
American administration all of asudden cares about the
humanitarian situation.
Gaza, for the first time,speaks about it in those terms
and I don't know what's thetheory.
I think it's important thatthey say it.

(45:48):
And I also know firsthand thatwhen Israel decided to stop the
humanitarian assistance, I hadarguments with lots of people
inside the IDF where they said,well, with Trump, he's not going
to care, he's going to let usdo whatever we want.
And I said I don't think youunderstand that no one in
America likes to see hungrychildren on TV.

(46:12):
This is not.
You know.
There are things that, yeah,maybe they care less, they're
less sensitive.
You want to get the Blinkentreatment or not.
We can talk about this at thiscoaster, but I don't know that
by being a Republicanadministration, you're
necessarily going to approve,give a carte blanche to anything
.
There are things you know thatjust like are undone.
So I think this was also anassumption with Israel, in

(46:35):
addition to other assumptions onthe Trump administration.
They're going to be doingwhatever they want.
So just like fast forward towhere we are today.
Israel there's the Gazahumanitarian foundation that
says that they pose conditionsto Israel to address
vulnerabilities with thismechanism that Israel is trying
to launch and now the Americansare taking custody over, but

(46:57):
it's, I don't know, the righthand and the left hand and it's
too complicated to explain, Ithink, and we don't have the
time for this, but Israel'shands was forced to allow trucks
in, to come in the old modelthe 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 thisis the UN.
Right when Israel said no UN,no, nothing.
Now it's UN.
As of today, I saw there are 56trucks that went into Karim
Shalom the crossing but have notbeen picked up by the one.
I guess you need coordinationinside.

(47:36):
This is a drop in a bucket, adrop in the ocean.
The needs far supersede this andI also fear that I fear of what
you call not just looting andnot Hamas taking over this, but
also just like people trying toget a hold of the aid, and we've

(47:57):
heard stories about right, likeof mothers and daughters being
crushed to death in a bakerywhen there was more food inside
Gaza, and I'm really scared thatthis little aid is going to
lead to other disasters besidesthe hunger and other things
we're seeing there.
So the situation is really,really bad, but I do hope we

(48:19):
will continue having thispressure and, ari, you know also
that domestically in Israel, Ithink it's the first time that
there's a serious discussionabout it, at least of what is
the use of not enabling food tocome into Gaza.
What does it serve?
It doesn't make Hamas surrenderand it definitely doesn't help
Israel's peace in the world,even if there's no empathy here

(48:41):
for the Palestinians.

Speaker 2 (48:45):
And the person who argued this point that Israel
needed to move in aid into Gazain order to enable the IDF to
fight the war and to give theIDF time to quote-unquote
destroy Hamas was Bibi Netanyahuin the beginning of the war,
justifying not only to theIsraeli public but really to his
allies in the government whyIsrael needed to facilitate the

(49:08):
entry of aid.
He kind of forgot about that atsome point, instituted a full
blockade in early march and afew days ago remembered it again
and he said it in in the videohe released.
Uh, by the way, we've said fromthe beginning you know, we need
to facilitate the entry of aid.
It's like where, where have youbeen?
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 wentthrough Rafah, through Egypt.
At the beginning, everythingthat Israel did on the
humanitarian front was pressurefrom outside, mostly from the
Biden administration.
So I don't blame you.
I have a deja vu also.
So all of a sudden we havepressure from the Trump

(49:51):
administration, or real pressureor fake pressure, but there's
pressure or criticism on theTrump 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 apressure on the humanitarian.
We're going to allow thehumanitarian.

(50:11):
This is going to be the sourceof 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 nowwe're at the height of
incoherent policy.
Right, so we can, as, as as weknew would happen, but as
hopefully now everybody canagree, happen, but as hopefully
now everybody can agree,preventing assistance from going
in from March 1st up until thisweek did nothing to collapse

(50:39):
Hamas.
So, okay, we can stipulate that.
So we're restoring aid.
Well, if that's the case, thenactually do it right, instead of
the trickle of assistancethat's going in, instead of
sending it in, and you know, asShira notes, it's not getting
distributed anywhere.
How could it be with, withIsraeli airstrikes, at the pace

(51:00):
of of what they were early,early year on in the war, um,
like what, what's?
You're not.
It's like the Israeligovernment wants to, wants to
get credit for saying, okay, youknow, now, now we're, now we're
worried about starving peoplein Gaza, so we're going to let

(51:20):
it in, but you're not reallyletting 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 anydistribution mechanism that's
going to fool anybody.
It's like the entire thing isjust, is, like I said,
completely incoherent.
They're, they're, they're,clearly seems to me they're not
actually trying to alleviate theproblem and they're not doing
enough to even get credit fortrying to alleviate the problem,
and maybe that'll change overthe next few days and weeks.

(51:40):
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 thepressure on Israel, so you've
solved neither problem that youhave as Israel.
Michael, I wanted to ask youwhat did you think of Shira's
theory that this was actuallynot pressure from the Trump

(52:07):
administration on Israel toallow aid back in?
Steve Witkoff, Trump's specialMiddle East envoy, said the
president was nothing if not ahumanitarian and that there
would not be a humanitariancrisis in Gaza on Donald Trump's
watch.
So do you not think DonaldTrump 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 weresaying because, all of a sudden,
it was all the coincidence withthe timing of the Gaza
humanitarian foundation thatpeople in Israel wanted to
launch.
And if you wanted to preventthe humanitarian crisis in Gaza,
I would argue that we've beenin the humanitarian crisis in

(52:47):
Gaza for the duration of hispresidency.
Okay, so that's my argument.
But here, michael, yourresponse 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 similarlysnarky comment, which is that,
you know, avoiding ahumanitarian crisis on president
Trump's watches.
We're a bit too late for that.
I'm pretty sure it's alreadyhappened.
Um, listen, I think that, um,it's very strange.
President Trump is a guy whofamously does not seem to have

(53:18):
much empathy for many, manydifferent groups or people.
He genuinely seems to haveempathy for the Israeli hostages
.
I think that's we've seen it.
We've seen it over and over andover again from the campaign on
until now.
And he also seems to havegenuine empathy for Palestinians
in Gaza.
Now it comes out sometimes instrange ways, right Like when he

(53:41):
unveiled the Gaza Lago plan,rooted in that we have to do
something for the Palestiniansbecause they can't possibly be
expected to stay in Gaza whenit's like this.
But he seems to actually havereal empathy for the scenes of
starving Palestinians in Gazaand Palestinians being killed in
Gaza.

(54:01):
So I'm not sure that, again, notattributing this to Shira,
understanding that this is sortof a conspiracy theory that's
floating around there.
I'm not sure that this is somekind of feint up by the White
House and by you know, netanyahu.
I think that Trump genuinelyseems upset about what's going

(54:25):
on.
If he wasn't, I don't thinkyou'd see it filtering down to
folks like Marco Rubio, whoclearly have gotten, you know,
either direct orders or, atleast you know, are smart enough
to understand that when theboss says something, you should
parrot it too, where we now hearMarco Rubio, too, not only
talking about assistants havingto go in, but also, yesterday,

(54:46):
saying that so far it's notenough.
So you know, if this is acoordinated PR stunt, it's being
done very poorly.
I think that the administrationactually is annoyed by what's
going on and upset by what'sgoing on, and it doesn't seem to
me like Netanyahu is respondingfast enough for them.

Speaker 4 (55:07):
But do you think it may be so?
Maybe this is where it's sortof like they were trying to get
to the big deal right, likelet's have this final deal, we
will end the war, and that's whythey were holding off criticism
on the humanitarian stuff.
But as they saw thenegotiations were stalling, they
were losing patience and thenit's like okay, we're going to
start talking about the otherstuff that does concern us and
we let Israel get away withbecause we were going to do

(55:30):
things different than Biden.
I don't know.
To me it also and again, justspeaking with some officials
from the Gulf a few weeks ago,it was very clearly the
humanitarian issue was going tocome up in his visit.
But a lot of things came up inthe visit.
I don't know to what extent.
So it just the humanitariansituation.

(55:51):
It wasn't.
It's not like binary right Oneday there's no humanitarian
crisis, another day there is,and all of a sudden to care.
In a way, it must've been acombination of a few factors
that made this sort of UScriticism 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 andimmediately after he took office
, he's there.
There are things that he saysover and over again and when he
harps on an issue, it'sgenerally a sign that he means
it and it's something that heactually cares about.
He said over and over and overhe wanted to see the Gaza war be

(56:35):
concluded quickly, and it wasunclear what he meant by that.
If what he meant was a quickdeal, which you know, that seems
to be the initial thinking whenhe took office and the
ceasefire was basically forcedon Netanyahu by Wyckoff or if he
meant that the Israelis shouldjust, you know, go in all
restraints are off and finishthings up quickly.

(56:58):
At this point I'm not sure itactually matters which he had in
his head.
It's pretty clear that the mainpoint was finish it quickly,
and it hasn't been finishedquickly, and I think that's why
we're seeing him lose patience.
And this shouldn't besurprising because, like I said,
it was telegraphed and peoplenot only not only noted it at
the time that the Israelis wereprobably going to have a

(57:19):
relatively short leash, even ifthe president didn't care what
was on the end of you know kindof how you got to the end of the
leash.
The leash was short and I thinkthat 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 oneDonald J Trump is the topic.
I think humanitarian aid is onething, and my theory is that he
talked to enough Arab leadersbefore and during his trip to
the Gulf and they said you haveto do something to alleviate the
suffering in Gaza.
And okay, he told his people Iwant to see aid go in.

(57:52):
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 thinkit's separate from forcing
Israel to stop the war.
If Donald Trump really wantedto Israel and Bibi Netanyahu
really to end the war, he wouldget up there and say it or he
would tweet it and that would bethat up there and say it, or he
would tweet it and that wouldbe that we may get there.

Speaker 3 (58:24):
According to the news today, the Mossad
representatives from the Israelinegotiating team are still in
Doha, but everybody else hasleft.
Steve Witkoff is not there.
So it's very possible that thenext time the president talks to
Witkoff and Witkoff says to himyou know the, the next time the
, the the president talks toWyckoff and Wyckoff says to him
I'm not sure if the Israelis aretrying their hardest, or I'm
not sure if the Israelis areserious, we, we may end up with
the, with a truth, social blastfrom the president, uh, directed

(58:48):
at Netanyahu, that that wouldnot surprise anybody at this
point.
It wouldn't wouldn't surpriseme.
I'm not saying it's definitelygoing to happen, but it's not
all that far-fetched.
And if that happens, thenNetanyahu is really in even
deeper trouble politically.
So if I were him, I would betrying to avoid it.
But I don't see.

(59:08):
I think he's trying to do it inall the superficial ways we
talked about up front.
I think he's trying to scamTrump and Whitcough, which is
kind of how he approaches theUnited States generally, and
Trump just doesn't seem like aguy 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 BibiNetanyahu end the war?

Speaker 4 (59:35):
I think there are a lot of people in Israel and
around the world that areyearning for that right, for
that moment where he's willingto turn the screws, and then
again, I don't think Netanyahuwould be able to just say like
no, screw it, I'll let like 90more trucks go in.
I don't know the decision andthe process, the Trump

(59:59):
administration, why they are notdoing this.
I agree with Michael seems tobe quite a transparent president
in the sense of, like he doessay what he needs on a variety
of things.
Right, he said he wants anagreement with Iran.
He wants this, he wants anagreement with.
You know, I mean a lot ofthings.
He said he wants an agreementwith Iran.
He wants this, he wants anagreement with.
I mean a lot of things arehappening in the world.
We keep talking about thisissue.

(01:00:20):
So we might get there, and someof it would depend on what
Israel does.
This whole idea of Israel keeptrying to send a message that
everything's okay and we gotWashington back.
I'm not sure it's.
I'm not sure it's correct.

(01:00:40):
You know there were reportsthat the Derm are meeting with
Trump in itself an achievementright.
Most countries don't have thisaccess where a minister of
strategic affairs meets with thepresident, but the reports that
came out that this was a prettythe tone was pretty harsh in
the meeting.
And even if one paragraph inthe Washington Post is not

(01:01:05):
indicative of what is happeningand maybe you all reporters
don't report the truth, it seemsthat there's been what there's
been a surge in reports fromWashington that indicates that
there's an indication thatthere's less patience to the

(01:01:25):
Israeli policy.
And I don't know if you sawyesterday I think it was the
Wall Street Journal the frontpage of the Wall Street.
Journal saw the Guardian talkingabout what Israel is doing in
Gaza.
I think.
To me it's indicative thatwinds are shifting.
I don't know when Trump isgoing to say, hey, I'm done with
this, and Israel, you should bedone, but as far as I'm

(01:01:47):
concerned, it's going to be amoment too soon.

Speaker 3 (01:01:52):
I will tell you the tide definitely seems to be
turning here.
I will tell you, the tidedefinitely seems to be turning
here.
Like you note the Wall StreetJournal Shira, there's a new
Senate resolution, co-sponsoredby every single Democrat in the
Senate save one, demanding formuch more humanitarian
assistance to go into Gaza.
Every single Democrat exceptfor one.

(01:02:18):
Now, it's not like having 99senators on it, but the
Democrats tend to be prettyfractured on Israel.
There's a real divide, and thisgot all of them except for one,
so they're really.
I can't stress enough how much.

Speaker 2 (01:02:47):
And they're really.
I can't stress enough how muchIsraeli government acting as if
this is still recorded podcast.
I'm still skeptical that Trumpwill actually bring the hammer
down and force Israel to stopthe war, netanyahu to accept the
ceasefire deal.
There was jubilation and peoplehere and in many other places

(01:03:20):
said he's going to force Israelto essentially accept the second
phase of the ceasefire andfully end the war and, by the
way, get all the hostages back.
There was no pressure that camedown and that Yahoo was given a
green light to collapse, aceasefire to restart the
offensive, and they've, as a fewdays ago to bring it all back

(01:03:41):
full circle, have actuallyrestarted 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 onwe'll have happier news, more

(01:04:02):
optimistic news.
Let's hope.
Here's to hope.
Take care, bye, thank you guysBye.
Okay, thanks again to MichaelKoplow and Shira Efron, as
always, for their generous timeand insights.
Also, a special thanks to ourproducer, jacob Gilman, and to
all of you who support IsraelPolicy Forum's work.
Do consider making a donationto Israel Policy Forum, so
keeping a credible source ofanalysis and ideas on issues

(01:04:26):
such as these that we all caredeeply about, including this
podcast.
And, most importantly, thankyou for listening.